Jump to content
IGNORED

MQA is Vaporware


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

 

In fairness to JA, he doesn't say "full authentic" in the quote you shared there. You said that...

 

He says unfolded. And yes we know unfolding beyond 96k is crappy up-sampling...

 

I want MQA to go away but I like JA's inputs here so we need to stay accurate or he'll disappear from this thread and we're left with not much.

 

 

Sorry he had a perfect opportunity to qualify the "24/192" unfold claim. He did not. 

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

Your smugness really is second to none. Perhaps your loyalty to JA for providing you with an actual full time job is blinding you.

That bio on his personal site, tho.  It's been cleaned up but you can find snippets of the even more narcissistic version somewhere on this AS site if you can stomach it.

http://www.jimaustin.org/

You're welcome!

Link to comment
11 hours ago, tmtomh said:

 

Finally.

And JVS just published an album review where he didn't mention MQA. Imagine that. 
Maybe all our comments are having an effect. 

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to comment
9 hours ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

Sorry he had a perfect opportunity to qualify the "24/192" unfold claim. He did not. 

Every time that I read 'unfold', I cringe.   'Unfolding' is imperfect.  (I am not disagreeing with the previous comment -- just that 'unfolding' sounds too nice.)

 

Unfolding is first IMPERFECT, secondly -- UNFOLDING would not be necessary unless there was the ugly 'FOLDING', which by the way that it is described -- is a loss of data with hints.   Plucking coefficents from a DCT/MDCT based on stats/levels is also that kind of lossage.

The "fold -> unfold" is lossy -- similar to "dct -> pluck out coefficents -> idct" being lossy.

 

Some of the math might be more 'natural' or 'built-in' to the system with folding/unfolding -- maybe, maybe-not, but that doesn't make it audibly good.   If the result is incomplete after 'unfolding', then the 'noise' had better be statistically close to dither, or it can produce problems.

 

John

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...