MQA is Vaporware

[Archimago]

16 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

AES is not an "academic" organization is it?  I thought it was an industry group created by and for the industry and its authoritative insiders.  Is Bob Stuart an actual academic?

 

 

Is there a significant authority in Audiophiledom who has "accepted, learned, changed" and thus walked back his initial support of MQA?  Amir it seems is just another Audiophile insider with a crisis of authority around MQA.  

 

It also appears you have gotten under his skin a bit @Archimago, in that your the real "objectivist" in the room.

 

MQA is wonderful in its ability to burn down and reveal the naked belly of these alleged authorities...

 

Well... Leaving AES aside :-)...

 

I remember the first time I heard about Amir was when he was debating the late Arny Kruger about hi-res audio. It's been awhile since I've seen that thread but in general I agree with this Audio Investigations entry. No doubt Amir is a smart guy, I can't help but feel there's some ego there that I'm uncomfortable with.

 

I enjoy reading his measurement reports (like recently the PS Audio DAC and the much-ballyhooed-by-various-audiophiles Totaldac - no surprise there are issues with these devices) nonetheless.

[crenca]

1 minute ago, Archimago said:

No doubt Amir is a smart guy, I can't help but feel there's some ego there that I'm uncomfortable with.

 

Well, the various principles at SBAF (many of whom do their own extensive measurements) have detailed how Amir, let's say "fudges" (to chose a word) his measurements according to his various agenda's (one of them being anti-Schiit).  I am only mildly interested observer in this however and have not dived in to make a determination myself, but I wonder about Amir's work.  On the other hand, nobody has ever accused the SBAF boys of being ego free themselves.  Of course, I openly wonder about JA's work as well, not only his philosophy-asserted-as-fact around minimum phase but even his objective measurements.  It's a niche hobby so we more often than not don't have several authorities measuring the same piece of gear, so IMO it's best to take them for what they are:   data point(s) from a single flawed individual who usually has an agenda/ego/"philosophy"...

[Archimago]

1 hour ago, crenca said:

 

... It's a niche hobby so we more often than not don't have several authorities measuring the same piece of gear, so IMO it's best to take them for what they are:   data point(s) from a single flawed individual who usually has an agenda/ego/"philosophy"...

 

Well said.

 

Certainly no argument from me that we all have our own "agenda / ego / philosophy" whether consciously or subconsciously expressed. 🙂

 

Agree or not with the other person's opinion, I think internal consistency of one's philosophy and clarity of communication are essentials when debating. In this regard, I'm not sure I understand where Amir is coming from or why he feels the way he does about MQA...

[MikeyFresh]

18 minutes ago, Archimago said:

In this regard, I'm not sure I understand where Amir is coming from or why he feels the way he does about MQA.

 

I think it's likely due to his "engineering" firm (read: AV custom installer) Madrona Digital being a big proponent of Berkeley Audio Design's products, which they sell and install.

[Ralf11]

so, if Amit fudges his measurements on a DAC, is it enough of a change from the true value to make a difference in SQ?

 

is it a difference that exceeds unit to unit variation?

 

aside from the ethics...

[MikeyFresh]

25 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

so, if Amit fudges his measurements on a DAC, is it enough of a change from the true value to make a difference in SQ?

 

is it a difference that exceeds unit to unit variation?

 

aside from the ethics...

 

How about when Amir claimed the Sonore microRendu caused an 8dB rise at the analog output of his DAC? That sort of thing would be audible to everyone, wouldn't it?

 

 

One big problem there of course, it wasn't actually a thing. What he was measuring was caused by his use of Windows Media Player and it's dithered volume control. 

 

Credibility took a pretty big hit there, but not only there, plenty of other botch jobs have confirmed that ASR's measurements need to be taken with a grain of salt, and there appears to be an agenda at play. I suggest there is an agenda at play with regard to his MQA stance too.

[esldude]

3 hours ago, crenca said:

 

Well, the various principles at SBAF (many of whom do their own extensive measurements) have detailed how Amir, let's say "fudges" (to chose a word) his measurements according to his various agenda's (one of them being anti-Schiit).  I am only mildly interested observer in this however and have not dived in to make a determination myself, but I wonder about Amir's work.  On the other hand, nobody has ever accused the SBAF boys of being ego free themselves.  Of course, I openly wonder about JA's work as well, not only his philosophy-asserted-as-fact around minimum phase but even his objective measurements.  It's a niche hobby so we more often than not don't have several authorities measuring the same piece of gear, so IMO it's best to take them for what they are:   data point(s) from a single flawed individual who usually has an agenda/ego/"philosophy"...

I've never found reason to doubt the measurements that JA supplies.  I sometimes look askance at his conclusions from those measurements, but I think you can count on his measurements as golden.  

 

The thing about SBAF and Amir is more often than not, the results are the same within the margin of error for repeating measurements.  It is how they are interpreted or sometimes the conditions of the test were different.  More than once I've seen people at SBAF upset with his measurements while those done by Atomic Bob show pretty much the same thing.  Bob praises the unit with iffy results and Amir doesn't.  Many of those just don't like hearing the gear is sub-standard.  Schitt is a good example of this.  BTW, did you catch that Atomic Bob was using a USB cleaner for his Schitt gear as his measurements suffered without it?

 

I also find some of the things said about Amir bizarre as people post things just made up, and you wonder where it came from and other people just assume it is true and proceed.  Like he can only get measurements by traveling around to do them at places they haven't caught onto him yet.  While in reality the great bulk of what he measures is sent to him or he buys it to test.  Quite some disconnect there.  Or his recent measurement of a PS Audio product where the results exceeded the specs quoted by PS audio, more or less matched JA's results and he was called out for doing a hatchet job.  I'm sorry, but the quoted results were very mediocre for a very expensive product.  And though Amir achieved a better result it was still mediocre.  

 

There are a few things I might not agree with, but overall they are few while mostly thinking he is providing a service to measure to publish his results for gear.  He's upset some pointing out how AV products are mediocre.  I've measured a few of those myself.  They are mediocre.  Those are the results.  For the cost you aren't getting good performance. 

 

His defense of MQA I don't understand.   

[esldude]

1 hour ago, MikeyFresh said:

 

How about when Amir claimed the Sonore microRendu caused an 8dB rise at the analog output of his DAC? That sort of thing would be audible to everyone, wouldn't it?

 

 

One big problem there of course, it wasn't actually a thing. What he was measuring was caused by his use of Windows Media Player and it's dithered volume control. 

 

Credibility took a pretty big hit there, but not only there, plenty of other botch jobs have confirmed that ASR's measurements need to be taken with a grain of salt, and there appears to be an agenda at play. I suggest there is an agenda at play with regard to his MQA stance too.

Here is the post where he explains the mistake he made in measuring after a couple of us questioned him on this.  He made a mistake.  He has made a few, but who doesn't.  He did listen to criticism, found the mistake, and posted corrected results.  I don't see the big problem unless he refused to review himself or correct his mistake.  He could have sanitized the thread, but left it there for all to see his mistake. 

 

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/measurements-of-sonore-microrendu-streamer.577/post-16734

 

 

[MikeyFresh]

48 minutes ago, esldude said:

He could have sanitized the thread, but left it there for all to see his mistake. 

 

He partially sanitized the thread, but that's water under the bridge at this point. I'll give him credit for not being guilty of 100% revisionist history there.

 

That said, lets not lose sight of the nature of the error, he thought an Ethernet -> USB converter acting as a renderer caused an 8dB rise at the DAC's analog output. Really? Novices know better.

 

Lets also not lose sight of his reaction to the questioning of those measurements, he immediately sought to change the subject and made an attack on the iFi iPower, calling it the "included" power supply, and then amending that to be the "recommended" power supply when in fact it was neither.

 

Sonore sells the microRendu sans power supply, and always did. Should one wish to purchase a power supply with the microRendu, various choices are provided including the iPower (cheapest option), CIAudio LPS, Teddy Pardo LPS, HD-Plex LPS, UpTone LPS-1.2, UpTone JS-2, SBooster 6VDC, or SGC 7V LPS. While not all of those choices were available from Sonore back in 2016, that doesn't change the fact that the iPower was never the "included", nor the "recommended" power supply for the microRendu. That was Amir's misrepresentation.

 

Moreover, Amir's spotlight of the iPower's AC leakage current is hardly impressive, nearly all cheap SMPS wall warts have that issue, for example take a look at a Mean Well data sheet, it's there for all to see, no big revelation there at all.

 

Why did Amir choose to test the microRendu with the iPower? Because it was the cheapest option, not because it was "included", or "recommended" as he asserted. He certainly knew the cheapest option would also measure the worst.

 

What was Amir's agenda or axe to grind? Likely the lack of any dealer margin on Sonore products, Amir's Madonna Digital doesn't realize any profit margin on products sold direct (Schiit for instance), so he dings them.

 

Similarly, he sells the MQA compatible Berkeley Audio Design products, hence his position on MQA. Or maybe BS made a nice Patreon donation?

 

 

[rwdvis]

9 hours ago, JoshM said:

After the MQA thread over at ASR had to be locked months ago because Amir was getting pilloried by his own followers for his blind appeals to authority on behalf of Bob Stuart, Amir has unlocked the thread in order to post more blind appeals to authority and specious arguments on behalf of Rob Harley (and against Archimago).

 

Got to love a proprietor of an audio “science” forum who defends MQA!

 

Thankfully, @mitchco called Amir on it over at ASR. 

The only reason he reopened it is because he was triggered by this post linked below and a few preceding it.  He’s been following the PSA thread.

 

He knows there’s not much to fear in reopening it, his obedient, fearful heard will not stray nor sway in their belief in Him.😃

 

https://forum.psaudio.com/t/another-review-of-the-ds-dac/13027/394

 

One of his debate tactics is to declare himself an expert in everything, therefore, any counter-argument you have is invalid.

 

He often makes the statement that we should not question our Doctor’s advice when seeking medical advice (which is fallacious), therefore, we should not question him.  But in the next minute, he’s arguing with an actual attorney regarding legal matters, and declares himself an expert in that field, because he’s worked at MS and has “experience” in that area.

 

He likes to appeal to his own insufficient authority and expects all to bow down and accept what he says without question.  Those who follow that rule at ASR are held in the highest esteem.

 

[rwdvis]

4 hours ago, Archimago said:

 

Well... Leaving AES aside :-)...

 

I remember the first time I heard about Amir was when he was debating the late Arny Kruger about hi-res audio. It's been awhile since I've seen that thread but in general I agree with this Audio Investigations entry. No doubt Amir is a smart guy, I can't help but feel there's some ego there that I'm uncomfortable with.

 

I enjoy reading his measurement reports (like recently the PS Audio DAC and the much-ballyhooed-by-various-audiophiles Totaldac - no surprise there are issues with these devices) nonetheless.

 

Outside of his very narrow field of expertise, he’s actually not that bright.  He has a poor understanding of science (or purposely misrepresents it when convenient) and lacks basic logic/critical thinking skills (or knowingly uses fallacious arguments with dishonest intent).

 

[rwdvis]

 

No one has linked the recent, excellent Archimago MQA blog, yet?

 

https://archimago.blogspot.com/2019/09/musings-democritization-doublethink-mqa.html

 

 

[opus101]

1 hour ago, esldude said:

I've never found reason to doubt the measurements that JA supplies.  I sometimes look askance at his conclusions from those measurements, but I think you can count on his measurements as golden.  

 

In general yes I would agree. But there is one 'edge case' I've noticed where he appears not to understand what he's actually measuring. That case being an unfiltered NOS DAC - its invalid to make a direct swept frequency response measurement using an AP as the upper octave level gets severely corrupted by the unfiltered images. He seems blissfully unaware of this.

[esldude]

2 hours ago, MikeyFresh said:

 

He partially sanitized the thread, but that's water under the bridge at this point. I'll give him credit for not being guilty of 100% revisionist history there.

 

That said, lets not lose sight of the nature of the error, he thought an Ethernet -> USB converter acting as a renderer caused an 8dB rise at the DAC's analog output. Really? Novices know better.

 

Lets also not lose sight of his reaction to the questioning of those measurements, he immediately sought to change the subject and made an attack on the iFi iPower, calling it the "included" power supply, and then amending that to be the "recommended" power supply when in fact it was neither.

 

Sonore sells the microRendu sans power supply, and always did. Should one wish to purchase a power supply with the microRendu, various choices are provided including the iPower (cheapest option), CIAudio LPS, Teddy Pardo LPS, HD-Plex LPS, UpTone LPS-1.2, UpTone JS-2, SBooster 6VDC, or SGC 7V LPS. While not all of those choices were available from Sonore back in 2016, that doesn't change the fact that the iPower was never the "included", nor the "recommended" power supply for the microRendu. That was Amir's misrepresentation.

 

Moreover, Amir's spotlight of the iPower's AC leakage current is hardly impressive, nearly all cheap SMPS wall warts have that issue, for example take a look at a Mean Well data sheet, it's there for all to see, no big revelation there at all.

 

Why did Amir choose to test the microRendu with the iPower? Because it was the cheapest option, not because it was "included", or "recommended" as he asserted. He certainly knew the cheapest option would also measure the worst.

 

What was Amir's agenda or axe to grind? Likely the lack of any dealer margin on Sonore products, Amir's Madonna Digital doesn't realize any profit margin on products sold direct (Schiit for instance), so he dings them.

 

Similarly, he sells the MQA compatible Berkeley Audio Design products, hence his position on MQA. Or maybe BS made a nice Patreon donation?

 

 

The error was a simple one yes.  Embarrassingly so. 

 

As for the SMPS, he showed results with a lab power supply, and with a SBOOSTER power supply which gave results like his lab supply and better than the iFi supply.  If they don't come with a power supply such results from multiple supplies seems useful to owners of the device.  In the first post it says it does not come with a power supply, he ordered it with the  iPower supply.  One of those in your list above.  Yes, as he was buying this, he did order the cheapest one.  I don't see any notices saying if you order from our list some of these will add noise to the signal instead of cleaning it up.  And know if anything his measures have shown you can't equate cost with performance without checking. 

 

You sound like a hurt fanboy of something he gave poor marks to honestly.  

 

 

[esldude]

1 hour ago, opus101 said:

 

In general yes I would agree. But there is one 'edge case' I've noticed where he appears not to understand what he's actually measuring. That case being an unfiltered NOS DAC - its invalid to make a direct swept frequency response measurement using an AP as the upper octave level gets severely corrupted by the unfiltered images. He seems blissfully unaware of this.

I've noticed that, but don't know if he is unaware of that or not.  His comments here would indicate he likely does know it. 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/audio-note-cd-41x-cd-player-measurements

 

Yet measures of other NOS DACs he doesn't explain the response or why it looks like it does. 

 

It does seem reasonable to me to measure it the way it measures because if you play music this way it is the response you'll see.  Mixed in with all the imaging that occurs.  You could measure with fixed spaced tones and ignore the artifacts.  But those artifacts are really there. 

[opus101]

23 minutes ago, esldude said:

 His comments here would indicate he likely does know it. 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/audio-note-cd-41x-cd-player-measurements

 

That indicates that he does know about the existence of 'negative frequencies' at the DAC's output but doesn't make the connection that they upset the level meter used by the AP to gauge the frequency response. Perhaps he makes the tacit assumption that the AP can tell the original stimulus apart from the images?

 

He generally also publishes the FFT of a white noise stimulus which does show the true FR and so far I've noticed no remark on why the two measurement methods disagree.

[MikeyFresh]

8 hours ago, esldude said:

As for the SMPS, he showed results with a lab power supply, and with a SBOOSTER power supply which gave results like his lab supply and better than the iFi supply.

 

Thats where the revisionist history comes in, you see that wasn't part of the original review, it was added after the fact. The original review simply attacked the $49 iPower and claimed it was the "included" then "recommended" supply when it wasn't.

 

8 hours ago, esldude said:

In the first post it says it does not come with a power supply, he ordered it with the  iPower supply.  One of those in your list above. 

 

Again, that's what the review now says, after having been altered. originally it was claimed to be the included or recommended supply. That's not my list, it's the list of power supply options offered by Sonore, however the default is no power supply (bring your own).

 

8 hours ago, esldude said:

I don't see any notices saying if you order from our list some of these will add noise to the signal instead of cleaning it up.

 

I don't see anyone selling anything with a similar SMPS wall wart giving such notice, it seems to be understood that one of the weaknesses of that kind of design is AC leakage current, or more generally, you get what you pay for when it comes to power supply.

 

8 hours ago, esldude said:

And know if anything his measures have shown you can't equate cost with performance without checking. 

 

That was already well known, ASR is not saving the poor unwashed masses in that regard.

 

8 hours ago, esldude said:

You sound like a hurt fanboy of something he gave poor marks to honestly. 

 

To you perhaps, and that's OK if thinking that makes you feel better. If owning one Sonore product makes me a "fanboy", I guess I'm guilty then, however I don't need any botched ASR measurements to determine the value proposition offered by something like a microRendu, nor do I need ASR to tell me that a better power supply will make any particular piece of gear measure better.

 

I'll bring this back on topic by saying there was and still is an easy to see agenda, bias, and axe to grind with ASR on what/how they choose to measure and/or attack. In light of that, all ASR measurements need to be taken with a grain of salt, as does their stance on topics such as MQA.

 

Tell me, does Madrona Digital also sell Harman products? Just curious.

 

Amir is simply not the knight in shining armor you paint hm to be, I'm sorry. ASR's technical and "business case" show of support for MQA further confirms that, much to the dismay of his once loyal little following.

 

[crenca]

14 hours ago, esldude said:

I've never found reason to doubt the measurements that JA supplies....

 

I recall reading (can't recall where - probably SBAF) where JA had Border Patrol DAC in house that had an unusually high output impedance, so JA went ahead and measured it into an equally unusually high impedance.  This of course had the effect of improving the DAC's measurements in the test, typical use case be damned.

 

In any case I think @MikeyFreshis right in that a "trust but verify" stance towards measurements needs to be taken, not only because these guys have their agenda's (and thus will fudge here or there) but also because measurements are hard, variable depending on methodology, etc...

[esldude]

23 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

I recall reading (can't recall where - probably SBAF) where JA had Border Patrol DAC in house that had an unusually high output impedance, so JA went ahead and measured it into an equally unusually high impedance.  This of course had the effect of improving the DAC's measurements in the test, typical use case be damned.

 

In any case I think @MikeyFreshis right in that a "trust but verify" stance towards measurements needs to be taken, not only because these guys have their agenda's (and thus will fudge here or there) but also because measurements are hard, variable depending on methodology, etc...

JA did note this in the Border Patrol measurements.

 

The BorderPatrol DAC SE's maximum output level at 1kHz was 1.87V, which is 0.6dB lower than the CD standard's 2V. The output impedance was very high, at 2.3k ohms at 1 and 20kHz, rising to 5.8k ohms at 20Hz. This DAC needs to be used with a preamplifier having an input impedance of 50k ohms or higher if the low frequencies are not to sound lightweight.

 

Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/borderpatrol-digital-analogue-converter-se-measurements#Z483MiKxAV92iaJB.99

 

He also used 100 k input which he typically does.  He sometimes repeats that with 600 ohm loads which he didn't for obvious reasons.  Since he made it clear that doesn't bother me. You could say he was letting the DUT put its best foot forward, but if I owned such a thing I would use it that way too.  

[crenca]

10 minutes ago, esldude said:

JA did note this in the Border Patrol measurements....This DAC needs to be used with a preamplifier having an input impedance of 50k ohms or higher if the low frequencies are not to sound lightweight....He also used 100 k input which he typically does.  He sometimes repeats that with 600 ohm loads which he didn't for obvious reasons.  Since he made it clear that doesn't bother me. You could say he was letting the DUT put its best foot forward, but if I owned such a thing I would use it that way too.  

 

It does seem that way...best foot forward and a measurement methodology designed for just such a thing, or at least that's the outcome.

 

What is a "typical" pre input impedance?  Are there many 50k or higher pre's?  

 

All this ties back to the culture of Audiophiledom in that a typical review is lightweight, positive, "best foot forward" and all that just about all the time.  JA's measurement methodology appears to be capable of conforming with this philosophy.  It is not a "standardized" methodology and there are not others cross checking him (usually)...

[Ralf11]

last few pages should be moved to a 'measurements thread' and are not on MQA

[Rt66indierock]

4 hours ago, MikeyFresh said:

I'll bring this back on topic by saying there was and still is an easy to see agenda, bias, and axe to grind with ASR on what/how they choose to measure and/or attack. In light of that, all ASR measurements need to be taken with a grain of salt, as does their stance on topics such as MQA.

 

Tell me, does Madrona Digital also sell Harman products? Just curious.

 

Amir is simply not the knight in shining armor you paint hm to be, I'm sorry. ASR's technical and "business case" show of support for MQA further confirms that, much to the dismay of his once loyal little following.

 

 

Getting this back on track. Amir is a supporter of high resolution audio and wrote an article about it "High Resolution Audio:does it matter?" And who does he site as evidence Bob Stuart and his 2014 paper "The Audibility of Typical Digital Audio Filters in a High- Fidelity Playback System". He probably isn't happy about the current challenges to high resolution audio considering he sells the stuff.

 

And nothing has been posted yet on Companies House about MQA Ltd or Project Panther Bidco (Tidal to the rest of you).

 

[John_Atkinson]

1 hour ago, crenca said:

I recall reading (can't recall where - probably SBAF) where JA had Border Patrol DAC in house that had an unusually high output impedance, so JA went ahead and measured it into an equally unusually high impedance.

 

 

I measured the BorderPatrol DAC into 100k ohms, which is what I do with all DACs and preamplifiers.This is not an "unusually high impedance" and is standard for audio analyzers. I do mention when a product has problems driving low impedances. If it doesn't I also measure into the punishing 600 ohm load. If the product is borderline, I measure how it behaves into increasingly low impedances starting at 10k ohms, which is about the lowest input impedance a DAC might see.

 

Quote

This of course had the effect of improving the DAC's measurements in the test, typical use case be damned.

 

As you will see if you read the review, I did not try to play down the BorderPatrol DAC's measured performance. In fact, the manufacturer objected strenuously to what I wrote, in particular my final summing up where I concluded "The BorderPatrol Digital to Analogue Converter SE's measured performance is dominated by its use of the underperforming TDA1543 DAC chip."

See www.stereophile.com/content/borderpatrol-digital-analogue-converter-se-measurements

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

[crenca]

5 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

Amir is a supporter of high resolution audio and wrote an article about it "High Resolution Audio:does it matter?" And who does he site as evidence Bob Stuart and his 2014 paper "The Audibility of Typical Digital Audio Filters in a High- Fidelity Playback System". He probably isn't happy about the current challenges to high resolution audio considering he sells the stuff.

 

Thanks for the insight.  It's a difficult conversation in that the real usefulness of Hi Res is being obfuscated with certain overemphasized digital philosophies, products, market positions, and personal loyalties...

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Getting this back on track. Amir is a supporter of high resolution audio and wrote an article about it "High Resolution Audio:does it matter?" And who does he site as evidence Bob Stuart and his 2014 paper "The Audibility of Typical Digital Audio Filters in a High- Fidelity Playback System". He probably isn't happy about the current challenges to high resolution audio considering he sells the stuff.

 

And nothing has been posted yet on Companies House about MQA Ltd or Project Panther Bidco (Tidal to the rest of you).

 

Charlatans are attracted to other charlatans. And Amir is the ultimate Charlatan...which is just tip of the iceberg.