MQA is Vaporware

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

1 minute ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

Not for commercial release, only for my own comparisons between the hi-rez master and the MQA-encoded version.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

Owner, Stereophile Recordings

 

Thanks for response. Given your full endorsement of MQA, I would have to ask, why not?

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

Just now, firedog said:

 

Because like with most things, MQA obfuscates. Their marketing speak makes it sound as if the principals involved with the recordings are "authenticating" the masters. Obviously this isn't true, as some MQA material is old and the principals are all dead. No performing artist, producer, or engineer is around to authenticate. So someone at the rights holder is doing it. Could be someone with real knowledge of the music, or it could be some office flunky looking at a database on a computer screen. 
Clearly there are a few "white glove" MQA issues that have been authenticated by the artist or the producer, but these are the exception that prove the rule - that the "authentication" is mostly done by someone other than the artist or a central person in the production team. 

Well stated...and the the audio press continue to spread fantastical stories about MQA...

 

Example: Munich 2019 report:

 

When I questioned EMM Labs' Shahin al Rashid about using the NS1 to play PCM resolutions higher than 192, he noted that if the file is encoded in MQA, the NS1 can easily stream 384 PCM. This is because the Network Streamer sees the file as 44.1, and then unfolds it accordingly. Final rendering is performed by the DAC.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/emm-labs-ns1-network-streamer#M23BFOv65xj6rGSp.99

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

Just now, John_Atkinson said:

 

Lack of time to negotiate with streaming companies. Now that I am retired and have less daily stress -  I was working >80-hour weeks without a break the past couple of years as Stereophile's editor in chief -  this is one of the things on my to-do list.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

Owner, Stereophile Recordings

Understood. 👍

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

2 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

 

I assume you’re saying that all these companies have decided not to include MQA decoding in their products but I’m not aware of Sonore selling anything where that would come up. 

They were going to do incorporate MQA decoding in their O/S, and possibly in the hardware. This was a big topic. They threw in the towel due to the negative buzz. I followed it carefully. 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

11 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

 

I assume you’re saying that all these companies have decided not to include MQA decoding in their products but I’m not aware of Sonore selling anything where that would come up. 

vortecjr

"Here are some of the issues:

 

1. HD Track was suppose to offer MQA streaming and now they are not.

2. Roon will have decoding soon.

3. A+ already has MQA decoding.

4. No way to use Tidal masters direct.

5. Add to these a few more issues like contacts, fees, and all the negativity.

 

From a practical perspective we can arrange to upsample all 44.1k and 48k content to 96k and call it a day. This solution will work with any content and not just MQA content.

 

Finally, there are no issues between us and MQA...they have been very cool with us."

 

 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

8 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Authentication is for a nonexistent issue of someone changing the files before they get to the customer. 

 

I asked BS about this in an original MQA panel. 

...wait...I thought it was spun as way to impress the customer that the files were "what the artist intended".....🤩

 

you know...direct from there studio?

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

2 hours ago, vortecjr said:

No. We didn't "through in the towel" per say...the work is done and it's working fine. We just changed our mines because while we were working on it the landscape changed. The main issues as mentioned above were Roon, A+, Tidal, and HD Tracks. The other main issue was the contacts and fees (yuck). From my perspective they should give it to us for free and just charge the content providers since in affect we would be helping them promote it. I said, "all the negativity" to give a bone to the cause:) You guys may not want it or like it, but a lot of people do and I still gets emails about it. 

I never said you did not put in the effort, and that no significant work had been done, but what I am missing here...you threw in the towel, pulled the ripped cord, for what ever reason... I think that is a perfectly accurate description. I am not sure why are trying to soften your own words quoted above.

 

BTW, if you continue to get user requests, it is absolutely your prerogative as the business owner to change your mind and offer MQA. It is also the perogative of consumers to skip your product. But you have to do what is best for your company. 

 

Whether you believe in the "technology" and I used that term loosely, is another question.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

2 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

MQA Ltd's business model is based on fees on hardware. Its right in the financial statements. They are using the Dolby model.

Another massive miscalculation by BS? One in a long line of many per 40 years? 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

7 minutes ago, 4est said:

Oh bullshit. As a small business owner I provide what my customers ask for even if I do not agree with it. I will give my open opinion when it is desired, and beyond that it is up to the consumer.

Ancient out dated thinking.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

29 minutes ago, 4est said:

WTF? Who are you to state the dynamics of my business and the clients I serve?

I am against MQA as much as anyone, and have made that clear. What is see is zealots dictating how we should respond to this "threat". I am sorta in Paul's camp on this. One can be against the adoption of MQA without the vitriol I see in this thread. If I were not familiar with this in its entirety, this thread would not be very compelling. Despite the overwhelming evidence, reading and participating among the rabidness of this thread is beyond what my stomach is willing to bear or what I would accept as a casual observer.

 

 

Do you feel better after your screed? Why am I not surprised you are in Paul's "camp". Bird of a feather.

 

Back to MQA, It is without debate a step backwards in digital audio. It is a screw job for music consumers. I was taught to pass on the quick buck and do for the greater good. Selling MQA enabled products works against the greater good. 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

6 minutes ago, vortecjr said:

I didn't soften anything...I explained the comment as only "I" can do. MQA is last on the list and last in importance to me. I have not put it in for the same reasons already explained...nothing has changed with the landscape. No reason to add it because it's indirectly supported through various other means. What MQA products are people boycotting over MQA...Roon, Tidal or A+. These solutions seem pretty popular to me despite MQA support. I support Roon, Tidal and A+ for doing it if for no other reason because they allow people to judge for themselves. 

Thank you for your very clear response.  I think this position is perfectly reasonable.  

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

4 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

OK, I cleaned up this thread a bit. If you posts got removed, suck it up. Nothing personal.

 

Stop the recreational outrage. Get back to MQA.

Seems to me It is unclear who you addressing as far as "recreational outrage".😎

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

1 hour ago, Paul R said:

 

Or, yours was actually the first* reasonable reply in recent memory that was both civil and informative when someone said they liked the way a MQA file sounded. Might be that people are just a tad bit gun shy... 

 

*Or at least, one of the first. 

 

I don't suppose you could sponsor a moderated talk with Bob Stuart?  I'm pretty sure he would jump if you offered the chance, and ageed to moderate it so he is not attacked. It might be somewhat informative, on either or both sides of the argument. Just don't let him filter the questions ahead of time.

 

-Paul 

 

 

 

Oh, you mean something like this? LOL!!!!

 

LOL

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

21 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

I’d like to ask Bob Stuart two questions. First How will the acquisition by Sound United of MQA licenses Onkyo, Pioneer and Integra impact MQA Ltd.? Second when will MQA plugins be available for digital audio workstations? I asked Bob the second question at the Los Angeles Audio Show in 2017 and I would like an update.

 

If I got third question it would be why have you and Ken Forsythe tried to shut down the “MQA is Vaporware” thread?

How about if he is such an AES decorated genius and giant of digital audio he did not design an ADC that solves the, ahem, "timing errors" and "blurring" at the capture point? Oh wait, they did not even have the chops to design a stand alone DAC...🤣

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

Over on (derogatory term removed. -CC), this was posted.

 

"And streaming services can be had for free, as in $0.00, or more depending on your relationship to listening to music on the hifi. For hifi folks, Tidal and Qobuz have been our saviors by offering lossless and high resolution streaming—our ears and ideals have been blessed by the Gods of Bandwidth and Audio Origami. But these are niche services dwarfed by the lossy crowd, the elephant in the sweet spot so to speak."

 

https://twitteringmachines.com/high-end-munich-2019-cries-whispers/

 

Bob Stuart elevated to a God! Wow!

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

32 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

I would say that MQA Ltd has been under pressure since June of 2015 when Reinet made their investment.

 

What would be different now? Maybe the following in the United States. Deezer’s highest resolution is CD quality despite signing an agreement with MQA Ltd in 2018. Tidal’s Hi-Fi tier has maybe 100,000 subscribers in the US. And according to their press release announcing MQA on iPhones they have 165,000 MQA tracks, CD quality is over 40 million tracks. Nugs.net has MQA concerts and albums to stream and download but they one of seven or eight choices to buy. Onkyo Music has MQA downloads, but they use 7Digital to run their store. 7Digital may be out of business in July if they can’t raise more capital. If 7Digital goes out of business Napster can pick up some of the slack now that they support MQA as option but their parent company RealNetworks is projecting a loss this quarter on revenue only slightly higher than the first quarter.

 

I consider this very limited access to MQA music. Limited enough that there isn’t demand for MQA DACs and other music playback equipment. Hardware royalties are what the MQA Ltd. business model is based on.

 

I doubt anyone from MQA Ltd will show up here. Just before I introduced myself to Mike Jbara (CEO) he said within earshot we will never get the Computer Audiophile crowd. This was at the end of RMAF 18 and after Marc Finer of the Digital Entertainment Group told me Qobuz not using MQA tells you all you need to know.

Solid overview of the bleak situation for MQA. I will however, add that ProStudioMasters has gone all in with MQA. But i am sure that even among MQA devotees that purchasing MQA tracks is a non starter. 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

1 hour ago, Em2016 said:

New video by Darko with Bob:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7mq_RDiROI

what utter tripe. that smooth British accent can't even overcome the steaming pile of bullshit he is spewing. 😃

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

1 hour ago, Em2016 said:

New video by Darko with Bob:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7mq_RDiROI

This is sickening...I have never heard so much absolute excrement. 

 

History shows that when charlatans are just about out of options, they try to redefine established technical terms, distort reality, and with a straight face spew horse manure in a fashion that make palatable to the ignorant. 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

36 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

 

That’s a bit extreme... 

 

I’ve noticed in interviews, the more controversial the comment from Bob’s mouth, the quieter he gets. Almost like a whisper. Makes me chuckle every time. We can still hear you Bob.

 

I love how Darko cuts it quickly with Bob’s very last comment... “it’s good for everybody”

 

I wonder if they both burst out laughing right after.

 

"That’s a bit extreme... "

 

Nope, 

 

Other than that, good observations. 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

23 minutes ago, Archimago said:

Another interview with the same old same old...

 

He's leaning quite a bit on the "neuroscience" again yet nothing concrete (again, are we talking about the neuroscience of human hearing?) and spends quite a bit of time on vision and the digital photo analogy as well. Have not seen him hit this angle as much before.

 

Not exactly "hard hitting" investigative journalism from Darko 🙂... He seems like a nice guy. But just like the vast majority of audio reviewers, he's clearly staying away from an actual dialogue with serious questions or willingness to address the "elephant in the room" at this stage, after all these years, which is the amount of negativity on account of the obvious lack of evidence for what Mr. Stuart claims. (Not to mention the ongoing, unfortunate half-truths and slight-of-hand around terms like "lossless" which of course rightly gets many folks angry.)

a very eloquent and refined post...let the summarize for the rest of us...it was total bullshit. 😍

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

3 minutes ago, Archimago said:

 

I don't have a British accent but it's nice to emulate it with eloquence and refinement :-).

 

I would love to be in a room and see Bob try to pull his mumbo jumbo junk science act on you...I would pay good money Arch!

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

26 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

Be careful -- that horrible bug might start being resistant to treatment, then we might all be stuck with it.  It is a good idea to 'be careful' about what one is doing nowadays.  The world used to be much simpler, but not anymore -- just be safe.

 

Funny, because I often hear folks state they don't want their music files or gear "infected" with MQA..😍

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

The world's biggest MQA fan is still at it....

 

"Thanks to the recording’s high sampling rate—I auditioned it in 24/44.1 MQA which, when unfolded and rendered, played at 24/352.8—the sonic expanse is huge."

https://www.stereophile.com/content/trachea-2l-and-norway’s-schola-cantorum#WKyhwV0TQjDfiwHW.99

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

10 hours ago, firedog said:

I corrected him in the comments and will continue to do so. It really is scandalous that he continues to write this. It's exactly the type of thing that JA and the others at Stereophile seem to be oblivious to when  they seem not to understand why their publications and writings aren't held in the highest esteem here. 

Well done pero de fuego!😎

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

3 hours ago, mansr said:

Again, you're missing the point, which is that MQA gives writers something new to write about and get paid for.

I disagree with you. There is always something "new" to write about with the endless product churn, non stop hifi shows, price escalation, and heaven help us, cables. 

 

No, MQA does not fall into the paradigm you describe..there was special attention and interest paid to it.  Clearly Atkinson and his cabal thought it was their gift from the gods that would help create a frenzy, and more ad revenue would follow.