Jump to content
Rt66indierock

MQA is Vaporware

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, firedog said:

 The latter thread isn't my cup of tea, but it is harmless: It's hobbyists discussing their tweaks to SQ on a hobbyist site. It has little/nothing to do with the "Old Guard" as it doesn't come from the ecosystem of the audio establishment. I don't think there is necessarily any connection/correlation between the participants in that thread and MQA boosters and fanboys in the press and on forums. 

+100


Founder of Audiophile Style

Announcing Polestar | Quick Community Reviews and Ratings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, firedog said:

 The latter thread isn't my cup of tea, but it is harmless: It's hobbyists discussing their tweaks to SQ on a hobbyist site. It has little/nothing to do with the "Old Guard" as it doesn't come from the ecosystem of the audio establishment. I don't think there is necessarily any connection/correlation between the participants in that thread and MQA boosters and fanboys in the press and on forums. 

 

I disagree 😎.

 

Audio has a "tragedy of the commons" problem.  A runaway subjectivism is not "harmless" and it is not contained to this or that thread, publication, or niche.  The Old Guard feeds and is feed by this kind of subjectivism and it is very much part of the "establishment" (particularly the trade publication/review industry)  - it all is very strongly correlated.  This is the "environment" and ecosystem that enables frauds like MQA to find traction in the first place.  

 

Not that this is going to change any time soon (though it is changing with the increasing importance of consumer forums/communication, etc.), but I when assessing MQA and the like I believe it behooves us to be honest about these things.


Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jcbenten said:

 

I would venture to guess that Record Labels (or some anyway) dipped their toes in MQA to see if a DRM scheme would be acceptable.  I would say that their "efforts" were half-assed at best.

 

As the @The Computer Audiophilepointed out multiple times if the labels had chosen to release only in MQA, then it would have been successful. Were there efforts "half-assed" due to their own internal circumstances/incompetence, or did they assess that the market push back would have been too much?


Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

As the @The Computer Audiophilepointed out multiple times if the labels had chosen to release only in MQA, then it would have been successful. Were there efforts "half-assed" due to their own internal circumstances/incompetence, or did they assess that the market push back would have been too much?

I am guessing but waiting to see if the MQA could be hacked.  @Mansr, @Archimago, and others pretty much did it pretty quick.


QNAP TS453Pro w/QLMS->Netgear Switch->Netgear R7800 Router->Ethernet (50 ft)->Netgear switch->SBT->iFi xDSD->Linn Majik-IL (preamp)->Linn 2250->Linn Keilidh; Control Points: Squeeze Commander (DroidX) & iPeng (iPad Air); Also: Rega P3-24 w/ DV 10x5; OPPO 103; PC Playback: Foobar2000 & JRiver; Portable: Sony NWZ_ZX1 & ZX2 w/ PHA-3; SMSL IQ, Fiio Q5, iFi Nano iDSD BL; Garage: Edifier S1000DB Active Speakers  Wish List: New DAC,  SBT replacement; Dream system: Linn EXACT or ATC Active or Big Tubes (KR or Nagra or Shindo or ...)

 

My goal is to use appliances and take home PC out of the chain...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

Look, one could spend two hours going line by line in poignant out that these 1200 words are nothing but pure pseudo techno babble, half truths, and a fog of vagueness so thick you could cut it with a knife

 

Please, tell me, as you lounge in your ivory tower, exactly what a" modern approach to sampling" is?  I would love to know.

 

Who let him into the ivory tower?

 

also:

 

[MQA Lovers] are" talking a lot but they're not saying anything

Say it once, why say it again

...

I hate people when they're not polite"

 

- David Byrne

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Currawong said:

Here's a good example. We know, for a fact that you cannot completely remove distortion caused by these things from digital music. If that's not true, I'd really like to see the papers written with proofs showing how it's done. 

 

John Dyson is already demonstrating that it IS indeed possible to remove most of these distortion artifacts, and he may even be well ahead of MQA in this area. In fact, some of his corrected RBCD tracks from non decoded or improperly decoded Dolby A material, end up sounding as good, if not better than many modern High Resolution releases !


How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

 

PROFILE UPDATED 26-12-2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...