MQA is Vaporware

[witchdoctor]

4 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

The start of a recording is the 192kHz file at whatever bit depth in the studio, where MQA applies a lossy algorithm, with bad filters that cause aliasing, and no deblurring, as has been shown by the reverse engineering on this site.

Therefore, how is MQA the path of best SQ ???.

Surely, the original master is the best sound quality which can be available as a download depending on the recording ?

Regards,

Shadders.

I said the path, not the goal line.

At AES the focus was on improving hirez mastering. Once the current generation of engineers start matering in MQA rather than converting back catalogs I think you will see an improvement. Thus it is a path, not a we are already their.

 

 

[witchdoctor]

3 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

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.

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

 

 

[witchdoctor]

Just now, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

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

I respectfully disagree. 

[witchdoctor]

25 minutes ago, Confused said:

I attended the dCS Vivaldi One demonstration at the Windsor hifi show last weekend.  The demonstration used a mixture of CD and SACD material.  No mention was made of MQA.  These are the facts, make of it what you will.

 

Subjectively, the sound quality was superb playing red book CD.

Nice, I don't know that Tidal is available in the UK yet or maybe they didn't have internet. Thanks for sharing!

[witchdoctor]

1 hour ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

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

How about what we agree with and why?  

[witchdoctor]

4 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

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

 

 

 

...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.

no thank you, we just need to agree to disagree

[witchdoctor]

Screw the iphone. Tidal is 30% owned by sprint. Get a new LG phone and some good cans and you are are a moblile, agile hirez road warrior:

 

https://www.whathifi.com/news/lg-v30-first-phone-mqa-audio-and-oled-fullvision-display

[witchdoctor]

1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Witch what hi-res files can you play on the LG V30?

 They have the V30 and the V30+ which does virtual reality. A review I saw from a guy that works at Sprint is that it has the best SQ of any he has tried by far. Here is some info about the audio features (the anti iphone). Sprint is offering a deal. I know it has a big hard drive and B&O headphones but I didn't see info on other hirez formats beside MQA:

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/8/28/16214086/lg-v30-ess-sabre-quad-dac-specs-ifa-2017

 

[witchdoctor]

The title of this thread is MQA is Vaporware. Everything I have posted demonstrates that this is false. All major labels have adopted it, some of the biggest high end brands have adopted it, it's available in cars, at home, on your desktop and NOW on your phone. There are now more than 7000+ albums available on Tidal with more being dropped every week. The labels want to master future releases in MQA as they move toward making this a "hirez" standard like 1080P or 4K is in video. 
DSD has been "vaporized" as the format never got traction. Now there are two more streaming services coming on board that will offer MQA. 
To me all of this evidence demonstrates that MQA is snowballing, is not "vaporware" and the members here who don't like MQA are enttitled to their opinion. But "vaporware"? No.  

So, it is what it is. If you don't like MQA and want something else I have a thread open for MQA alternatives. THANKS to the many members who have posted.

If you are looking for a SOA system that combines audio and video come stop by my thread on immersive audio. (Immersive audio is NOT multichannel, sometimes there is confusion about this)
 

[witchdoctor]

1 hour ago, Charles Hansen said:

 

As far as I can tell, MQA has attracted next to no attention in Europe. The main interest in from the US, almost entirely due to The Absolute Sound and Stereophile. There is a small amount of interest from Korea now, I'm unsure what's driving that (other than subsidizing an MQA-equipped streaming service there). Perhaps they think that Holland will be the best "beachhead" for a European invasion. Who knows?

MQA is available where Tidal is available for the most part. As more streaming services adopt MQA it will become more widely available.

 

[witchdoctor]

5 minutes ago, synn said:

I am quite new here, as you can see from my post count.

 

 

In the past few months, I had read so much about MQA and I really wanted to go out and try it. I almost ended up buying an NAD amp with the built in BluOS module for this purpose. But a few days before that, I downloaded the now famous 2L tracks and gave it a twirl. I have no MQA capable device of course, so I decided to compare the undecoded file to the rest. It is supposed to be better than CD quality, right?

 

To my ears, the MQA tracks sounded a bit better than CD quality and not as detailed as the 192KHz, DXD or DSD files. Now giving it the benefit of the doubt that a fully decoded file will sound as good as DXD, I am still left with a problem.

 

I could get an MQA equipped DAC for my listening room to enjoy full quality music (If the claims are true). But in my living room setup with the AV receiver or on the road with my DAP, I am still left with a slightly better than CD quality file. A normal 192KHz plays exactly the same in all three setups. Bandwidth and download limits are not a problem for me.

So for me, the MQA hype train has left the station. I think I will live with 192KHz for some time (Even that is quite hard to find, most of the "High res" files I can purchase for the kind of music I listen to are 48-96KHz anyway).

I think you made a good decision. If you are after SQ 192KHz and MQA are nearly indistinguishable. I prefer MQA because of the huge library I have access to for $10 extra a month. I couldn't accumulate that many 192 tracks on my own.