MQA is Vaporware

[Samuel T Cogley]

17 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

How the witchdoctor "rolls" with MQA-  mobile, agile, and high style:

 

https://twitter.com/MeridianAudio/status/923134305680928769

 

2 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

One of the BEST musical sources in the world dCS Vivaldi One does MQA (of course):

https://www.dcsltd.co.uk/news/

 

At some point (maybe now?), this is straight-up MQA forum spam. 

 

[Samuel T Cogley]

5 minutes ago, Indydan said:

I don't know if it has been mentioned, but MQA is not Bob Stuart's first try to implement an audio format. The format on DVD-Audio discs called Meridian lossless packaging was also created by his company Meridian (MLP).

 

MLP failed for audio. MQA will also. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meridian_Lossless_Packing

 

Never understood MLP when FLAC would have worked just fine.  Oh wait, the "F" in FLAC stands for "free".  No opportunity to monetize.

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 minute ago, Indydan said:

 

Mr. Hansen has written about this in some detail. When I see the over the top efforts of some people, to constantly push MQA into the conversation, I am inclined to believe him.  

 

And indeed WD could be one of the names on that list!

[Samuel T Cogley]

Just now, Indydan said:

 

Exactly. MQA exists for the same reason. 

 

Wow.  An amazing coincidence!!!  FLAC once again is a free, open source alternative to something Bob Stuart is trying to monetize through a proprietary "solution".

[Samuel T Cogley]

18 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

This is an MQA thread, and that car and that dCs player represent absolute pinnacle audio quality.

Top quality products include MQA- get it? That is the path of best SQ. Those companies wouldn't degrade those products at those prices right? 

 

Man, this is just about as thick as can apply the BS.  You're spamming the thread, perhaps at the behest of MQA.  You're not discussing, you're just spamming.

[Samuel T Cogley]

17 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

I thought the MQA momentum was because of this thread?  

 

Don't you mean you spamming the thread?

[Samuel T Cogley]

2 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

You don't like MQA NP. I do, that doesn't mean I am spamming we just have different taste. 

 

 

Your entire rationale for "liking" MQA is all the "momentum" MQA has.  It's circular logic that's nothing more than a smokescreen for forum spam.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Just now, witchdoctor said:

I respectfully disagree. 

 

Can you elaborate?  What do you disagree with and why?

[Samuel T Cogley]

15 minutes ago, Confused said:

 

If only this were true, remember the loudness wars?

 

If the artist believes "louder sells more", then you get stuff like Death Magnetic.

[Samuel T Cogley]

5 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

How about what we agree with and why?  

 

I'm way more interested in understanding why just posting marketing collateral:

 

3 hours ago, witchdoctor said:

How the witchdoctor "rolls" with MQA-  mobile, agile, and high style:

 

https://twitter.com/MeridianAudio/status/923134305680928769

 

2 hours ago, witchdoctor said:

One of the BEST musical sources in the world dCS Vivaldi One does MQA (of course)

 

Reflecting the unique nature of Vivaldi One, each piece is personally supplied to the customer by an expert dCS engineer, who will configure it to get the best possible sound.

 

https://www.dcsltd.co.uk/news/

 

...qualifies as discussion vs. blatantly using the forum as some kind of marketing/advertising vehicle for MQA.  Is pro-MQA post count your ultimate goal?  Are you trying to drown out MQA dissent by flooding the forum with MQA spam?

 

Please, a real response this time, not some lame "agree to disagree" dodge.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Just now, witchdoctor said:

no thank you

 

Goodbye spammy troll!

[Samuel T Cogley]

3 hours ago, realhifi said:

What on earth are people complaining about?  If it’s witchdoctor they have some VERY thin skin and as far as I can see zero reasoning behind their complaints. He no more sounds like some shill than ANYONE else that has posted likes, dislikes, favorite topics, etc, etc, etc.  Seriously?  So if I start commenting on posts (that have MQA in the SUBJECT LINE) with an upbeat, positive assessment of MQA then I too would be a “shill” or part of some sort of conspiracy?  Very odd. Bordering on paranoia.  

 

I might agree with you if he wasn't treating the forum like Twitter.  Most of his "content" is quick-hit posts.  He's being thoroughly disingenuous.  He never elaborates on any of his posts.  He has no desire to make a case, he's just spamming.  Honest advocacy is, of course, a good thing.  But this has all the earmarks of a guerilla marketing campaign.  I don't care if he claims to like helping starving children.  It's not the thing he's advocating for, it's how he's doing it.  I see that Chris likes your post.  Perhaps this is the MQA "balance" he was hoping for? 

[Samuel T Cogley]

12 minutes ago, 4est said:

I find this to be a double standard from what you have stated in the Civility thread.

 

How so?  Can you elaborate?

 

As I see it, the issue is not incivility.  Now perhaps you're suggesting that some on the forum are taking some pleasure in seeing others on the forum unhappy about something.  I suppose this is not completely unexpected.

 

If this is the basis of the "double standard" you're alluding to, by all means step up and own it.

 

If WD is merely a troll sent here to torment a certain faction of forum members, then bravo!  I didn't see that coming.

 

But to me, it's indistinguishable from an intentional, deliberate, guerilla marketing campaign.

[Samuel T Cogley]

16 minutes ago, rickca said:

You want PeterV back?  

 

Peter utterly owned his Bob Stuart sycophancy.  I can respect that way more than childish Twitter hits.

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 hour ago, 4est said:

In the Civility thread you made it seem as if it was alright to say whatever however you wanted to in order to "defend" what you see is the truth.

 

I did nothing of the sort.  If you can find a quote to back this up, please do so.

 

Perhaps there is a group of "high profile members/people" that assume they understand my argument without actually reading it. 

 

I have to date one middling MQA DAC (the Meridian Explorer 2) and the performance of that device with or without MQA content is quite underwhelming IMHO.  My hands-on experience with MQA does not even remotely come close to the hype.  In fact, quite the opposite.  I'm willing to give MQA one more chance, and I'm leaning more towards the iFI iDSD Nano BL (hopefully out later this year).

 

Quote

Here you are expressing that WD is pushing an agenda and should be banned for his deliberate campaign.

 

"expressing"?  Only in your mind.  I never asked for anyone to be banned.  I never even liked posts of others suggesting it.  I submit your apparent prejudices are coloring your interpretation of my contributions here.  I have no beef with you, and generally read your posts.  If calling me out gains you some kind of forum cred, then go for it.  I'm just asking you to own it and not be coy.

[Samuel T Cogley]

2 hours ago, Charles Hansen said:

 

Hello Samuel,

 

Thanks for the info. I don't know why some people do such shilling.

 

To close this particular topic, I want to bring your attention to this train wreck (now only available on the Internet Archive) that the younger people would rightly call an "epic fail".  It celebrates the rise of the crowd-sourced funding model, and enthusiastically predicts the demise of the more traditional audio gear manufacturers that distribute primarily through brick and mortar.  Scroll to the bottom of the article to see the author.

 

 

[Samuel T Cogley]

42 minutes ago, Fokus said:

 

Let me put it this way: if such an ADC displays sins that can usefully be compensated for afterwards, then this can entirely be done outside of the MQA ecosystem, as part of normal and competent remastering.

 

The ADCs of yore had lower resolution compared to today's units.  Music of the later 80s that had only a digital, Redbook (or in some cases, lower than Redbook) resolution master is what we're stuck with.  Forever.  No amount of lipstick on that pig will make it pretty. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

7 minutes ago, semente said:

 

If you see audio magazines as journalism then I'm affraid your expectations are misplaced.

Marketing vehicle would, in my view, in most cases, be more a adequate designation.

 

+1

 

It's not journalism by any definition of the word I'm familiar with.

[Samuel T Cogley]

The search term "Charles Manson" was trending yesterday.  Doesn't mean someone wants to buy one.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Some feedback for the thread regarding the new iFi iDSD Nano BL (with MQA support)

 

According to the new errata on the iFi Nano BL firmware download page:

 

Quote

With PCM, LED is white as it is Upsampled 8x (Minimum Phase and Minimum Ringing filters).

 

If I'm reading this right, all PCM is upsampled to DXD internally, and the sample rate indicator will only now glow white for all PCM.  Seems like the product manager needs to have a discussion with the firmware developers about the usefulness of that light.  I was under the impression that all iFi DACs upsampled PCM internally (for the filters), but still managed to have a useful indicator for the input sample rate.  Some may see this as a nit, ok.  It's different than the other iFi DACs.

 

MQA works with both the Tidal app and Audirvana, but I find that after switching to MQA from PCM, it's often necessary to restart MQA playback (with the "start from the beginning" button) for any audio to come out of the DAC (hopefully this will improve with better firmware).  Sometimes MQA decoding doesn't kick in right (the DAC plays undecoded MQA with a white light) and the "start from the beginning" trick works here and turns the light magenta.

 

Having spent some time to reacquaint myself with the current MQA landscape, I have to say that "vaporware" is an apt descriptor.  As far as I can tell, the only way to get any significant MQA content in the U.S. is to use Tidal (I am a HiFi subscriber) and use the Tidal desktop app.  I was stunned to discover that after the long delayed AQ Dragonfly MQA-enabled firmware was released, there is still no way to play Tidal MQA on the mobile app.

 

MQA will ultimately be at the mercy of software/firmware developers to achieve any real market penetration.  The long absence of a mobile solution is rather glaring IMHO.  The Tidal Desktop App is underwhelming.  Still no way to search for MQA content.

[Samuel T Cogley]

25 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

Samuel,

 

I am trying to get an upgraded license to Amarra Luxe so I can do MQA playback that way.  I am also still setting up a NAS drive for my PS Audio Directstream Network Bridge.  Hopefully that will be ready by Christmas.  Glad to hear Audirvana is there already.

 

Hi Lee

 

While I'm quite skeptical of MQA, I'm doing my best to answer the "but what does it sound like?" question.  Setting aside all the well discussed anti-consumer and dubious technical aspects, I'm most perplexed about how much MQA needs Tidal to be successful.  I have been a Tidal subscriber since before the Jay Z acquisition.  When I use Roon, Tidal is pretty good, but not quite awesome.  Their CDN has issues from time to time (this is seen in Roon as "this title is currently unavailable" that eventually clears).  But I'm at a complete loss why there isn't a straight forward way to see all the MQA titles there.  I'm well aware of the spread sheets that private enthusiasts are keeping, and I've used them to discover new MQA content.  But any audiophile product that requires me to run Excel or Google Docs to use is a non-starter as far as I'm concerned.

 

Like many/most computer-centric audiophiles, I have way more software than I need to listen to music.  Audirvana, Roon, HQPlayer, JRiver, Foobar, and others I probably forgot.  When/if Roon gets MQA support, I might settle down to just that (and HQPlayer for my DSD DACs).  But even as we get close to the end of 2017, MQA is still something like vaporware.  Drawing on my recollection of the HDCD rollout from last decade (I know that MQA and HDCD are vastly different from a technical and consumer standpoint), MQA is very far behind the curve at this point.

 

PS: Regarding NAS, I'm a big fan of FreeNAS.  While I concede it's more expensive than Synology, I think it's worth the extra money.  Lots of flexibility there that just doesn't exist in Synology.

 

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 hour ago, synn said:

Oppo just announced tidal support for one of its players.

 

On a personal note, I just ordered an Onkyo DP S1 (A Dual DAC, DSD and MQA enabled DAP). I can finally test what DSD, 192k and MQA sound when played to their fullest extent. I am not holding my breath and whatever the outcome is, I am not too keen to introduce DSD or MQA to my main listening rig.

 

I have a DP-X1 and was not really impressed by the sound quality.  Pono is better by quite a bit.

 

I'd be curious to hear your listening impressions of the DP-S1.  Thanks.

[Samuel T Cogley]

11 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I always thought HDCDs offered redbook quality on standard players and "enhanced" quality on HDCD players. I don't believe there is a version of degraded quality, but I could be wrong.

 

This is off-topic, but I have several Audio Fidelity CDs that turn on the HDCD light on CD players that can decode them, but, according to what I read over at the Hoffman forums over the years (Hoffman mastered many AF titles), none of the HDCD features ("Peak Extend", "Low Level Range Extend")  were used to master those titles.  I've never gotten a straight answer as to whether these titles played decoded or not decoded are identical.  I suspect someone more familiar with the Pacific Microsonics Model Two might have some answers.  But I'm not sure that "plays on regular CD players" is functionally equivalent to "full Redbook quality on regular CD players".

[Samuel T Cogley]

14 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

Slightly off topic. Here is a scenario :

 

There is a project manager upgrading the studios, and the cables that the project manager designed and used throughout the studio where appropriate, cost £2,400 per metre. All the people in the studios stated it made a major difference in sound.

 

I suspect this is hypothetical, but the "major difference in sound" could be from the other upgrades?  Just trying to understand this hypothetical better.

[Samuel T Cogley]

8 minutes ago, Fair Hedon said:

that is your opinion. in my view, my message is clear as day, and to the point.

 

audiophiles blather on about being True To The Source.

 

and MQA spits right in the face of that premise.

 

I basically agree with this, but I think it unpacks a little more.  Ultimately, the record companies, not the artists, are The Source (apologies to LRH ), so MQA is really saying "True To The Record Companies".  When viewed through this lens, MQA's story isn't quite so disingenuous.  "Master Quality" is what the record companies want you to hear, without regard for the artists' wishes.  As Spencer Chrislu from MQA has stated, "naked" high resolution PCM files are the record companies' crown jewels and should not be directly accessible by consumers.