MQA is Vaporware

[audiventory]

2 hours ago, Nikhil said:

Of course "apodizing filters" sounds very impressive.  Fixing Time distortion? Less said the better ... Mitch's article pretty much nailed that lie.

For using "time distortion", "timing" and other same terms need define it exactly.

All information, that I read about "what is time distortions" is information about minimized amplitude of ringing and fixing of pre-ringing, if I correct understand links below:

1. http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=17501

2. https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2014108677&recNum=1&maxRec=&office=&prevFilter=&sortOption=&queryString=&tab=PCTDescription

Also pay attention to claims #21 of the patent (link #2). As I understand, there described using resampling filters, that allow achieve lesser total filters impact to signal in pair (encoder and decoder).

When digital audio signal compressed, such way allow reduce signal damaging (ringing) due resampling.

If digital audio signal is not compressed, there reduce nothing.

[ron spencer]

13 hours ago, Sal1950 said:

 

I thought FLAC meant Fun Loving Audio Connoisseurs while MQA means Money Quickly Accepted

[james45974]

Did a search for this on CA but didn't see it mentioned before, apologies if I missed it.  Here is a link to a hypothesis paper from Xivero (of MusicScope fame) regarding MQA:

https://www.xivero.com/blog/hypothesis-paper-to-support-a-deeper-technical-analysis-of-mqa-by-mqa-limited/

[Ralf11]

I'm just glad the MQA threads SURVIVED the site upgrade...

[Rt66indierock]

The Vaporware Trails March 2017

 

Starting with will high resolution ever make it into the mainstream at SXSW it should be becoming clear to the supporters of hi-res that it is niche market only. If all the panelists can come up with is we need a star like Neil Young to promote it even when they were reminded about Pono then hi-res doesn’t stand a chance in the mainstream.

 

So where does this leave MQA? As of March 25^th there are 2,689 entries in the spreadsheet tracking MQA music. They have created videos to help their promotional efforts but in my opinion they are too Brit centric to matter in America. In America the promotional effort seems to be audio shows and audio societies. I don’t see any how this approach will make MQA anything but a niche product among audiophiles in America.

 

The things that matter to me about MQA are the following. I still can’t download MQA files of the music I listen to. I haven’t found any bands in the genres I mentioned January 2, 2017 interested in making MQA recordings. One of my nine reference albums is now converted to MQA. AudioQuest hasn’t released the update for MQA. I think it is fair to say it is late. And finally I’ve heard nothing about MQA on Roon

.

Personally I’m gratified people have taken the time to track the MQA conversion process, track the providence of recordings and where they are available. It’s great to know that a lot of the music is converted from 16/44.1 because it seems that there is an effort to sell audiophiles that MQA is gathering momentum when it isn’t.

[pdickerson]

I know we would all love to see every album converted to MQA yesterday and Roon developers provide every wish we desire, but is that fair?  

 

 

[Fyper]

10 minutes ago, pdickerson said:

I know we would all love to see every album converted to MQA yesterday and Roon developers provide every wish we desire, but is that fair?  

 

 

Not all of us, no... :-)

[Sal1950]

2 hours ago, pdickerson said:

I know we would all love to see every album converted to MQA yesterday and Roon developers provide every wish we desire, but is that fair?  

 

 

No, not all.

I'm in no hurry to see my lossless CD quality downloads replaced with MQA's lossy facsimile of 16/44

Prefer to see MQA disappear in a puff of Vaporware smoke.

[audiventory]

13 minutes ago, Sal1950 said:

No, not all.

I'm in no hurry to see my lossless CD quality downloads replaced with MQA's lossy facsimile of 16/44

Prefer to see MQA disappear in a puff of Vaporware smoke.

 

I want only lossless downloads.

[jhwalker]

1 hour ago, audiventory said:

 

I want only lossless downloads.

Frankly, I'd like to see both options continue to be offered.

 

Lossless is intended to fully digitize the original session (albeit with lots of wasted space using a traditional rectangular PCM matrix), complete with any digital distortions, etc., introduced along the way.

 

MQA is purported to clean up the original session (i.e., make it even better), reduce the wasted space in the resultant file by refusing to encode noise below the floor and empty space above the audibility threshold ("triangular" matrix), and allow clean up at the other end, as well.

 

To my ears, MQA sounds "different" and, in some cases, "better".  Other listeners, including folks with much better ears than I, also say it sounds better.

 

I'd hate to kill a nascent technology that *may* provide better outcome(s) just because "I only want lossless downloads".

[audiventory]

2 minutes ago, jhwalker said:

I'd hate to kill a nascent technology that *may* provide better outcome(s) just because "I only want lossless downloads".

 

For broadcast the technology is ok.

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 minutes ago, jhwalker said:

 

To my ears, MQA sounds "different" and, in some cases, "better".  Other listeners, including folks with much better ears than I, also say it sounds better.

 

I'd hate to kill a nascent technology that *may* provide better outcome(s) just because "I only want lossless downloads".

 

This is where I stand as well.

 

Not on any bandwagon, just taking a relaxed approach.

[juanitox]

39 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

This is where I stand as well.

 

Not on any bandwagon, just taking a relaxed approach.

i have  Fleetwood mac Rumors  in 16/44   24/96  MQA and  SACD , i would say the same the MQA don't sound better

but like if the mix is not the same as the others ?  anyway the SACD file  is still  far beyond what a shame this format is also in a dead end !

[Sal1950]

59 minutes ago, jhwalker said:

Frankly, I'd like to see both options continue to be offered.

 

Lossless is intended to fully digitize the original session (albeit with lots of wasted space using a traditional rectangular PCM matrix), complete with any digital distortions, etc., introduced along the way.

 

MQA is purported to clean up the original session (i.e., make it even better), reduce the wasted space in the resultant file by refusing to encode noise below the floor and empty space above the audibility threshold ("triangular" matrix), and allow clean up at the other end, as well.

 

To my ears, MQA sounds "different" and, in some cases, "better".  Other listeners, including folks with much better ears than I, also say it sounds better.

 

I'd hate to kill a nascent technology that *may* provide better outcome(s) just because "I only want lossless downloads".

But that's the problem, the MQA replace the lossless offerings as they're released and you can't have both.

And this is the way all the powers that be want it. They'll all be on the $ MQA gravy train and don't care if your SQ is better, the same, or worse.

 

[jhwalker]

6 minutes ago, Sal1950 said:

But that's the problem, the MQA replace the lossless offerings as they're released and you can't have both.

And this is the way all the powers that be want it. They'll all be on the $ MQA gravy train and don't care if your SQ is better, the same, or worse.

 

 

Can you point to a release yet where this has happened?  So far, every new release I've seen streaming in MQA has also been available in lossless format.

 

Not to say it will never happen, and I stated my preference was to retain *both* - but it isn't happening now, so far as I can see.

[Sal1950]

6 minutes ago, jhwalker said:

 

Can you point to a release yet where this has happened?  So far, every new release I've seen streaming in MQA has also been available in lossless format.

 

Not to say it will never happen, and I stated my preference was to retain *both* - but it isn't happening now, so far as I can see.

Where's the bandwidth savings in that?

Don't worry, they'll all be gone soon from MQA streamers and probably the downloaders like HDTracks too.

[Samuel T Cogley]

MQA/Tidal/Audioquest seems to still be stuck on getting MQA Core working on ARM processors.  AQ is way behind on that firmware update for the new Dragonflys, apparently blaming Tidal.  But I've heard the actual code comes from MQA themselves.

 

I know of two software MQA Core implementations: Tidal desktop and Audirvana+ 3.0.  Are there any others?

 

 

[jhwalker]

2 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

MQA/Tidal/Audioquest seems to still be stuck on getting MQA Core working on ARM processors.  AQ is way behind on that firmware update for the new Dragonflys, apparently blaming Tidal.  But I've heard the actual code comes from MQA themselves.

 

I know of two software MQA Core implementations: Tidal desktop and Audirvana+ 3.0.  Are there any others?

 

 

 

Not that I know of - wild to see such slow rollout (over two years now!), and maybe it will die on the vine.

 

I have very little skin in this game - the only thing I have that is MQA compatible is the Meridian Explorer 2, and I'm not buying any MQA files either, just streaming.  I'd just like to see it given a chance to succeed.

[jhwalker]

5 minutes ago, Sal1950 said:

Where's the bandwidth savings in that?

Don't worry, they'll all be gone soon from MQA streamers and probably the downloaders like HDTracks too.

 

Every stream that is done in MQA vs. lossless is a net savings in bandwidth.  Storage is another story

[audiventory]

22 minutes ago, jhwalker said:

 

Every stream that is done in MQA vs. lossless is a net savings in bandwidth.  Storage is another story

 

John,

Many years storage for audio is not story

[Samuel T Cogley]

19 minutes ago, jhwalker said:

 

Not that I know of - wild to see such slow rollout (over two years now!), and maybe it will die on the vine.

 

I have very little skin in this game - the only thing I have that is MQA compatible is the Meridian Explorer 2, and I'm not buying any MQA files either, just streaming.  I'd just like to see it given a chance to succeed.

 

I have an ME2 as well.  Bought it just for MQA.  For me, the bloom was off the rose after about 3 days.  Even with non-MQA content, I start to get listening fatigue with the ME2 after a couple of hours.  Also, there was a bug uncovered in the MQA technical analysis thread that after playing MQA content, the MQA filter stays enabled when playing non-MQA content.  Best to unplug/re-plug the ME2 when transitioning.

 

Regarding the success (or not) of MQA, unless they can address mobile decoding on non-Meridian hardware, they're doomed.  The ME2 draws too much USB power to be a viable mobile DAC.

[Rt66indierock]

6 hours ago, pdickerson said:

I know we would all love to see every album converted to MQA yesterday and Roon developers provide every wish we desire, but is that fair?  

 

 

 

Fair? I said in my original post that I won’t test MQA until eight of my nine reference albums are available in MQA because they are all mainstream classic rock for two reasons. One is consistency. I’ve tested with the same music since the mid-seventies with the one addition in 1982 The Nightfly. I’m not changing testing methods for a format. And two if these albums aren’t in the format there is a strong probability the format is niche market with no mainstream appeal. I reported one is now converted to MQA nothing more.

 

Roon is ready to go with MQA decoding except for a technical issue with Tidal. All I’m reporting is the issue still hasn’t been resolved.  

[Jud]

57 minutes ago, Sal1950 said:

Don't worry, they'll all be gone soon from MQA streamers and probably the downloaders like HDTracks too.

 

Any actual plans regarding contractual arrangements between the industry and the vendors who supply HDT etc. that you can point to?

 

Otherwise, not saying this can't or won't happen, but let's not take it as proved just yet.

 

I also have a hard time seeing why the industry would have bothered to help create a hi res download industry and then destroy it, for what, exactly?  It isn't like they're bleeding massive amounts of revenue from piracy in this tiny niche area of their operations.

[Fitzcaraldo215]

1 hour ago, juanitox said:

i have  Fleetwood mac Rumors  in 16/44   24/96  MQA and  SACD , i would say the same the MQA don't sound better

but like if the mix is not the same as the others ?  anyway the SACD file  is still  far beyond what a shame this format is also in a dead end !

SACD may be in a dead end for rock and pop, but it is not for classical.  Yes, classical is a niche, and SACD is just a niche within that.  So, I am not trying to overstate the market impact.  

 

There continue to be remastered, reissued oldies from the analog era on SACD.  But, more importantly, newly recorded material using the latest hi rez technology also continues to appear from a number of labels, if at a much, much slower rate than CD.  Most newly recorded SACD's offer discretely recorded hi rez DSD multichannel, as well as stereo in DSD and RBCD formats.

 

The SACD hybrid idea, offering hi rez but with downward compatibility to CD,  has been mirrored in MQA.  Also, MQA supports multichannel, though that is in the early stages of being rolled out.

[miguelito]

30 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

Roon is ready to go with MQA decoding except for a technical issue with Tidal. All I’m reporting is the issue still hasn’t been resolved.

Interesting... What is the issue with TIDAL? Audirvana 3 is already able to decode TIDAL MQA...