MQA is Vaporware

[Teresa]

22 hours ago, firedog said:

...For a lot of remasters, including from  old tapes-LP master tapes, the hi-res and DSD versions do sound better than the older versions and show a real intent to produce a better version.

 

The problem is that a lot of other remasters don't-they actually sound worse than previous versions and many of the labels seem only to be in it for the money. 

 

As audiophiles, we've probably all been burnt by such versions and it makes us less likely to buy more newer versions. Just another example of the labels shooting themselves in the foot b/c of greed. 

 

That is one of the reasons I avoid hi-res remasters from the major and other non-audiophiles labels. I have been burned too many times by so-called hi-res downloads (24-bit and DSD) from the major labels.

 

I prefer newly made audiophile recordings but I also like a lot of rock from my teenage years and jazz from the golden age. For those recordings I wait for audiophile remasters from Analogue Productions, MFSL and other audiophile remaster labels. So far most are only on SACDs, as far as I know the only analog remasters also released as hi-res are the DSD downloads from Analogue Productions.

 

That said, I prefer newly recorded music from audiophile and the European boutique classical labels in SACD or as DSD downloads. 

[MetalNuts]

5 hours ago, Teresa said:

That is one of the reasons I avoid hi-res remasters from the major and other non-audiophiles labels. I have been burned too many times by so-called hi-res downloads (24-bit and DSD) from the major labels.

 

Me too.  We have to be skeptical on remasters, some of them are just a mean to resurrect/extend the copyright and the remaster may not be an improvement at all to the SQ. 

[alekc]

5 hours ago, MetalNuts said:

 

Me too.  We have to be skeptical on remasters, some of them are just a mean to resurrect/extend the copyright and the remaster may not be an improvement at all to the SQ. 

 

100% agree. One has to be very careful with selection when new and remastered does not always means better. Same with audio equipment. I am happy owner of Chord Mojo which is few years old already for example and I think it overshadows easily a lot of newer portable amp/dacs of similar price range.  

 

Our life is not simple - it is rather like balancing on a very thin ice when it comes to make right choice. This can be frustrating at the times but when you find something that is excellent in terms of SQ it is a grand prize we are all into it in the first place.

[FredericV]

In Belgium, we still have full speed, and this is the typical speed we are getting, and the data is unlimited.



Homework is now mandatory when the job can be done remotely, and still the country has no internet outages. The data is more distributed over the whole day, while before the peaks were when most people came home. It's actually flatten the curve, but applied to the bandwidth usage over the day.

So in Belgium, MQA is not even need to have to stream hi-res.




In these drastic times, ISP's who ripped people off by extreme overbooking, will now need to take more countermeasurements and capacity upgrades will happen much sooner. Even before corona, friends in the hifi industry (hifi press) publically complained their ISP had such a low upload speed it was unworkable. They would drive to public wifi places just to get their job done.

With corona and the forced stay home, those ISP's are now completely saturated, and MQA is not a solution to this problem as nothing works well. ISP's will now make quantum leaps during & after corona, so this never happens again.

Quantum leaps in bandwidth which expire the shelf life of MQA's compression benefit, which could also be done with flac entropy optimizations.

[Currawong]

I might ask why you're connecting to anything on the internet from a root login.... but anyway....

 

As FTTH is most common in Japan, there is, or maybe was, a service that intended to stream DSD (!!!). I don't think I need say more.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

Somebody please explain this to me...I'm disheveled.

 

SACD / "MQA CD" Hybrid-

 

 

 

 

 

[firedog]

30 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

Somebody please explain this to me...I'm disheveled.

 

SACD / "MQA CD" Hybrid-

 

 

 

 

 

I can only assume it is like a regular 2 layer SACD, except the CD layer is replaced by an MQA-CD layer derived from the master; the other layer is apparently a conversion of the master to DSD. Conceptually not so different from making a hybrid SACD from a Redbook master, which isn't uncommon. 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

18 minutes ago, firedog said:

I can only assume it is like a regular 2 layer SACD, except the CD layer is replaced by an MQA-CD layer derived from the master; the other layer is apparently a conversion of the master to DSD. Conceptually not so different from making a hybrid SACD from a Redbook master, which isn't uncommon. 

It seems it was a very early digital PCM recording done at 15 bits/ 50.35 kHz.

 

The only reason Stuart got involved it well;l known that 2L was one of the first labels to spread their cheeks

for MQA.  Perhaps the SACD hybrid is a new tactic to Trojan horse MQA into audiophile purchases. 

[AudioDoctor]

On 3/20/2020 at 1:32 AM, FredericV said:

In Belgium, we still have full speed, and this is the typical speed we are getting, and the data is unlimited.



Homework is now mandatory when the job can be done remotely, and still the country has no internet outages. The data is more distributed over the whole day, while before the peaks were when most people came home. It's actually flatten the curve, but applied to the bandwidth usage over the day.

So in Belgium, MQA is not even need to have to stream hi-res.




In these drastic times, ISP's who ripped people off by extreme overbooking, will now need to take more countermeasurements and capacity upgrades will happen much sooner. Even before corona, friends in the hifi industry (hifi press) publically complained their ISP had such a low upload speed it was unworkable. They would drive to public wifi places just to get their job done.

With corona and the forced stay home, those ISP's are now completely saturated, and MQA is not a solution to this problem as nothing works well. ISP's will now make quantum leaps during & after corona, so this never happens again.

Quantum leaps in bandwidth which expire the shelf life of MQA's compression benefit, which could also be done with flac entropy optimizations.

 

Thats not an issue on fiber connections, only on old fashioned copper which most are still on here in the US.

[firedog]

7 hours ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

It seems it was a very early digital PCM recording done at 15 bits/ 50.35 kHz.

 

The only reason Stuart got involved it well;l known that 2L was one of the first labels to spread their cheeks

for MQA.  Perhaps the SACD hybrid is a new tactic to Trojan horse MQA into audiophile purchases. 

2L is doing all "Redbook" as MQA-CD, AFAIK.

[Hifi Bob]

15 hours ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

Somebody please explain this to me...I'm disheveled.

 

SACD / "MQA CD" Hybrid-

 

 

 

 

 

Algol—the ’60s programming language? The mind boggles.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

8 hours ago, Hifi Bob said:

Algol—the ’60s programming language? The mind boggles.

I have to give the grifters at MQA credit, they have tried every conceivable angle.😅

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

16 hours ago, firedog said:

2L is doing all "Redbook" as MQA-CD, AFAIK.

Yes, but they have made plenty of DSD recordings and released SACDs in the past. I am almost sure they

were close to going belly up. 

[ARQuint]

2 hours ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

Yes, but they have made plenty of DSD recordings and released SACDs in the past. I am almost sure they

were close to going belly up. 

 

I am almost sure that 2L is doing just fine.

 

The above comment reminds me of Donald Trump perpetually referring to "The failing New York Times" because the paper says things he doesn't like.

 

The New York Times is doing just fine, too, in case anybody had doubts. At least I'm almost sure.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

9 minutes ago, ARQuint said:

 

I am almost sure that 2L is doing just fine.

 

The above comment reminds me of Donald Trump perpetually referring to "The failing New York Times" because the paper says things he doesn't like.

 

The New York Times is doing just fine, too, in case anybody had doubts. At least I'm almost sure.

I should have been specific as to the time frame. 5 or 6 years ago they were in dire straits. Hmmm...amazing that it overlapped with the founding of MQA...

 

Have an opinion as the "MQA CD" / SACD Hybrid bundle?

 

And quite frankly, I am miffed you would compare me to a deranged, moronic pathological, narcissistic sexual predator. 😷

[MikeyFresh]

6 minutes ago, ARQuint said:

 

I am almost sure that 2L is doing just fine.

 

The above comment reminds me of Donald Trump perpetually referring to "The failing New York Times" because the paper says things he doesn't like.

 

The New York Times is doing just fine, too, in case anybody had doubts. At least I'm almost sure.

 

Thanks so much for that reassurance Andrew, I'm quite relieved, as 2L has SO much great music I want to buy. Should we draw the inference that MQA is also in super great shape then, is that the point you are really trying to make?

 

I like the NY Times, and always have despite a clearly liberal slant, but I see no parallel there with either 2L, nor MQA, sorry. Referencing Trump in negative fashion will not earn you the allies you seem to think it will, just ask CNN.

 

Please refrain from politically charged commentary, as that always goes no where fast.

[ARQuint]

59 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said:

 

Thanks so much for that reassurance Andrew, I'm quite relieved, as 2L has SO much great music I want to buy. Should we draw the inference that MQA is also in super great shape then, is that the point you are really trying to make?

 

I like the NY Times, and always have despite a clearly liberal slant, but I see no parallel there with either 2L, nor MQA, sorry. Referencing Trump in negative fashion will not earn you the allies you seem to think it will, just ask CNN.

 

Please refrain from politically charged commentary, as that always goes no where fast.

 

I feel that MikeyFresh understood my point exactly. The health of  2L has nothing to do with that of  MQA, Inc. (about which I have no special insights.) So, to wonder aloud about the stability of the record company because they have connections to the technology concern is irresponsible and potentially damaging to the former. As is the editorial policy of the Times, I think we should correct "alternate facts" when they are disseminated.

 

The discussion of MQA has been profoundly political from the very beginning (my TAS editorial "The Politics of MQA" was printed two-and-a-half years ago) as reflected by the prominence of political tactics—ad hominem, conspiracy theories, insults, bullying, etc. There's a lot less of that at AS since Chris made it less welcoming for those who were here mostly to engage in this kind of sport. And we can go back to that happy state when, right now, I return to lurking and listening!

 

Andy

[firedog]

1 hour ago, ARQuint said:

 

 

 

The discussion of MQA has been profoundly political from the very beginning (my TAS editorial "The Politics of MQA" was printed two-and-a-half years ago) as reflected by the prominence of political tactics—ad hominem, conspiracy theories, insults, bullying, etc. There's a lot less of that at AS since Chris made it less welcoming for those who were here mostly to engage in this kind of sport. And we can go back to that happy state when, right now, I return to lurking and listening!

 

Andy

Thttp://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/the-politics-of-mqa/

 

Andy-

This is really more of your nonsense and the editorial you refer to wasn't  much more than a tendentious "survey" of the MQA discussion landscape that reflected your outlook and prejudices, but didn't accurately reflect reality. 

 

Sure, there's been some of that kind of discussion here.

But it pales in comparison to the lies and deceptions put out by MQA themselves, many in the audio press, and the organized (yes, organized) online propaganda of the MQA fanboys. For some reason you seem to always at least partially overlook that, and give MQA and it's fans a partial pass that's undeserved. 

 

And as an additional note: your lament about the lack of "technical" discussion of MQA is really laughable in hindsight. Serious technical challenges have been made to MQA claims, and they've never once engaged them directly or contradicted them with anything approaching evidence. Just more repeating of their marketing speak, and shouting down of Chris at a presentation, as if that is technical proof of their claims.

[MikeyFresh]

1 hour ago, ARQuint said:

I feel that MikeyFresh understood my point exactly.

 

Yes, and the part about how much 2L music in MQA anyone will be buying?

 

1 hour ago, ARQuint said:

The discussion of MQA has been profoundly political from the very beginning (my TAS editorial "The Politics of MQA" was printed two-and-a-half years ago) as reflected by the prominence of political tactics—ad hominem, conspiracy theories, insults, bullying, etc.

 

Here is where you've lost me. I know of no such thing. Is this the long documented MQA shoot the messenger of free speech and opinion on public forums lame attempt in responding to the very detailed technical measurements from more than one source, that have fully debunked MQAs's supposed technical prowess, is that what you are referring to? If not then what?

 

Were those technical findings presented both there and elsewhere ever officially responded to in any meaningful way, have you or anyone else ever provided any credible rebuttal at all? 

No.

 

1 hour ago, ARQuint said:

There's a lot less of that at AS since Chris made it less welcoming for those who were here mostly to engage in this kind of sport.

 

Less of something perhaps, but engaging in sport, no. You've once again tried to skip right past previously detailed indisputable BS vis-à-vis MQA as detailed and appearing in publication, in a vain attempt at painting some sort of "political dispute" as the crux of the matter. Big fail.

 

 

[ARQuint]

1 hour ago, firedog said:

And as an additional note: your lament about the lack of "technical" discussion of MQA is really laughable in hindsight. Serious technical challenges have been made to MQA claims, and they've never once engaged them directly or contradicted them with anything approaching evidence. Just more repeating of their marketing speak, and shouting down of Chris at a presentation, as if that is technical proof of their claims.

 

In that long-ago editorial (and in our current situation, it really feels like eons ago) I said this

 

                  << the theoretical objections to MQA do deserve a thorough consideration. >>

 

Just a few months later came Archimago's magisterial evaluation of the technology at CA/AS, which informed the thinking of many, me included. The problem was, for every Archimago, there were 3 or 4 Brinkmanships, whose unsubstantial two-sentence zingers were posted with far greater frequency. I can't, of course, say this with any certainty, but MQA, Inc. might have engaged with our anonymous friend had the air not been poisoned with so much vitriol and snarkiness—remember, Bob Stuart himself answered a slew of questions on this site before that. But it was too late. And then came the disgraceful treatment of Chris at RMAF 2018 and the door was forever slammed shut.

 

My personal emphasis on "civility" irked some folks on this thread and was even viewed by a few as a kind of diversionary tactic. It's not. I never had any interest in either defending or attacking MQA—I lack the technical background to do that with authority and commentary on SQ seemed quite beside the point. But I recognized that the animus surrounding the issue was damaging to our hobby. Chris himself suggested that all the toxic invective around MQA may have actually interfered with the messaging of those building a rational case criticizing it, and I agree. I don't see how you can expect those with a different viewpoint to engage when they are being accused of dishonesty and worse, when they simply may have been wrong.

 

I really don't like being a lightening rod on a topic (MQA) that doesn't matter all that much to me as a listener—it distracts from the far more productive activities of this site—and will recede, as promised.

 

Stay safe, everyone.

 

AQ

 

 

[KeenObserver]

1 hour ago, ARQuint said:

 

In that long-ago editorial (and in our current situation, it really feels like eons ago) I said this

 

                  << the theoretical objections to MQA do deserve a thorough consideration. >>

 

Just a few months later came Archimago's magisterial evaluation of the technology at CA/AS, which informed the thinking of many, me included. The problem was, for every Archimago, there were 3 or 4 Brinkmanships, whose unsubstantial two-sentence zingers were posted with far greater frequency. I can't, of course, say this with any certainty, but MQA, Inc. might have engaged with our anonymous friend had the air not been poisoned with so much vitriol and snarkiness—remember, Bob Stuart himself answered a slew of questions on this site before that. But it was too late. And then came the disgraceful treatment of Chris at RMAF 2018 and the door was forever slammed shut.

 

My personal emphasis on "civility" irked some folks on this thread and was even viewed by a few as a kind of diversionary tactic. It's not. I never had any interest in either defending or attacking MQA—I lack the technical background to do that with authority and commentary on SQ seemed quite beside the point. But I recognized that the animus surrounding the issue was damaging to our hobby. Chris himself suggested that all the toxic invective around MQA may have actually interfered with the messaging of those building a rational case criticizing it, and I agree. I don't see how you can expect those with a different viewpoint to engage when they are being accused of dishonesty and worse, when they simply may have been wrong.

 

I really don't like being a lightening rod on a topic (MQA) that doesn't matter all that much to me as a listener—it distracts from the far more productive activities of this site—and will recede, as promised.

 

Stay safe, everyone.

 

AQ

 

 

 

Seriously?

[firedog]

2 hours ago, ARQuint said:

 

In that long-ago editorial (and in our current situation, it really feels like eons ago) I said this

 

                  << the theoretical objections to MQA do deserve a thorough consideration. >>

 

Just a few months later came Archimago's magisterial evaluation of the technology at CA/AS, which informed the thinking of many, me included. The problem was, for every Archimago, there were 3 or 4 Brinkmanships, whose unsubstantial two-sentence zingers were posted with far greater frequency. I can't, of course, say this with any certainty, but MQA, Inc. might have engaged with our anonymous friend had the air not been poisoned with so much vitriol and snarkiness—remember, Bob Stuart himself answered a slew of questions on this site before that. But it was too late. And then came the disgraceful treatment of Chris at RMAF 2018 and the door was forever slammed shut.

 

My personal emphasis on "civility" irked some folks on this thread and was even viewed by a few as a kind of diversionary tactic. It's not. I never had any interest in either defending or attacking MQA—I lack the technical background to do that with authority and commentary on SQ seemed quite beside the point. But I recognized that the animus surrounding the issue was damaging to our hobby. Chris himself suggested that all the toxic invective around MQA may have actually interfered with the messaging of those building a rational case criticizing it, and I agree. I don't see how you can expect those with a different viewpoint to engage when they are being accused of dishonesty and worse, when they simply may have been wrong.

 

I really don't like being a lightening rod on a topic (MQA) that doesn't matter all that much to me as a listener—it distracts from the far more productive activities of this site—and will recede, as promised.

 

Stay safe, everyone.

 

AQ

 

 

 

I appreciate your response. I hope you are staying safe, too.

 

Quote

I don't see how you can expect those with a different viewpoint to engage when they are being accused of dishonesty and worse, when they simply may have been wrong.

 

The problem with this is twofold:

a)some of those being accused of dishonesty, were, in fact, being dishonest. And that includes representatives of MQA;

b) I'd sure like to see a list of all the MQA fanboys who proselytized all over the net, all the MQA employees or reps, and all the audio writers - who have admitted they were wrong about MQA. Even admitting they were partially wrong.It's pretty hard for me to think of  one, even after several years. Much more common to reject what Archimago wrote about on the basis of him writing under a pseudonym.
 

The unwritten cultural imperative to approach any controversy with the idea that "it's just an honest disagreement between two sides whose positions hold equal merit" is simply a crock. Sometimes one side isn't honest, and sometimes facts and evidence are much more on one side than the other. 

[MikeyFresh]

6 hours ago, ARQuint said:

The problem was, for every Archimago, there were 3 or 4 Brinkmanships, whose unsubstantial two-sentence zingers were posted with far greater frequency.

 

No there weren't, and even if there were, what exact "problem" would that create for MQA (or even Stereophile for that matter) in actually stepping up to the plate and addressing the real issues at hand, rather than weakly deflecting repeatedly under the guise of "incivility"? You are once again using a very tired and ineffective approach here Andy, neither MQA, nor Stereophile is the victim you seek to portray them as being.

6 hours ago, ARQuint said:

I can't, of course, say this with any certainty, but MQA, Inc. might have engaged with our anonymous friend had the air not been poisoned with so much vitriol and snarkiness—remember, Bob Stuart himself answered a slew of questions on this site before that.

 

I can say with certainty MQA would not under any circumstance have engaged, and it's easy to see why. If you have a real technology, that has real technical merit and offers real value to consumers and artists, then you'd be willing to answer any questions, face any/all criticisms, and ultimately prevail, and you'd do so at all costs to uphold your good name, and to preserve and move forward all of the work that had already been done. You wouldn't just vanish with nary an answer to any challenge, would you?

 

Unless you got nuthin', in which case you withdraw, pointing a finger at your detractors in a classic attempt at "I am the real victim here". MQA showed their hand right there, poor show, really very weak. Bob didn't answer shit, you made that up, and then he went completely dark while lackeys such as TAS and Stereophile did his bidding. I see that you still are, just can't resist that urge to play the anonymous card again there, gotta go to that well one more time when otherwise you've got nuthin'.

 

6 hours ago, ARQuint said:

And then came the disgraceful treatment of Chris at RMAF 2018 and the door was forever slammed shut.

 

Actually I'd bet that door is still wide open, but since MQA has nuthin', they need to act like it's shut, and so do you.

 

6 hours ago, ARQuint said:

My personal emphasis on "civility" irked some folks on this thread and was even viewed by a few as a kind of diversionary tactic. It's not.

 

It is a diversionary tactic, and it is viewed as such by far more than just the "few" you suggest. The vast majority here and elsewhere see it for exactly what it is, a weak attempt to change the narrative and suggest "the real problem here " isn't MQA at all. Can't defend yourself? Just change the topic.

 

You are right about one thing, MQA as a topic and product will continue to recede, and eventually it will be gone. It is not viable, the market has spoken, both TAS, and Stereophile, as well as various MQA parrot cheerleading manufacturers will rightly end up worse for the wear, their reputations now tattered.

 

 

 

 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

2 hours ago, MikeyFresh said:

 

No there weren't, and even if there were, what exact "problem" would that create for MQA (or even Stereophile for that matter) in actually stepping up to the plate and addressing the real issues at hand, rather than weakly deflecting repeatedly under the guise of "incivility"? You are once again using a very tired and ineffective approach here Andy, neither MQA, nor Stereophile is the victim you seek to portray them as being.

 

I can say with certainty MQA would not under any circumstance have engaged, and it's easy to see why. If you have a real technology, that has real technical merit and offers real value to consumers and artists, then you'd be willing to answer any questions, face any/all criticisms, and ultimately prevail, and you'd do so at all costs to uphold your good name, and to preserve and move forward all of the work that had already been done. You wouldn't just vanish with nary an answer to any challenge, would you?

 

Unless you got nuthin', in which case you withdraw, pointing a finger at your detractors in a classic attempt at "I am the real victim here". MQA showed their hand right there, poor show, really very weak. Bob didn't answer shit, you made that up, and then he went completely dark while lackeys such as TAS and Stereophile did his bidding. I see that you still are, just can't resist that urge to play the anonymous card again there, gotta go to that well one more time when otherwise you've got nuthin'.

 

 

Actually I'd bet that door is still wide open, but since MQA has nuthin', they need to act like it's shut, and so do you.

 

 

It is a diversionary tactic, and it is viewed as such by far more than just the "few" you suggest. The vast majority here and elsewhere see it for exactly what it is, a weak attempt to change the narrative and suggest "the real problem here " isn't MQA at all. Can't defend yourself? Just change the topic.

 

You are right about one thing, MQA as a topic and product will continue to recede, and eventually it will be gone. It is not viable, the market has spoken, both TAS, and Stereophile, as well as various MQA parrot cheerleading manufacturers will rightly end up worse for the wear, their reputations now tattered.

 

 

 

 

Mr Fresh, have we not been through this cycle 15 times before with AQ?

 

The same rinse and repeat nonsense about civility blah blah blah.

 

I believe your response here is the most devastating I have seen and should put an end to this.

 

Mr, Quint talks about alternate facts but continues to repeat the absurd canard that MQA would have

"engaged" with folks if there was toast and tea and mints on the table. Pure fiction.

 

And why SHOULD there be civility for grifters? MQA tried to defraud music consumers with an inferior.

product that costs more.  I personally have spent many thousands of dollars on music since MQA was founded,

and I should bend over and spread for the grifting failed audiophile companies? 

 

Mr. Quint has not once, not even ONE time answered for his magazine and his colleagues coverage of MQA.

 

I guess it is humiliating when unpaid netizens actually scoops the so called self crowned authorities. 

 

P.S. there were folks who did not "like" CD when it first arrived but it's benefits were clear, and the market

agreed, it had a pretty good 30 year run.

 

Even if I and other folks did not "like" MQA and it clearly solved technical issues and had undisputed benefits, then it would not matter what detractors think....and this thread would not even exist. But it does.

 

[Rt66indierock]

14 hours ago, ARQuint said:

 

I am almost sure that 2L is doing just fine.

 

The above comment reminds me of Donald Trump perpetually referring to "The failing New York Times" because the paper says things he doesn't like.

 

The New York Times is doing just fine, too, in case anybody had doubts. At least I'm almost sure.

 

Andy, if they were doing just fine the following would have been addressed. The website would be updated so the store button would say where to buy since they haven't had a store since 2018. 2L used to be a site for people who liked Norwegian music to go. Without the store it is work to find this music and this customer base should have cared for better. That 2L hasn't done these two things causes me to wonder about other things like finances. 

 

The New York Times is doing just fine if you think a decline in revenue from 2005 to 2019 of over 40% is good. I don't. They are still struggling with their digital revenue model.