MQA is Vaporware

[MikeyFresh]

Desktop app for Windows looks quite good (HD and Ultra HD can't be streamed from a web browser):

 

Clicking the Ultra HD icon for any given track yields playback information specific to that device, so they are making an attempt to educate Joe Public here, my Lenovo laptop's sound card tops out at 24/48:

 

 

 

Connecting an Oppo HA-2 and selecting it in Windows sound settings produces 24/96:

 

[MikeyFresh]

Casting from the Android app using a Galaxy S7 to the office TV worked without a hitch, though there clicking the little HD badge produced a message saying no information about the stream was available while casting, so tough to say what the actual resolution was but I don't see any reason why that wouldn't be up to the Chromecast 24/96 limit for lossless audio:

 

 

[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.

[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.

[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?

 

 

[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.

 

[MikeyFresh]

23 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I don't see it confusing at all.

 

It is in the sense that both Meridian, and MQA are at least part owned or even majority owned by Reinet and so are somewhat joined at the hip in that regard.

 

However the actual announcement looks to just be a distribution deal for the Meridian brand in Japan. That too is a bit odd given Meridian hardware does compete on some level with Onkyo owned brands in Japan, and there is a high-end Onkyo line that is not imported to the U.S. that is directly competitive with Meridian in terms of price point.

[MikeyFresh]

1 hour ago, KeenObserver said:

Are these people desperate?

 

I don't think so, more the other way around. None of these MQA partners need do anything that would cost them much, I'd like to think they are keenly aware of that and are only cutting deals with MQA that cost the partner next to nothing.

 

The label's ownership stake in MQA is one such example, they paid next to nothing for it. 

 

Based on the ridiculously low Turnover posted in MQA's financial results, it does not appear they have been successful on any level in cutting deals that produce real revenue in the here and now.

 

If I were a partner or potential partner, I'd fiercely negotiate only the most favorable deal terms with MQA, otherwise just walk away. It should be abundantly clear by now that MQA needs partners much worse than those partners need MQA.

 

That pathetic top line number in MQA's financials would seem to indicate the partners are aware of MQA's desperation, and have taken advantage of that, none of them are really paying MQA much of anything to date.

 

While Jbara (or even a bit player like Forsythe in their U.S. operation) does have ties to various industry segments, they've failed to effectively leverage that in such a way as to actually generate top line results, much less bottom line.

 

Failed miserably would be more descriptive, when MQA's top line number is exceeded by a single Director's renumeration (among their 21 employees). I wonder if that's Jbara pulling in the £403,494, or is that actually Bob himself?

[MikeyFresh]

34 minutes ago, Dr Tone said:

Now more extensive provenance is the big thing coming from MQA according to Danny from Roon.

 

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/provenance-and-mqa/83875

 

After all of the other outright lies and misrepresentations made by MQA (and parroted by the mainstream media), why would anyone be willing to take their word for it regarding claims of enhanced effort regarding provenance assurance that could then somehow be tied to their BS authentication claim?

 

So Roon's COO is recycling the old authentication story but with provenance added, shall we go all-in and suggest there has been white glove treatment en masse but the "pipeline limitations" at the labels have merely slowed the rollout? 

 

Or are we talking about that hamburger batch processor in the cloud churning out loads of garbage?

 

So now BS is the great protector of provenance, and along with the labels and actual demand by the artists, the poor unwashed masses will finally be saved.

 

I have a bridge for sale, it's in Brooklyn, and it generates toll revenue.

 

 

[MikeyFresh]

46 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I will note this isn’t the first time MQA Ltd has used a term with a generally accepted different meaning to us, and used it with a twist. 
 

MQA’s use of the term provenance is quite different from audiophiles’ understanding. 
 

We’ve always known it to mean a 44.1 master is delivered as a 44.1 file etc... It’s meant to keep the labels honest. 
 

Now MQA is using it to give the labels an out. If they upsample a 44.1 master to 96kHz it will illuminate a blue “provenance” light. 
 

 

 

The labels also have a shoddy track record with regard to older recordings on analog tape. There the provenance issue goes back somewhat further still, tape source questions that the labels intentionally dodged early on with their legal disclaimer printed on nearly every disc booklet/case back:

 

 

 

They made little or no attempt to authenticate anything from the get-go with digital, but now suddenly through the miracle of MQA, the labels will turn over a new leaf and work directly with the content producers to ensure proper end-to-end "authentication"?

 

Failing that, which record label staff will be choosing which existing digital transfers to feed the hamburger batch encoder?

[MikeyFresh]

20 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

I admit I use Roon for one thing: getting the Qobuz stream to my DAC with as little adulteration as possible.  The product and its user base have evolved into a bit of a cult IMHO.  I'm also an Audirvana+ user and perhaps it's time to cut Roon loose.  I probably don't even need it anymore.

 

If Qobuz streaming is your primary use case, you can certainly drop Roon for Audirvana, the Qobuz integration there is quite good in my experience.

[MikeyFresh]

22 minutes ago, rn701 said:

 

Does it have anything similar to roon radio?

 

I believe it does not, but I'm not a Roon user and so don't have any first hand experience with what exactly Roon Radio is or does. Perhaps off-topic for this thread, but you can certainly ask about that in the Audirvana thread.

[MikeyFresh]

4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

He realizes Tidal isn’t working for him. 

 

I bet the math isn't complicated or in need of deblurring.

[MikeyFresh]

56 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

as I've said before, and started threads on, ergonomics, control functionality, and esthetics count

 

That they do, and no one person can decide for all the exact value on offer for any given product. Pride in ownership also plays a factor there, just as with cars, bicycles, watches, cameras, pens etc...

 

56 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

I generally want a mix for myself - and I weight SQ highly

 

Most people on forums like this would be similar, how much any perceived SQ difference is worth in terms of cost is a highly subjective and personal thing, and no one does any real involved blind or ABX testing prior to making purchase decisions.

 

Now back to our regularly scheduled Master Quality Adulterated programming.

[MikeyFresh]

11 hours ago, firedog said:

Very one sided POV. It was also bloated by incessant repetition of MQA marketing claptrap from MQA fanboys who refused to deal with any criticism in a factual way and insisted on red herring arguments. 

 

Also bloated by massive amounts of "civility" posts - which were often off topic and a way of deflecting the argument away from MQA itself and turning the thread into one dealing with the source of the criticism of MQA instead actually answering criticisms of MQA.

 

Your posts not entirely excluded among those, although far from the worst offenders. 

 

Very well stated, those are simply the facts, despite the efforts of others attempting to discredit this thread and indeed the entire forum as "uncivil".

 

ARQuint was not the worst offender, but that honor may very well fall on NextScreen's new President, who consistently deflected the conversation in different meaningless directions and regurgitated MQA marketing-speak in a futile attempt to dodge those facts. Poor show, but apparently it didn't harm his effort to land a new job.

[MikeyFresh]

2 hours ago, ARQuint said:

I think that progress is being made on the civility front, a reflection of how Chris wants this community to function. For me, that's substantive.

 

That great, but for most of us the real progress had been made long ago when the facts presented here completely debunked MQA, and those facts were never rebutted in any substantive way at all.

 

TAS et al are guilty in that respect, attempting to change the narrative repeatedly to one of supposed rampant forum incivility, in lieu of any substance on those inconvenient truths about MQA.

 

TAS, and Stereophile, at one time were both highly respected publications despite always having been thinly veiled advertorials. I paid for and read both magazines for decades, as they were enjoyable even if they needed to be taken with a grain of salt.

 

Now all those years of earned respect and goodwill have largely been pissed away vis-à-vis your indefensible position on the topic of MQA, and that harm has real substance. Only time will tell if NextScreen's new President can undo any of that. I know where my wager is.

[MikeyFresh]

Have I (once again) missed a recent spate of incivility in this thread? Yes, I did.

[MikeyFresh]

6 hours ago, christopher3393 said:

Some people have very short memories here about their own faux pas, but an infinite memory for those of their opponent

 

Yes that's true, and that ugly doxing incident you were involved in is a prime example.

 

6 hours ago, christopher3393 said:

do you have any regrets regarding any posts you made,some of which, while literally may have been "on topic" may have derailed more genuine conversation?

 

Some introspection on your part is in order there, no?

Or are you personally asking others to submit their repentance, and if so, should it be directed to you, Chris Connaker, or both?

 

6 hours ago, christopher3393 said:

So I don't fit your stereotype that some of you keep insisting upon, at your own convenience.

 

Fake news, and I do detect narcissism, no one here has stereotyped you at all. In fact other than responses to your occasional thread check-ins crying foul on the civility front, you are never really mentioned in any way. No one has stereotyped you, however your behavior here and on other fora has more than earned your actual reputation, in that sense no one need stereotype you.

 

6 hours ago, christopher3393 said:

I happen to think that this forum would be better served by a generally higher ethical standard.

 

Perhaps, but that would be in the eye of the beholder, who will better moderate it... you?

 

6 hours ago, christopher3393 said:

And now this will be called derailing and other specious things. So it goes.

 

Manage the damage.

 

It will be called derailing, because it is, and I join the OP in calling you out on it.

"Manage the damage" eh? Dare I request you elaborate, exactly what damage is being managed, and by whom? Cryptic one-liners aren't clever, tell us who should be managing what exact damage.

[MikeyFresh]

4 hours ago, ARQuint said:

Can we bury the hatchet and move on?

 

That would likely be much easier if TAS and Stereophile published retractions, admitting that numerous previous statements made about MQA's supposed technical efficacy were false or misleading at best, now fully debunked, and were never anything more than a parroting of MQA's own marketing-speak.

 

Some semblance of respect for these proud old publications could be salvaged in that scenario, reputation rehabilitation is not impossible, but it starts with honestly admitting mistakes.

[MikeyFresh]

10 minutes ago, abrxx said:

it is this data, when suitably decoded by the MQA Decoder (this has nothing to do with upsampling/rendered), that will reconstruct an approximation of the hi frequency content.

 

So MQA = Master Quality Approximated then.

[MikeyFresh]

10 hours ago, FredericV said:

17/88.2 + upsampling to 352.8kHz with fake resolution indicator ...
Even if you blank 1/3 of the data in the MQA distribution file, the DAC will still do some fake unfold without actually recovering the first step to 17/88.2 of internal resolution, and still claim it's 352.8

 

The original DXD which is the real 24/352.8 from which the lossy crypto DRM version was created, still is the preferred version to my ears. I leave them with their illusion.

 

It would seem Mr. Wong needs to get out a bit more, maybe take a break from Facebook too. There is nothing exciting about a number on a display, especially when that number is both fake and meaningless.

[MikeyFresh]

27 minutes ago, mansr said:

Is anyone surprised?

 

Not at all, Essential has been dead in the water for a long time now.

 

Perhaps MQA themselves are surprised, they still tout the "partnership" on their website despite it never having produced much of anything. How many total units did Essential ever even ship?

[MikeyFresh]

32 minutes ago, mansr said:

Was it ever alive?

 

I guess not, it would appear Essential had sold a total of 150,000 units since 2017.

Thats just not going to cut it going against the likes of Apple, Samsung, Moto, Oppo, OnePlus, and various others.

[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.

[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.