Jump to content
IGNORED

MQA is Vaporware


Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Within that 16 bits there's at least the bit somewhere which denotes that the file is MQA.


As 24 bit MQA files (not 24 bit of audio anyway, but 24 bit file format with more than 1/3 containing non nyquist data) can be truncated to 16 bit, and the MQA indicator stills shines on my Mytek, it's actually in the LSB bit of redbook.
 

 

Depending on how you count, if bit 0 is the MSB bit, then it's the 15th bit, and this position does not change depending if it's a 16 or 24 bit MQA file.

Designer of the 432 EVO music server and Linux specialist

Discoverer of the independent open source sox based mqa playback method with optional one cycle postringing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, botrytis said:

 

It has THROWN AWAY parts of the file, period. How can you restore them if they are gone?

MQA-Block-Diagram.png?8802298321645544022

 

Remember this block diagram? This is from the MQA patent. Notice the 'Lossy' parts? That means they are ignored and thrown away? Are you Dr. Frankenstein? Because that is what you are asking....


Thanks for this graph. The first steps are to noise shape the 24/96 to 17/96, and then all their folding steps to pack this as 24 bits at half the sample rate.

Then the bottom graph shows the inverse process, where the output is 17/96 !!!

I now have conclusive proof that MQA is indeed never any better than 17/96

The MQA shills are revisiting their canned articles ("research" they call this), but so are we.

Designer of the 432 EVO music server and Linux specialist

Discoverer of the independent open source sox based mqa playback method with optional one cycle postringing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

Within that 16 bits there's at least the bit somewhere which denotes that the file is MQA. By now I forgot how often that bits (or sequence of) sticks out its neck, but previously this was in bits 17-24 somewhere, which was part of the encoding scheme anyway, and deemed not to be in the Redbook representative. Now, however, it is really taken from the 16 bits Redbook bears anyway.

 

This associates with HDCD. And guess what - in the long term HDCD does not sound right to me either.

 

Maybe I must wonder whether there's a resemblance between the two. Maybe MQA Ltd hired KOJ ?

 

Looking around, it's 13 bits for music data, 3 bits for MQA encoding. So, we drop back from 96 to 78 dB dynamic range ... is this a disaster? From my own experiments, investigating what happens when bits are lost - not really. If intelligent dithering is applied then what you get, subjectively, is an increase in benign noise - very large levels of gain are needed to actually hear this.

 

No way is MQA-CD, er, good - but it's not the end of the world; if a release is only available in this then it still should be able to be made to sound good, 🙂.

Frank

 

http://artofaudioconjuring.blogspot.com/

 

 

Over and out.

.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

If there is dynamic compression, with no clipping, and the precise parameters are fed back in to decompress, then the waveform is fully restored - I did some exercises, years ago, of doing compression and then decompression to envelopes of sine waves which faded in to maximum, and then faded out - using Reaper - provided one didn't get too fancy, the waveform was retrieved.

 

In the real world, of reversing audible 'damage', the difference is dramatic - going from "Get me out of here!!", to "Hey, that was a good track!" - worrying about the process being 'perfect' is in the realms of angels on a head of pin stuff - if it works subjectively, then that's what counts ... to me.

 

Did an exercise, some months ago for Archimago, of what can be done without too much drama - for a track he was complaining about,

 

Frank

 

http://artofaudioconjuring.blogspot.com/

 

 

Over and out.

.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, KeenObserver said:

 

Having one company have control of the entire music encoding and distribution network a matter of anti Trust.  Should the justice department be looking into this?

But in the legal sense that isn't what will be happening. There are multiple labels and MQA. Labels choose to have their catalog MQA'd, and then sell that version. In a legal sense this isn't a monopoly or lack of competition.  The labels compete, and the non MQA material still exists. MQA hasn't eliminated it, the rights owners have simply decided to sell a certain version of their files and keep others in the vaults. Their prerogative.

No case for stopping that. The fact that some audiophiles don't like the file version being sold doesn't matter. The labels can also choose to only make mp3 versions available if they wish.

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +_iFi  AC iPurifiers >Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Conditioning+Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Listening: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Matrix Element i Streamer/DAC (XLR)+Schiit Freya>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: RPi 3B+ running RoPieee to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, firedog said:

But in the legal sense that isn't what will be happening. There are multiple labels and MQA. Labels choose to have their catalog MQA'd, and then sell that version. In a legal sense this isn't a monopoly or lack of competition.  The labels compete, and the non MQA material still exists. MQA hasn't eliminated it, the rights owners have simply decided to sell a certain version of their files and keep others in the vaults. Their prerogative.

No case for stopping that. The fact that some audiophiles don't like the file version being sold doesn't matter. The labels can also choose to only make mp3 versions available if they wish.

 

While it's not a monopoly, I'd say the big labels make up an oligopoly.  Seems to me that if they all release their catalogs in MQA only, then the big labels are conspiring together and acting like a cartel (non-competition).  In any case, there's not enough interest outside the very tiny audiophile community, so there's no chance a government would intervene to break the cartel (and stop the MQA-only trend).

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

While it's not a monopoly, I'd say the big labels make up an oligopoly.  Seems to me that if they all release their catalogs in MQA only, then the big labels are conspiring together and acting like a cartel (non-competition).  In any case, there's not enough interest outside the very tiny audiophile community, so there's no chance a government would intervene to break the cartel (and stop the MQA-only trend).

Would Apple care? They might not want this MQA thing apart of iTunes. Their at least big enough or have the resources to bring it to mainstream media. 

PC/NAS/JRiver/Roon - PS Audio P5 Regenerator - KEF LS50 Nocturne - Rel 328 subwoofer - PS Audio AC5 Power cables 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ShawnC said:

Would Apple care? They might not want this MQA thing apart of iTunes. Their at least big enough or have the resources to bring it to mainstream media. 

 

Yes, Apple certainly has clout. However, AFAIK, Apple provides less than 16/44.1 resolution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the group managed by Veter Peth, someone is comparing those MQA CD files with the ones before, and he does not hear any difference. As he is using an MQA dac, this would mean you actually need to use an MQA decoder in some form to get what you had in the past, without MQA.

So the MQA tax is now active on Tidal:

afbeelding.png.1e66954ab7047928a60c3118fd3af171.png

MQA adds nothing with those green fake 16/44.1 MQA CD files for the consumer, it takes away your rights and then sells them back to you as you now need MQA to get what you already had before.

Maybe they come up with the lame excuse his system is not good enough ....

Designer of the 432 EVO music server and Linux specialist

Discoverer of the independent open source sox based mqa playback method with optional one cycle postringing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FredericV said:

MQA adds nothing with those green fake 16/44.1 MQA CD files for the consumer, it takes away your rights and then sells them back to you as you now need MQA to get what you already had before.

 

Even with MQA, I don't think you can get what you already had before, if before you had pure PCM 16/44.1.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ARQuint said:

 

Kind of like "Perfect Sound Forever"?

 

I'm pretty confident that even recording professionals who have had positive things to say about about MQA (people like Bob Ludwig, Peter McGrath, George Massenburg, Morten Lindberg) would cringe at Veth's preposterous statement.

 

One of the things the pandemic has reminded me about the audiophile pursuit is that no technology is a substitute for the real thing. The musical organizations I patronize offer streamed performances in lieu of cancelled concerts and I find I have little interest. It's not remotely the same as being in the room with the musicians as a performance is happening. Hearing music live and perfectionist audio are complementary experiences—they always have been and always will be. So during COVID times, I listen more than ever to recordings that I chose at home while awaiting the day we can all return to concert halls and other venues.

 

Do you think that Bob Ludwig, Peter McGrath, George Massenburg, or Morten Lindberg would ever archive their music on MQA?

Boycott Warner

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...