MQA is Vaporware

[The Computer Audiophile]

@Ishmael Slapowitz Are you in the industry?

 

You’ve used many anonymizing techniques, since you joined, to hide your identity from me behind the scenes. 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

@Ishmael Slapowitz Are you in the industry?

 

You’ve used many anonymizing techniques, since you joined, to hide your identity from me behind the scenes. 

No affiliation. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

3 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

@Ishmael Slapowitz Are you in the industry?

 

You’ve used many anonymizing techniques, since you joined, to hide your identity from me behind the scenes. 

 

Hey Chris.  @christopher3393 seems like he smells blood in the water.  Please don't be goaded by his civility crusade.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

6 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

@Ishmael Slapowitz Are you in the industry?

 

You’ve used many anonymizing techniques, since you joined, to hide your identity from me behind the scenes. 

I pointed out McGrath was an MQA insider and promoter. I understand this may have made you uncomfortable as you now own Wilsons and they are a client. I was simply pointing out a fact concerning their sales manager and his MQA endorsement.  Nothing else.

[daverich4]

7 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

I pointed out McGrath was an MQA insider and promoter. I understand this may have made you uncomfortable as you now own Wilsons and they are a client. I was simply pointing out a fact concerning their sales manager and his MQA endorsement.  Nothing else.

 

You said more than that. You said he had something to gain financially from the success of MQA. I’m willing to take you at your word, I simply asked if you would explain how. 

[christopher3393]

19 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Hey Chris.  @christopher3393 seems like he smells blood in the water.  Please don't be goaded by his civility crusade.

 

Deflection and dissembling.

[John_Atkinson]

52 minutes ago, mansr said:

Pono initially were looking at MQA (though it wasn't called that then), complete with full DRM features. I guess we'll never know the true reason they backed out of that.

 

There were other issues but according to Charley Hansen, it was primarily battery life. The DSP available for MQA decoding back then rapidly depleted the player's battery.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

[mansr]

Just now, christopher3393 said:

Deflection and dissembling.

Thanks for clarifying your intent.

[firedog]

1 hour ago, christopher3393 said:

 

What is your affiliation with the audio industry? Have you written audio equipment reviews and do you continue to do so? It is policy here to declare your affiliation. Have you ever posted on this site under another name?

All he said was that he's been to hifi shows. How does that turn in your mind into him being "in the industry"? 

[christopher3393]

3 minutes ago, mansr said:

Thanks for clarifying your intent.

 

look, I know you and some others are fine with having abrasive banned individuals return as often as they can get away with it by basically deceiving the moderator. Of course, this is only the case if they support and advance your cause by whatever means necessary.

But please don't paint me as supporting MQA. And don't ask me to like the screed that you not infrequently serve alongs with your technical screenshots. Not gonna happen.

[christopher3393]

Just now, firedog said:

All he said was that he's been to hifi shows. How does that turn in your mind into him being "in the industry"? 

 

This has been going on for awhile as I mentioned. Larger context. Perhaps you don't see it?

[firedog]

57 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

Find something do with your self please. 🤣

Actually, if you have nothing to hide there is no reason not to state that you have no affiliation. Just answer whether you do or not.

[firedog]

5 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

This has been going on for awhile as I mentioned. Larger context. Perhaps you don't see it?

Edit: he directly denied being in the industry. Unless we have evidence otherwise, we have to take him at his word.

 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

Just now, firedog said:

Yes, now that I see a flat out inability to say he has no industry affiliation, it seems suspicious.

Did you not see my post? Perhaps read posts further up before you accuse?

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

3 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

This has been going on for awhile as I mentioned. Larger context. Perhaps you don't see it?

the only thing going on for a while is your utter lack of anything to contribute to this thread and your yenta busy body-ness.

[crenca]

3 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

look, I know you and some others are fine with having abrasive banned individuals return as often as they can get away with it by basically deceiving the moderator. Of course, this is only the case if they support and advance your cause by whatever means necessary.

But please don't paint me as supporting MQA. And don't ask me to like the screed that you not infrequently serve alongs with your technical screenshots. Not gonna happen.

 

Look, we know you are fine living in the glass house of your idealism around community, forums, and "civility".  You talk a good game around community, civility, and tolerance but in fact practice a puritan brand of moral finger wagging and demand whom you have decided are "banned individuals' to get the punishment they deserved...yours is the only "cause" worth a machiavellian effort in your view, and you contribute a screed to this effort every chance you get.

 

Looked up the definition of hypocrite lately?

[firedog]

4 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

Did you not see my post? Perhaps read posts further up before you accuse?

Sorry. Edited my previous post. 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

1 minute ago, firedog said:

Sorry. Edited my previous post. 

Not a problem. Thanks.

[The Computer Audiophile]

40 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

I pointed out McGrath was an MQA insider and promoter. I understand this may have made you uncomfortable as you now own Wilsons and they are a client. I was simply pointing out a fact concerning their sales manager and his MQA endorsement.  Nothing else.

Your understanding is incorrect. I'm far from uncomfortable with anything you say. I just like facts rather than your continued conspiracy theories that have been proven false. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

20 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

look, I know you and some others are fine with having abrasive banned individuals return as often as they can get away with it by basically deceiving the moderator.

 

Delusional, paranoid fantasies.

[crenca]

9 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Your understanding is incorrect. I'm far from uncomfortable with anything you say. I just like facts rather than your continued conspiracy theories that have been proven false. 

 

Which conspiracy theory has been proven false?

 

The one where McGrath (or JA, or fill_in_the_blank) are "directly compensated", or the one where they directly promote the fraud that is MQA?

[mansr]

33 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

look, I know you and some others are fine with having abrasive banned individuals return as often as they can get away with it by basically deceiving the moderator.

That's between them and Chris, unless they misbehave again. Nobody needs you playing sheriff. You're probably the chairman of your HOA.

[marce]

My view on MQA as an observer over the last several years is that the evidence against it being a benefit far out way the evidence it is a benefit to audio reproduction. 

The added processing to unfold! the music data buried in god knows what data packaging also does not appeal to me, keeping the signal chain as simple as possible is always best.  The added hardware and software overheads make DAC's more complex, again not a good thing, a complex design is always harder to get right, software being more prone to issues than hardware.

Finally the industry champions of MQA have quite often been acerbic in its defence!

Just my view from reading numerous threads (not only here), press announcements, videos etc.

Thanks to all that have put the effort in, for the above reasons my next DAC (coming after the major roof leak, the British summer has revealed is sorted) will not have MQA.

[KeenObserver]

1 hour ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

There were other issues but according to Charley Hansen, it was primarily battery life. The DSP available for MQA decoding back then rapidly depleted the player's battery.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

 

Seriously?

[Samuel T Cogley]

7 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

 

Seriously?

 

I'm not surprised.  Look how long it took Tidal's mobile app to do the "first unfold".  I think the Dragonfly Red/Black had the MQA "renderer" firmware for a year or more before Tidal did its part.