MQA is Vaporware

[Rt66indierock]

2 hours ago, Paul R said:

 

Nope, not at all.  With say, 24/196k you have lots of room to push noise above the range of normal hearing, and then use simple non-damaging filters to get rid of it and any ultrasonic content. Has nothing at all to do with being able to hear ultrasonic content, which is very much a blue herring. 

 

With DSD, since it inherently is very noisy, you have to use noise shaping, pushing the vast majority of noise in the signal way above human hearing, and then just using a really simple filter to eliminate it. 

 

At 44.1k you can not do that. 

 

Practical point. Listen to a 44.1k recording. Then upsample that 44.1k recording to 24/192k on the fly while listening to it. Then upsample it to DSD while listening to it.  With most DACs, the 24/192k and DSD are going to sound very similar, but both quite different from the 44.1k playback. This will be even more evident if you use a DAC with selectable filters, like the Rega DAC, if it can do DSD. Or a DAC with bit perfect playback, like the iFi iDSD DACs with pre 5.3 filters. 

 

They may also sound sound different depending upon the SRC you use to do the upsampling or transcoding. 

 

In none one of the cases are you going to hear ultrasonic output. Blue herring, extra large economy size. Only significant fact to work from is that they sound different.

 

 

 

Getting this tread back on topic. Did you hear about HDTracks Streaming in 2016 or 2017? David Chesky said his phone was ringing off hook after the 7digital press release from the audio press because they didn't know.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

47 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Back to relevant topics. The current one is who is tool of special interests like MQA Ltd and who is a pawn in the game of life? If you heard of HDTracks streaming before Munich in 2017 you were one of the people David Chesky wanted to know about it. If you heard about it at Munich 2017 you were part a select group of media. David got a lot of calls after the press release by 7digital from the audio press who didn't know.

 

It certainly looks like John Atkinson and David Chesky were used to raise funds in 2015 for both MQA Ltd and 7digital.

Are you forgetting Robert "I'll back any still born product or technology" Harley?

[John_Atkinson]

47 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

It certainly looks like John Atkinson and David Chesky were used to raise funds in 2015 for both MQA Ltd and 7digital.

 

Please leave me out of your fevered imaginings, Rt66indierock.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

[John Dyson]

4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

But you’re somehow one of only two people in the world who hear the difference between two identical files 😁

I *thought* i heard a difference on 'a certain test.'  I do lots of testing ALL OF THE TIME, and depend on my hearing...  However, just using hearing is not reliable when done casually.  At least, for reliable results, I really do need a better controlled environment, and at least use some statistics for comparisons.  For me, 'Sounds good' isn't even reliable -- esp at the end of the day.

 

Most difficult -- listening to/comparing  the entire recording.  It is so easy for the same recording to sound differently from play to play.

 

*in my case* the only way that my hearing is reliable at all -- listening for very specific instances of distortion, and whether or not that distortion is reduced or increased.  Even then, the relative measurement requires great care.

 

The general case of determining if a recording *is the same* -- super difficult, and for me requires statistics.  Almost every casual attempt at comparision results in embarassment.

 

John

[Rt66indierock]

55 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

Please leave me out of your fevered imaginings, Rt66indierock.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

 

Fevered imaginings?  Think a bit about what was in Stereophile from "I've Heard the Future of Streaming: Meridian's MQA" in 2014 to when David Chesky filed HDTracks.Com, LLC v 7Digital Group PLC June 27, 2018.  Far more than David Chesky said publicly.

[daverich4]

Maybe it’s time to stick a fork in this thread, I think it’s done. 😂

 

From Enjoy The Music Dot Com

High-Quality (Or "High-Resolution") Audio
If you believe that you can hear the difference, and you have an audio system set up to take advantage of the increased fidelity, some companies are still trying to make a go of the hi-res audio space.

Jay-Z's TIDAL platform separates itself with its HiFi subscription tier, which offers access to high-res audio and costs $20/month: twice the price of its base tier, as well as twice the price of Apple and Spotify's most popular plans. Called "TIDAL Masters," these hi-res tracks are "master-quality recordings directly from the master source." HiFi audio has good sound, but limited resolution (44.1 kHz /16-bit); TIDAL Masters offer "an authenticated and unbroken version" (typically 96 kHz / 24-bit). TIDAL offers 60+ million tracks, including 170,000+ in hi-res.

[Rt66indierock]

14 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

Maybe it’s time to stick a fork in this thread, I think it’s done. 😂

 

From Enjoy The Music Dot Com

High-Quality (Or "High-Resolution") Audio
If you believe that you can hear the difference, and you have an audio system set up to take advantage of the increased fidelity, some companies are still trying to make a go of the hi-res audio space.

Jay-Z's TIDAL platform separates itself with its HiFi subscription tier, which offers access to high-res audio and costs $20/month: twice the price of its base tier, as well as twice the price of Apple and Spotify's most popular plans. Called "TIDAL Masters," these hi-res tracks are "master-quality recordings directly from the master source." HiFi audio has good sound, but limited resolution (44.1 kHz /16-bit); TIDAL Masters offer "an authenticated and unbroken version" (typically 96 kHz / 24-bit). TIDAL offers 60+ million tracks, including 170,000+ in hi-res.

 

Hardly see John Atkinson's post #15543 and my response. 

[sandyk]

7 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

But you’re somehow one of only two people in the world who hear the difference between two identical files 😁

Chris

That is a completely unfair comment, as there are at least a couple of dozen members of your forum alone, who have confirmed my reports, including several high profile qualified members in the last 3 or 4 months who I won't name in open forum, and John Dyson who later requested you to remove my quotes from his report after realising that they had identical checksums and then blamed his hearing..

 If you require proof of this statement about the recent confirming reports I am more than happy to provide this FYI ONLY, and you will be able to check this for yourself via exchanged PMs.

BTW, those who have openly admitted to this include Peter St. , Manishander, Audiophile Neuroscience,acg, Barry Diament, Cookie Marenco (see my signature), Silverlight,(remember Geoff from NYC?),Claudius,Coxhaus, elcorso,Teresa, Marcin Ostapowicz from JPlay and John Kenny. as well as quite a few less known members, and including 2 qualified E.E.s from Sydney- Ionwyn Buckland ( check him out on LinkedIn ) and John Stokes.

Alex

[mansr]

5 minutes ago, sandyk said:

That is a completely unfair comment

You and The Colloms make two, no?

[sandyk]

3 hours ago, John Dyson said:

I *thought* i heard a difference on 'a certain test.'  I do lots of testing ALL OF THE TIME, and depend on my hearing... 

 John

 I value your online friendship, and have enjoyed participating in your quest to rectify the problems in many earlier Dolby encoded releases.

 If you are willing, I am now quite able to (hopefully)  demonstrate to you that you weren't mistaken originally, just as I did recently with several high profile, and suitably qualified members with well over 5,000 posts EACH  in this forum.

Regards

Alex

[sandyk]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

You and The Colloms make two, no?

 

It would appear that your reading comprehension is as poor as your hearing abilities.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Sorry for derailing this. Back to MQA. 

[mansr]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Sorry for derailing this. Back to MQA. 

Also two people. Bob Stuart and Robert Harley.

[Ralf11]

4 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

Please leave me out of your fevered imaginings, Rt66indierock.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

 

If you deny it, say so.

 

 

[Paul R]

7 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Getting this tread back on topic. Did you hear about HDTracks Streaming in 2016 or 2017? David Chesky said his phone was ringing off hook after the 7digital press release from the audio press because they didn't know.

 

What does it matter?

 

In any case it was whatever year Jeff Nichols debuted Midnight Special at the film festival.

[Sal1950]

6 hours ago, daverich4 said:

Maybe it’s time to stick a fork in this thread, I think it’s done

IMO, it will be done when Meridian folds it's tent on MQA and goes home.

Till then we have to continue the pushback against them and their plans to end consumer access to bit perfect copies of high definition audio recordings. Don't let up or the juggernaut will roll over the free market of lossless, better than Redbook, file distribution to the consumer market. 

[daverich4]

15 hours ago, daverich4 said:

Maybe it’s time to stick a fork in this thread, I think it’s done. 😂

 

From Enjoy The Music Dot Com

High-Quality (Or "High-Resolution") Audio
If you believe that you can hear the difference, and you have an audio system set up to take advantage of the increased fidelity, some companies are still trying to make a go of the hi-res audio space.

Jay-Z's TIDAL platform separates itself with its HiFi subscription tier, which offers access to high-res audio and costs $20/month: twice the price of its base tier, as well as twice the price of Apple and Spotify's most popular plans. Called "TIDAL Masters," these hi-res tracks are "master-quality recordings directly from the master source." HiFi audio has good sound, but limited resolution (44.1 kHz /16-bit); TIDAL Masters offer "an authenticated and unbroken version" (typically 96 kHz / 24-bit). TIDAL offers 60+ million tracks, including 170,000+ in hi-res.

 

Jeez, people. It was a F’ing joke. Didn’t anyone see the smiley face? Although it did get the expected responses from some of the usual suspects. Carry on. 

[John Dyson]

13 hours ago, sandyk said:

 John

 I value your online friendship, and have enjoyed participating in your quest to rectify the problems in many earlier Dolby encoded releases.

 If you are willing, I am now quite able to (hopefully)  demonstrate to you that you weren't mistaken originally, just as I did recently with several high profile, and suitably qualified members with well over 5,000 posts EACH  in this forum.

Regards

Alex

My hearing (like most other people) is NOT reliable in that kind of test scenario.  I just did a casual evaluation, and like in a lot of cases, I heard a difference because I was listening differently.  A difference in mindset, time of day, phase of the moon, can let someone hear material differently.  Being reliable in doing a comparison of complex material as a whole requires a lot more concentration than I could dedicate or even have available for the effort.

 

The ONLY way that I am even marginally reliable is when I am listening for a specific sound/distortion, where not needing to listen to the entire set of complex iteractions.  In these cases, I have found that I made an improvement in one form of distortion, but audibly blind to the travesty that I had created elsewhere 'in the instantaneous sound-scape.'  When I need to do the small changes for distortion mitigation, it is best to take very little baby-steps in the changes.  It is amazing about how narrow the information-bandwidth is for hearing.

 

For comparing/evaluating complex material as a whole, I wouldn't trust my own results (other for casual conversation) without careful ABX type evaluations.   This observation of my own limitations comes from truly vast experience making mistakes and ending up red-faced.  The one test casually done where I heard a differece -- I did HEAR a difference, but it was due to mental/information processing state differences, not the audio itself.

 

sound -> conversion to audio -> conversion to objects -> conversion to experience.

 

I can hear only so many 'objects' at any one time, even though I can experience a recording as a whole.  Also, I can distinguish lots of simple tones, but not very many objects at the same time.  There is a 'bandwidth limit' in the aural 'object processing', at least in my own hearing mechanism.

 

John

 

[crenca]

22 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

It certainly looks like John Atkinson and David Chesky were used to raise funds in 2015 for both MQA Ltd and 7digital.

 

21 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

Please leave me out of your fevered imaginings, Rt66indierock.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

 

@John_Atkinson, your a trade publication editor/writer/promotor, not a "journalist".  Your part of the trade, so your a tool of the trade.  Stereophile's raison d'être is so that men such as Bob Stuart can promote their products...

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

10 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

 

@John_Atkinson, your a trade publication editor/writer/promotor, not a "journalist".  Your part of the trade, so your a tool of the trade.  Stereophile's raison d'être is so that men such as Bob Stuart can promote their products...

I don't think this accurate or fair.

 

John Atkinson will come here and say he serves readers first, and that is also not accurate, because they really serve the industry.

 

However, they do provide detailed information about audiophile products. They do provide measurements. They do provide music reviews. 

 

Do they ever question the outrageous pricing and lack of value in many of the products they review? Rarely.

 

Do they make excuses for some absurd products? Sure.

 

Do they repeat marketing dreck on occasion? Sure.

 

But they are not strictly a tool of the industry. There is some value here. Less so after MQA for sure.

[John_Atkinson]

27 minutes ago, crenca said:

@John_Atkinson, [you're] a trade publication editor/writer/promoter, not a "journalist". 

 

Oddly enough, when I came to the US from the UK, the INS accepted my qualifications both as a magazine editor and as a journalist and granted me an H1-B work visa: https://workpermit.com/immigration/usa/us-h-1b-visa-specialty-workers

 

Perhaps they were mistaken 🙂

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

[The Computer Audiophile]

30 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

I don't think this accurate or fair.

 

John Atkinson will come here and say he serves readers first, and that is also not accurate, because they really serve the industry.

 

However, they do provide detailed information about audiophile products. They do provide measurements. They do provide music reviews. 

 

Do they ever question the outrageous pricing and lack of value in many of the products they review? Rarely.

 

Do they make excuses for some absurd products? Sure.

 

Do they repeat marketing dreck on occasion? Sure.

 

But they are not strictly a tool of the industry. There is some value here. Less so after MQA for sure.

Did you just interview yourself? I think you did. 

[crenca]

38 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

I don't think this accurate or fair.

 

John Atkinson will come here and say he serves readers first, and that is also not accurate, because they really serve the industry.

 

However, they do provide detailed information about audiophile products. They do provide measurements. They do provide music reviews. 

 

Do they ever question the outrageous pricing and lack of value in many of the products they review? Rarely.

 

Do they make excuses for some absurd products? Sure.

 

Do they repeat marketing dreck on occasion? Sure.

 

But they are not strictly a tool of the industry. There is some value here. Less so after MQA for sure.

 

but but but....(start your motors), that bolded sentence IS exactly what a trade publication is.  Yes a consumer can benefit from the content of a trade publication in all the ways you detail, but that does not change the fact that JA is a trade promoter (and thus a tool of the trade) and Stereophile is a trade publication.

 

In this context (i.e. MQA) the difference between a trade publication writer and a journalist is the truth.  For the formal, the truth is relevant only if it is convenient.  For the latter, the truth is a core principle.

 

 

[Allan F]

Is it really! What basis do you have to conclude that Stereophile's readers are mainly people in the trade as opposed to subscribers interested in audio? IMO, you are equating any publication devoted to a particular hobby or industry with a trade publication. The latter's target audience is people directly involved in the trade or industry. I believe it is both inaccurate and unfair to so characterize Stereophile and similar publications.

 

The only way you could have a publication with no industry associations is to publish a magazine without advertising.

[gdpr]

Well, may I remind you that in order to survive, this site needs advertizers too.