MQA is Vaporware

[daverich4]

7 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

We gee I no problems finding that Bose had $4 billion of revenue last year. You must not watch NFL games as Bose is everywhere. And a I see Bose ads all the time on the Golf Channel. 

 

You’re the bookkeeper. What does that one item tell you about the financial health of the company? And you’re right, I nether watch football or golf. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

33 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

 

I read it because I don’t have the technical background that some others on this site do and I’m interested in the discussions. My only disagreement with this thread, that really seems to set some of you off, is about how much influence it has on the rest of the audiophile community. 🤷🏼‍♂️

 

So much to unpack here.  Just so I'm understanding your angle here and not making assumptions, how do you personally estimate the "influence" this thread has on "the rest of the audiophile community"?  Does your estimation protocol have some actual statistics or is it purely a subjective exercise on your part?

 

And where are you going with the influence angle?  Assuming your subjective hypothesis is that this thread has something close to zero influence, you're asking that people only post technical information that you're able to understand and that critics with non-technical information should just shut up?  Just trying to understand what you're on about.

[daverich4]

6 minutes ago, mansr said:

So it's a source of information for you but not for anyone else?

 

Sure, that’s exactly what I meant. 😂

[daverich4]

2 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

So much to unpack here.  Just so I'm understanding your angle here and not making assumptions, how do you personally estimate the "influence" this thread has on "the rest of the audiophile community"?  Does your estimation protocol have some actually statistics or is it purely a subjective exercise on your part?

 

And where are you going with the influence angle?  Assuming your subjective hypothesis is that this thread has something close to zero influence, you're asking that people only post technical information that you're able to understand and that critics with non-technical information should just shut up?  Just trying to understand what you're on about.

 

Purely subjective.

 

You have my interests in the technical discussions exactly backwards. The reason I’m interested in them is because I don’t fully understand them and I’m trying to learn. 

 

You have zero interest in understanding what I’m about. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

2 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

 

Purely subjective.

 

You have my interests in the technical discussions exactly backwards. The reason I’m interested in them is because I don’t fully understand them and I’m trying to learn. 

 

You have zero interest in understanding what I’m about. 

There you go making assumptions again 🙂

 

I'm genuinely interested in your desire for some people here to shut up.  I'm trying to understand what that's about.

[Rt66indierock]

23 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

 

You’re the bookkeeper. What does that one item tell you about the financial health of the company? And you’re right, I nether watch football or golf. 

 

It is the revenue combined with NFL partnership that tells me things are going OK. 

 

And I'm not a bookkeeper I employ a few but I'm a tax person. I do planning and tax controversies. 

[daverich4]

33 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

It is the revenue combined with NFL partnership that tells me things are going OK. 

 

And I'm not a bookkeeper I employ a few but I'm a tax person. I do planning and tax controversies. 

 

Then I apologize. I misunderstood what you do for a living. 

[daverich4]

53 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

There you go making assumptions again 🙂

 

I'm genuinely interested in your desire for some people here to shut up.  I'm trying to understand what that's about.

 

You would have a better idea what that’s about than I as it’s something that exists solely in your mind. 

[mansr]

4 hours ago, tmtomh said:

I for one am happy to talk you at your word that you are not pro-MQA

I tend to judge people by their actions rather than their words.

[Samuel T Cogley]

15 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

 

You would have a better idea what that’s about than I as it’s something that exists solely in your mind. 

 

ooooooooookay.  Now you're just being coy.  You're saying that the copious use of the word "again" in this post should not be interpreted as you wanting some people to stop posting in the thread? Then what did it mean?  And what's the linkage to how much influence this thread has on "the audiophile community" with regards to MQA?

[daverich4]

25 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

ooooooooookay.  Now you're just being coy.  You're saying that the copious use of the word "again" in this post should not be interpreted as you wanting some people to stop posting in the thread? Then what did it mean?  And what's the linkage to how much influence this thread has on "the audiophile community" with regards to MQA?

 

Why on earth would I care if people want to post in this thread? The post you referred to suggested that new information about MQA in this thread mostly ceased being posted 100’s of pages ago. The majority of the posts since then are things being reposted... again. I see no harm in that but your repeated claim that I “want people to shut up” or “stop posting” is a figment of your imagination. 

 

You and I have had what I consider to be reasonable discussions/disagreements in the past but this is getting tedious. I just hit play on an album by Lauren Henderson that I read about today and I think I’d rather do that than this. You can continue talking to yourself if you want. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

5 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

 

Why on earth would I care if people want to post in this thread? The post you referred to suggested that new information about MQA in this thread mostly ceased being posted 100’s of pages ago. The majority of the posts since then are things being reposted... again. I see no harm in that but your repeated claim that I “want people to shut up” or “stop posting” is a figment of your imagination.

 

 

You seemed to be complaining about something.  Now you say you weren't.  The copious use of "again" (20 times by my count) to me indicated a heightened emotional state.  You also unambiguously suggested that some people here were tilting at windmills:

 

Quote

The rest of the online world has moved on. Just  not this part of it.

 

  So sure, nothing to see here.  OK.  🙄

[MetalNuts]

The same or similar question will be asked again, again and again in a forum.  Repeating similar topic posts are common and what is wrong with that?  New comers do not want to dig into the forum and they ask or post something they believe other may interest to see or to participate in discussion as if this is the 1st discovery.  I am afraid most of them are not new.  If one has to go through all the posts in a forum to ensure it is new before posting his, by the time he finished with the reading all the posts, someone has already posted his intended posts or even sadly, his time is up and numbered. 🤣

[asdf1000]

On 7/17/2019 at 8:43 AM, The Computer Audiophile said:

I may be wrong but I haven’t seen any MQA certified HiFi on AliExpress lately. 

 

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32977645364.html

 

 

[mansr]

3 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32977645364.html

"Sorry, this item is no longer available."

[asdf1000]

2 minutes ago, mansr said:

"Sorry, this item is no longer available."

 

Apparently launching soon...

[mansr]

4 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

Apparently launching soon...

Some kind of temporal inversion anomaly?

[asdf1000]

8 minutes ago, mansr said:

Some kind of temporal inversion anomaly?

 

Ha, maybe there's no 'launching soon' option in their software?

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, asdf1000 said:

 

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32977645364.html

 

 

I wonder if SMSL is going to be added to the official hardware partners page on the MQA site. 

[asdf1000]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I wonder if SMSL is going to be added to the official hardware partners page on the MQA site. 

 

Maybe after it's available?

 

I saw the "launch soon" here:

 

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/smsl-m500-launch-soon.8373/

[Rt66indierock]

7 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I wonder if SMSL is going to be added to the official hardware partners page on the MQA site. 

 

It is supposed to be available August 20, 2019. The real question is will have the ESS hump?

[daverich4]

From the September 2019 issue of Stereophile...

 

”MQA files will still unfold to their full resolution (although it must be acknowledged, without going into detail, that above 96kHZ, an unfolded MQA file is not equivalent to a PCM file of the same specification).”

 

Is that because of this thread? Could be. At least it’s the desired result. 

[John Dyson]

2 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

From the September 2019 issue of Stereophile...

 

”MQA files will still unfold to their full resolution (although it must be acknowledged, without going into detail, that above 96kHZ, an unfolded MQA file is not equivalent to a PCM file of the same specification).”

 

Is that because of this thread? Could be. At least it’s the desired result. 

Mp3 and opus can do 24 bits or so -- why aren't they as good as lossless PCM?  MQA is in the same boat as MP3/OPUS, simply use a different data reduction and re-interpolation scheme (I'd guess -- that is what compression does.)

 

Lots of bits with error -- that is called dither -- more or less effective.  Probably 'less' effective than true dither because of biases.

 

John

[The Computer Audiophile]

12 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

From the September 2019 issue of Stereophile...

 

”MQA files will still unfold to their full resolution (although it must be acknowledged, without going into detail, that above 96kHZ, an unfolded MQA file is not equivalent to a PCM file of the same specification).”

 

Is that because of this thread? Could be. At least it’s the desired result. 

Thanks for the info!

[mansr]

17 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

From the September 2019 issue of Stereophile...

 

”MQA files will still unfold to their full resolution (although it must be acknowledged, without going into detail, that above 96kHZ, an unfolded MQA file is not equivalent to a PCM file of the same specification).”

 

Is that because of this thread? Could be. At least it’s the desired result. 

Wow. JA must have been shitting bricks putting that in print.