MQA is Vaporware

[fas42]

46 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Not even close. HDCD didn’t remove 3 bits. 

 

Quote

HDCD uses a 20 bit format in difference to the normal 16 bit format, which shall cause a better dynamic range, when playing on HDCD-players. If the HDCD is played on a normal player, only 14 bit are available, so in fact the dynamic range is worse compared to normal CD.

 

Hey, only 2 bits, rather than 3 were used - but who's counting ... 🙂.

[MikeyFresh]

7 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

 

Hey, only 2 bits, rather than 3 were used - but who's counting ... 🙂.

Evidently, Frank was told there would be no math.

[asdf1000]

2 hours ago, UkPhil said:

https://www.stereo.net.au/features/inside-track-bob-stuart-mqa

 

From that article, he seems to be talking about you guys ! You're all famous 😁

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

31 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

 

From that article, he seems to be talking about you guys ! You're all famous 😁

 

Bob kept telling me that for a long time. Saying @Miska and Mans were talking about high school level stuff and didn't understand what he was doing with MQA. It's a common tactic used by those hiding something. 

[KeenObserver]

There were people who didn't understand how badly you could screw the music consumer.

[KeenObserver]

There were people who clearly understood and warned the music consumer.

[KeenObserver]

Bob Stuart must have studied L Ron Hubbard.

[KeenObserver]

Bob Stuart created a method for making audio contaminated brandy.

[mevdinc]

18 hours ago, asdf1000 said:

A good example of blurring and a blurb. 

[John Dyson]

11 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Bob kept telling me that for a long time. Saying @Miska and Mans were talking about high school level stuff and didn't understand what he was doing with MQA. It's a common tactic used by those hiding something. 

I agree -- you are commenting on the typical "you aren't smart enough to understand" type response.   The audio community appears to be susceptable to 'high priests' with great intellectual dishonesty or true incompetence.   The problem that I have been trying to resolve is the most heinous event in audio, yet few appear to have picked up on it.   There is a strong intertia, where people will eventually buy-in to the dishonesty and sophistry.   Honesty doesn't always win.   Integrity is hard to come by.

 

Remember in the '80s when CDs had that 'digital sound' and those who supposedly 'know things' complained that 'digital' was naturally inferior?   It has taken 30+yrs to unveil the cheat, but now people are used to the 'digital sound', while vinyl is even being produced with it...

 

I am only ONE PERSON getting minimal help with failing hearing -- and have terrible problems trying to produce demos -- just had to improve the Brubeck examples because of finally getting feedback.   What is wrong with people who are so easily taken-in by dishonesty, snake oil, influence peddlers, and other such charlitans?

 

AS is one of the few places where there is SOME sanity, but the audio world in general does have this problem of dishonest high-priests and appears to be no win.   I can imagine in 1000yrs, our hearing will have 40dB dynamic range capability because of all of the FA recordings AND subsequent DRC and digital compression implied.  Humans hearing willl adapted to the distorted sound -- as it already has to some extent in the last 30+yrs.

 

John

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

11 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

The audio community appears to be susceptable to 'high priests' with great intellectual dishonesty or true incompetence.

This is a human problem, not just audio. 

[JoeWhip]

17 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

This is a human problem, not just audio. 

Amen to that!

[KeenObserver]

The more I see and read about Bob Stuart, the more I come to believe that he is purely a huckster.  I have come to despise him for what he is trying to do to the music consumer.

Whether it is just advertising BS, or he truly believes it, implying that only HE understands the science behind MQA is an insult to everyone.

Propping up Bob Stuart by bestowing him The Prince Philip award does not enhance the stature of The Royal Academy of Engineering.

Bob Stuart should have been given the Prince Andrew award for what he is trying to do to the music consumer.

[KeenObserver]

Watching Bob Stuart give a talk on MQA, it is all rainbows and unicorns and magic.  Bob Stuart goes on and on, hitting every talking point, and says NOTHING.

Watch a Professor Irwin Corey performance and then watch a Bob Stuart talk.

 

The people that believe the MQA BS are the same people that believe the magician sawed a person in half.

[PeterSt]

49 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

are the same people that believe the magician sawed a person in half.

 

But I saw that with my own eyes many times !

[lucretius]

Which version of the Eagles-Their Greatest Hits 1971-1975 album would you rather have:
 

MQA_24_192_dr.txt    Redbook_dr.txt

 

 

Which track of Fleetwood Mac's "Dreams" would you rather have:

 

MQA_24_96.flac_dr.txt  Redbook_dr.txt  HDtracks_PCM_24_96.flac_dr.txt

[lucretius]

Here is some evidence that (at least sometimes) the same files that are distributed to HDtracks are also used as input for conversion to MQA:

 

MQA_24_192_dr.txt  HDtracks_24_192_dr.txt 

 

For comparison, here's the Redbook version:

 

Redbook_dr.txt

 

[lucretius]

There's definitely some clipping on this MQA Hotel California album, however, the clipping isn't too severe.

 

HotelC-MQA_24_192_dr.txt

 

Why should there be any clipping?  Does clipping exist in the actual master?

[lucretius]

2 hours ago, KeenObserver said:

Bob Stuart should have been given the Prince Andrew award for what he is trying to do to the music consumer.

 

I haven't seen The Party Prince in a long time.  I wish we could say the same about MQA.

[MarkusBarkus]

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

This is a human problem, not just audio.

Although there are many versions of this that play out around the world, the unifying principle is: somebody gets paid. A lot.

 

And by the time the music stops, payday is long past and you can't claw-back time. Sorry to be so cynical, audio pals...

[UkPhil]

Dug out my Pro-Ject S2 DAC to check the Tidal files since the Warner update and I can confirm If you wind down a 16/44.1 MASTER to HIFI you still get the same MQA file regardless of your settings so standard DAC’s will go into digital limp mode 

 

Warner’s file 

[UkPhil]

The same test done with a Universal owned album,  the MASTER plays MQA wind it down to HIFI and we get PCM 44.1 at the moment 

 

 

[FredericV]

Just found this in the Veter Peth group. This is probably the reason why so many believe there is a third unfold:
 

Bob is claiming C, which has no musical content, is being folded into B, and then B is folded into A.

But this is wrong. There is no third unfold.

MQA can't encode any analog frequencies above 48 Khz, as MQA's encoder is band limiting everything to 17/96 at best, so any content above 48 Khz is lost. For multiples of 44.1K, anything above 44.1 Khz is lost if the source is sampled at 88.2K or higher.

https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/application_notes/163302855-is-mqa-doa

So all it can do is replace C with it's own garbage, which is the aliasing of their leaky filters

 

You can clearly see in the spectrum, that C is not being unfolded, but A and B are kept, although B is already lossy, and C is completely lost and replaced by something else.

So why does Bob pretends that C is kept?

[Dr Tone]

12 minutes ago, FredericV said:

So why does Bob pretends that C is kept?

Because upsampling is hard to market.

[lucretius]

2 hours ago, UkPhil said:

The same test done with a Universal owned album,  the MASTER plays MQA wind it down to HIFI and we get PCM 44.1 at the moment 

 

 

 

So it depends on the particular album?