MQA is Vaporware

[John_Atkinson]

19 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

Are these issues speculated by John Darko to be: "On the plus side, we thank our lucky stars that no-one uttered the words “Just as the artist intended”. 

 

No. They were personal.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

[botrytis]

4 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

No. They were personal.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

Since NY is an artist, it can personal since he seems to be very passionate about how is work is treated. SO, it can be both.

[StephenJK]

7 minutes ago, botrytis said:

 

Since NY is an artist, it can personal since he seems to be very passionate about how is work is treated. SO, it can be both.

Neil Young......is Neil Young.  Throughout his career, he follows his muse and doesn't seem to care if his fans follow along or not.  The fact that so many of them do speaks volumes. 

 

To give you an idea of how much he cares about high resolution anyone remotely interested can sign up to the Neil Young Archives for about $10/year.  It was free for the first introductory year.

 

https://neilyoungarchives.com/

 

You can stream any released Neil Young album from day one in 24/192 master tape quality.  Their motto is "Quality Whether You Want It Or Not." 

[Rt66indierock]

2 minutes ago, botrytis said:

 

Since NY is an artist, it can personal since he seems to be very passionate about how is work is treated. SO, it can be both.

 

To clarify Charles Hansen offered me that personal information and I turned it down.  I've been focused on financial, artist and studio issues with MQA.

[botrytis]

14 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

To clarify Charles Hansen offered me that personal information and I turned it down.  I've been focused on financial, artist and studio issues with MQA.

Someone needs to 'geek out' on that info.

[Rt66indierock]

1 minute ago, botrytis said:

Someone needs to 'geek out' on that info.

 

Possibly true but I was stunned by how far Meridian's and MQA's operating losses spread. Helped by adding John Atkinson doesn't want you to know this. It changed how people view Bob Stuart.

[crenca]

2 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Possibly true but I was stunned by how far Meridian's and MQA's operating losses spread. Helped by adding John Atkinson doesn't want you to know this. It changed how people view Bob Stuart.

 

Your right, this might be how to phrase it for (some) audiophiles:

 

"Jim Austin does not want you to know this, but MQA has no content >96khz"

 

"Robert Harley do not want you to know this, but MQA is DRM"

[Rt66indierock]

11 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

Your right, this might be how to phrase it for (some) audiophiles:

 

"Jim Austin does not want you to know this, but MQA has no content >96khz"

 

"Robert Harley do not want you to know this, but MQA is DRM"

 

Jim Austin may still be struggling with being the editor of a heritage magazine acquired "to better serve our international manufacturer and distributor customers."

 

Robert Harley I hope to talk to at RMAF 19.

[botrytis]

I will be attending AXPONA 2020. Although the better half will be with me.  It will be interesting to see what things look like then.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just finished Neil’s book. Tons to discuss September 9, 2019, the publication date. 

[botrytis]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Just finished Neil’s book. Tons to discuss September 9, 2019, the publication date. 

 

I am looking forward to this.

[Rt66indierock]

4 minutes ago, botrytis said:

I will be attending AXPONA 2020. Although the better half will be with me.

 

My SO as well now that the date are more favorable. But we will also be doing planning for trip from Chicago to Santa Monica, Route 66.

[Rt66indierock]

5 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Just finished Neil’s book. Tons to discuss September 9, 2019, the publication date. 

 

Sounds like fun here, a new thread or both?

[mansr]

21 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

Robert Harley I hope to talk to at RMAF 19.

Ask him if the claims regarding his compensation for glowing coverage of MQA are true. You know what I'm referring to.

[firedog]

33 minutes ago, mansr said:

Ask him if the claims regarding his compensation for glowing coverage of MQA are true. You know what I'm referring to.

Maybe an anti Polish conspiracy, or a Johannes Kepler society,  paid him to denigrate the accomplishments of Copernicus by reducing them to the level of MQA’s “revolutionary” breakthrough😉.

[crenca]

26 minutes ago, firedog said:

Maybe an anti Polish conspiracy, or a Johannes Kepler society,  paid him to denigrate the accomplishments of Copernicus by reducing them to the level of MQA’s “revolutionary” breakthrough😉.

 

OMG, MQA as one big ethnic joke... It all makes sense now 😋

[esldude]

1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Sounds like fun here, a new thread or both?

I think a new thread would be good.  

[labjr]

7 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

You should note that I wrote "There were other issues but according to Charley Hansen, it was primarily battery life." I didn't think it appropriate to expand on the "other issues" as they involved personal matters that Charley had told me in confidence..

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

Primarily? It wasn't that Charley thought MQA was a marketing scam?

[lucretius]

3 hours ago, SJK said:

To give you an idea of how much he cares about high resolution anyone remotely interested can sign up to the Neil Young Archives for about $10/year.  It was free for the first introductory year.

 

IIRC, Neil really hated redbook CD when it came out and never really warmed up to it.

[John_Atkinson]

23 minutes ago, labjr said:

7 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

You should note that I wrote "There were other issues but according to Charley Hansen, it was primarily battery life." I didn't think it appropriate to expand on the "other issues" as they involved personal matters that Charley had told me in confidence..

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

Read more  

Primarily? It wasn't that Charley thought MQA was a marketing scam?

 

Our conversation took place in the fall of 2014, when I Charley and I had dinner during the RMAF.  Charley showed me a prototype Pono Player and we discussed the design goals and how they had been achieved, as well as the product's back story. As best as I can remember, we didn't talk about MQA other than the problem with battery life it had led to with the original Meridian proposal.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

[mcgillroy]

Do I get it right that the kinda dying MQA-debate is about to get a Neil Young-sized life-infusion?

 

Fun!

 

MQA PR-peeps perhaps are reciting the "there is no bad publicity"-mantra in group chants right now. 

[Currawong]

 

On 8/4/2019 at 5:41 PM, sandyk said:

 

 24/192 is NOT a waste of time, neither is DSD. They are both audibly superior to 16/44.1 for those with half decent hearing and good equipment.

I guess that this rules out those who can't even hear differences between USB cables that meet the applicable standards ?

 

 

Sorry, can't resist, but 352.8 and 384k are even better, especially if you like a crapload of free digital noise! Note everything in that track above about 48kHz (where a 24/96kHz file would end) is massive amounts of junk noise. 

 

 

On 8/9/2019 at 3:17 AM, John_Atkinson said:

 

My own experience leads me to prefer "leaky" reconstruction filters for most kinds of music; as does that of some of Stereophile team of reviewers; as does that of readers with whom I have discussed the subject. I don't see why anyone would have a problem with people citing their own experience as a reason for having a preference.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

I've spent some time with the iFi Pro iDSD, and I get why people like those kinds of filters. It seems to vary depending on the DAC, but to me (and others) it sounded best with the GTO "MQA-imitation" filter. Instruments seemed to jump forward in the sound space.  While I recognised it wasn't really accurate in both the technical and listening sense (the Chord DACs seem to give the best, most even and deep sense of actual "space" from recordings) it was often more fun to listen with.

 

On 8/14/2019 at 9:43 AM, Jim Austin said:

 

I don't think that's an accurate characterization. John, a technically astute, experienced recording engineer and audio reviewer--a winner of the Heyser Award from the Audio Engineering Society--certainly understands what goes on up there. Jason isn't a technical guy, but he has an excellent ear, and he--along with people like Morten Lindberg,  Peter McGrath, Alan Siverman, and  Bob Ludwig--very much likes the way MQA sounds. 

 

In any case, as I made clear in my editorial in the July issue, one of the main values I bring to leading Stereophile is an appreciation of diverse voices and opinions. It's OK if one reviewer loves one thing and another reviewer likes something different. This endless thread is, if nothing else, evidence that not everyone can tolerate opinions different from their own, but to me that is a core virtue.

 

By the way, in the quote box above, I fixed the spelling of Jason's last name: Serinus. 

 

Jim Austin, Editor

Stereophile

 

Jim, your fellow internet travellers know what an "appeal to authority" argument looks like.  We also know what the difference between "opinion" and "fact" is. 

 

While "Ismael" has done more for the pro-MQA camp, and MQA themselves, by continually spamming the thread with shallow, argumentative crap and personal attacks, drowning out the useful technical discussion and in turn making out the arguments here to appear empty and the posters abusive trolls, his question was valid. I'm going to re-post it, revised, as my own.

 

Why do John Atkinson and Jason Victor Serinus still post about MQA music in their reviews in a manner that implies that they contain musical data over 96 Khz, when we know FOR A FACT that they do not? Why is it not stated that the MQA is unfolded to 96k, then rendered, via up-sampling to a higher rate using MQA filters? Why are they listed as, say, "24/48 MQA file unfolded to 24/192" when they are not?  Why are these facts not corrected?

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, Currawong said:

Sorry, can't resist, but 352.8 and 384k are even better, especially if you like a crapload of free digital noise! Note everything in that track above about 48kHz (where a 24/96kHz file would end) is massive amounts of junk noise. 

I didn't see that because I didn't need to cheat to hear which track was the original 24/96 track!

 

This is a recent 24/192 track from Barry Diament with genuine musical content to around 55KHZ

[marce]

That will be useful, considering we only hear to 20kHz and then only when young...

Oh sorry these tracks will be for Batman and Robin to party too.

[John_Atkinson]

6 hours ago, Currawong said:

Why are they listed as, say, "24/48 MQA file unfolded to 24/192" when they are not?  

This is literally correct. When 24/48 MQA data is sent to the D/A processor, the DAC chip is presented with 24-bit data sampled at 192kHz. If every such passing mention had to include a full discussion of how MQA works or doesn't work, reviews would become unwieldy. 

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile