MQA is Vaporware

[new_media]

2 minutes ago, StreamHiRes said:

From what I have heard with my own ears and an MQA capable DAC; MQA is a major leap forward. I can once again enjoy music in it’s highest quality and know that it’s authentic by the illumination of the blue MQA DAC light and not some upsampled MP3 file. Listening to digital music without temporal blurring reproduced using MQA is non-fatiguing and a very pleasurable pastime. I still like regular 24/96 Hi-Res, but this new technology is definitely revolutionary. I can’t understand how “audiophiles” don’t hear the marked improvement over regular FLAC; Unless your the type that listens with a slide rule and calculator.

 

I bought a Meridan Explorer² expressly so I could hear with my own ears whether MQA was worth the hype. I hear nothing revolutionary, and honestly no improvement over redbook CD. I have no plans to invest further in any MQA capable equipment.

[StreamHiRes]

1 minute ago, jabbr said:

 

What makes your opinion matter to me? You've got 10 posts, all about MQA and I have have zero reason to trust your listening skills.

I’m not asking you to trust my listening skills. Listen for yourself with an open mind. 

[firedog]

4 minutes ago, StreamHiRes said:

I can once again enjoy music in it’s highest quality and know that it’s authentic by the illumination of the blue MQA DAC light and not some upsampled MP3 file. 

Again, you are misinformed. The blue light proves nothing. A master used for MQA can be “authenticated” by a record label flunkie who had nothing to do with the production of the album. And it’s been shown that bits can be chopped from an MQA file and the “blue light” will still come on. The whole authenticated thing is a marketing ploy and you’ve fallen for it.

You are just rehashing previously disproven claims. You’ve contributed nothing of substance to the thread other than saying that you like MQA. You are showing yourself to be nothing other than a fanboy for MQA, which isn’t valuable to any discussion. 

[StreamHiRes]

2 minutes ago, new_media said:

 

I bought a Meridan Explorer² expressly so I could hear with my own ears whether MQA was worth the hype. I hear nothing revolutionary, and honestly no improvement over redbook CD. I have no plans to invest further in any MQA capable equipment.

You don’t hear an improvement over redbook? I can instantly  differentiate 16bit CD quality from 24bit MQA on Tidal. I instantly reach for the mouse and search for the next MQA track.😁

[new_media]

1 minute ago, StreamHiRes said:

You don’t hear an improvement over redbook?

 

No.

[mansr]

I'm starting to suspect that our new friend is in fact an old friend.

[firedog]

13 minutes ago, StreamHiRes said:

Listening to digital music without temporal blurring, reproduced using MQA, is non-fatiguing and a very pleasurable pastime.

 

More BS that’s been show not to be true. The whole “temporal blurring״ thing another MQA lie. If all you have to contribute to the thread is false MQA marketing speak, please leave the thread. 

It’s starting to be apparent you are here just as an MQA propaganda tool, and have nothing real to contribute. 

[new_media]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

I'm starting to suspect that our new friend is in fact an old friend.

 

What tipped you off? 🤔

[firedog]

5 minutes ago, StreamHiRes said:

You don’t hear an improvement over redbook? I can instantly  differentiate 16bit CD quality from 24bit MQA on Tidal. I instantly reach for the mouse and search for the next MQA track.😁

No, you can instantly differentiate that the upsampling and filtering done by MQA sound different. Big deal. Improvement is another thing entirely.

[StreamHiRes]

2 minutes ago, firedog said:

Again, you are misinformed. The blue light proves nothing. A master used for MQA can be “authenticated” by a record label flunkie who had nothing to do with the production of the album. And it’s been shown that bits can be chopped from an MQA file and the “blue light” will still come on. The whole authenticated thing is a marketing ploy and you’ve fallen for it.

You are just rehashing previously disproven claims. You’ve contributed nothing of substance to the thread other than saying that you like MQA. You are showing yourself to be nothing other than a fanboy for MQA, which isn’t valuable to any discussion. 

You are misinforming the public with unsubstantiated claims of MQA authentication indicators being a marketing ploy. Show me a file that is not MQA, but can somehow mysteriously indicate it is authentic. This site seems to be for few critics of MQA, and that’s fine. It’s good to vent. I’d much rather believe  Bob Ludwig than some critical anonymous people online.

 

 

[kumakuma]

1 minute ago, StreamHiRes said:

You are misinforming the public with unsubstantiated claims of MQA authentication indicators being a marketing ploy. Show me a file that is not MQA, but can somehow mysteriously indicate it is authentic.

 

 

[firedog]

1 minute ago, StreamHiRes said:

You are misinforming the public with unsubstantiated claims of MQA authentication indicators being a marketing ploy. Show me a file that is not MQA, but can somehow mysteriously indicate it is authentic. This site seems to be for few critics of MQA, and that’s fine. It’s good to vent. I’d much rather believe  Bob Ludwig than some critical anonymous people online.

 

 

Your appeals to authority are meaningless. Other authorities disagree. So they all cancel out. “Show you a file”? Again, you are late to the argument and don’t know what you are talking about. It’s been demonstrated that an MQA file can be altered (meaning it’s bits are different) and still light up the blue light, Get it, this means the blue light proves nothing, as a non authentic file is being “authenticated”. 

You are about to get on my “ignore” list, as you insist on arguing here when you haven’t informed yourself on the topic and don’t have a clue. Regurgitating MQA marketing speak doesn’t mean you know anything. 

[StreamHiRes]

1 minute ago, kumakuma said:

 

 

Really? Someone actually went through generating an entire computer code to apparently hack MQA authenticity. Wow! That’s pretty darn serious.

[StreamHiRes]

1 minute ago, firedog said:

Your appeals to authority are meaningless. Other authorities disagree. So they all cancel out. “Show you a file”? Again, you are late to the argument and don’t know what you are talking about. It’s been demonstrated that an MQA file can be altered (meaning it’s bits are different) and still light up the blue light, Get it, this means the blue light proves nothing, as a non authentic file is being “authenticated”. 

You are about to get on my “ignore” list, as you insist on arguing here when you haven’t informed yourself on the topic and don’t have a clue. Regurgitating MQA marketing speak doesn’t mean you know anything. 

Ignore is ok with me.😉

[jabbr]

5 minutes ago, StreamHiRes said:

You are misinforming the public with unsubstantiated claims of MQA authentication indicators being a marketing ploy. Show me a file that is not MQA, but can somehow mysteriously indicate it is authentic. This site seems to be for few critics of MQA, and that’s fine. It’s good to vent. I’d much rather believe  Bob Ludwig than some critical anonymous people online.

 

You are misinforming the public about your own so-called unbiased impressions.

 

Why should I believe "Bob Ludwig"? Is he unbiased?

 

Since anyone can say anything about anything on the Internet, I choose to listen to recommendations from individuals that have proven their advice to be worthy. The so-called "anonymous" people have perfectly good Internet names that I trust far more than the so-called "Bob Ludwig" who means nothing to me.

[StreamHiRes]

11 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

You are misinforming the public about your own so-called unbiased impressions.

 

Why should I believe "Bob Ludwig"? Is he unbiased?

 

Since anyone can say anything about anything on the Internet, I choose to listen to recommendations from individuals that have proven their advice to be worthy. The so-called "anonymous" people have perfectly good Internet names that I trust far more than the so-called "Bob Ludwig" who means nothing to me.

Bob Ludwig; One of the most renowned recording engineers in the world,  means nothing to you? Oh my😲. You must be one of those who listen with a calculator.

 

Learn a little something about Bob Ludwig 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Ludwig

[StreamHiRes]

MQA critics are so funny 😄!

[firedog]

14 minutes ago, StreamHiRes said:

Really? Someone actually went through generating an entire computer code to apparently hack MQA authenticity. Wow! That’s pretty darn serious.

And you apparently aren’t serious. Do you not get that altering the MQA file and still getting the blue light shows the whole thing has nothing to do with “authenticity”.

Just now, StreamHiRes said:

Bob Ludwig; One of the most renowned recording engineers in the world,  means nothing to you? Oh my😲. You must be one of those who listen with a calculator.

Bob’s a great mastering engineer. But concerning MQA: he’s one opinion, and other known engineers disagree, so none of it means anything. It doesn’t matter how famous you are, you are expressing your own opinion about sound, nothing more. 

 

It’s clear the one who has a closed mind here is you. You are going on my ignore list, as it is apparent you are totally unwilling to actual investigate the facts and form an opinion based on fact. 

I suggest all the rest of you also put him on your ignore lists, and we can stop wasting time and space on his posts.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

Guys, don't get bent out of shape. We clearly have a new troll sent over to ruffle feathers. Ignore.

 

This new troll is either a recycled shill clown from the MQA Zombie Army, or a new shill clown. Very possibly a dealer,

or distributor, who aside from the audio press, are the most shameless.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

Bob Ludwig was a massive promoter and hugely enthusiastic of every single new forma good or badt that came along with one goal in mind....revenue.

 

He was for DVD-A, SACD, Multi Channel, Plangent Process and best of all Mastered For iTunes...that is ally need to know about his credibility.

 

Next shill appeal to authority? We will be waiting.

 

[mansr]

2 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

This new troll is either a recycled shill clown from the MQA Zombie Army, or a new shill clown.

Or Brinkman Ship.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

Or Brinkman Ship.

Whom ever it is, they clearly have a stake in MQA. Clearly skin in the game, not just mere "enthusiasm"....

 

Maybe JVS?

[firedog]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

Or Brinkman Ship.

But he switched from pro MQA to anti, didn’t he?

[jabbr]

12 minutes ago, StreamHiRes said:

Bob Ludwig; One of the most renowned recording engineers in the world,  means nothing to you? Oh my😲. You must be one of those who listen with a calculator.

 

Why would knowing who "Bob Ludwig" is have anything to do with listening with a calculator?

 

12 minutes ago, StreamHiRes said:

 

Learn a little something about Bob Ludwig 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Ludwig

 

How do I know that your video is the same person being referenced by Wikipedia? Its all anonymous to me ...

[Sal1950]

1 hour ago, StreamHiRes said:

From what I have heard with my own ears and an MQA capable DAC; MQA is a major leap forward. I can once again enjoy music in it’s highest quality and know that it’s authentic by the illumination of the blue MQA DAC light and not some upsampled MP3 file.

Amazing the things people can hear when that little blue light comes on.

With all the manipulation being done to the original file data stream,  I can buy that it might sound different but not that its an improvement. We struggled for decades to have access to bit perfect & lossless copies of the original master files  minus DRM and all the other garbage and now you want to throw all that away for a simple compression scheme that's not as good as flac or any other lossless one?  Don't make a bit of sense to me, unless you buy into the deblurschitt snake-oil Meridian marketing. No thank you, I'll take a plain ole lossless scheme for my streaming.

 

4 hours ago, daverich4 said:

I understand change can be hard for many, but we should give MQA a chance. It’s changed my life for the better.

That's a pretty strong statement for a little piece of lossy compression software and some great marketing/sales BS. Better be 100% positive before you let the con-artists lock up your music in the latest ingenius form of DRM. Its not copy protection this time, the endgame is just to deny you access to the original master file in the first place.