MQA is Vaporware

[The Computer Audiophile]

38 minutes ago, R1200CL said:

.....and nothing about this in the press. (Yet) Horrible. 
 

@Kal Rubinson

I hope your magazine looks into this.

The old guard written press touted this as a great feature when it announced MQA as the best thing to ever happen to digital. 

[firedog]

3 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

The old guard written press touted this as a great feature when it announced MQA as the best thing to ever happen to digital. 

What do you mean? Not to digital, to the world.  Robert Harley compared it to a discovery on the level of Copernicus-a scientific revolution.....

[John Dyson]

4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Not sure how removing content and using leaky filters can make something sound more like the original without anything removed. 

I was just saying that we are getting substandard stuff normally anyway.   If they clean up their act, and give the good stuff to us before MQA encoding, the loss of a few low order bits is a lot less damaging than the 15-20dB of staged compression already in many/most recordings.   Sadly, many people cannot hear the compression in CDs anyway nowadays.

 

I am NOT advocating MQA -- NO WAY...    It is mostly just a way of adding 'digital-damage' to the already egregiously 'analog-damaged' recordings.

 

I am imagining in another 30yrs -- the audiophile will be accomdated to the already existant 20dB of multi-layer compression in current recordings, plus the loss of a few low order bits and other high-frequency damage.

 

This 'imagining' pictures an almost evolutionary change in the audiophile hearing, where there is the currently expected 20dB of analog compression and 14dB of effective digital dynamic range.   The audiophile ear will only be able to *situationally* perceive 40dB of dynamic range -- and anything that is recorded directly from a microphone onto media will sound 'damaged', perhaps missing high frequency content because a natural signal doesn't have a 10-15dB relative gain-up on the highs.

 

It would be SO helpful if more audiophiles could convert into high-fidelity listeners by hearing more non-processed pure recordings.    Or, at least, connect a stereo pair of condenser microphones to some amplified headphones, and listen to a REAL piano.   Perhaps listen to a real, non-processed clarinet...   The expectations will change, perhaps creating more frustrated customers who will REALLY KNOW the cr*p quality of recordings being sold today.

 

I am becoming convinced that the damage is occuring in the distribution phase.  I just did a youtube grab of a relatively new 'pristine' boutique recording, and it definitely DID NOT sound live.  My hearing is NOT that perverse.

 

John

 

[Kal Rubinson]

3 hours ago, R1200CL said:

.....and nothing about this in the press. (Yet) Horrible. 
 

@Kal Rubinson

I hope your magazine looks into this.

Write to the editor.  I don't know if it will do any good but I don't follow the issue any more.

[UkPhil]

5 hours ago, R1200CL said:

I’m afraid you’re correct.
 

Is there any way to get this confirmed officially? I understand Tidal added, but a google search doesn’t say replace. Or remove. Yes, I noticed (some) albums is only MQA. Now actually 2 versions of MQA. 16 and 24 bit. This doesn’t make sense at all. Why this 16 bit version ? Anyone has a good explanation ?
 

I hope we can get some official statements, cause Tidal or Warner doing this without actually telling people isn’t acceptable.

 

 

 

This could be a start of creating the “controlled” distribution of a common file which could find its way been sent to other streaming sites as it may only be the file available 

 

These quotes are from Bob Stuart recently :

.” MQA is now used in the whole of Warner Music new and back catalogue, and Universal’s too – plus Sony is coming, and a lot of the independent label”

 

“The audio industry has tended to be made up of hundreds of small enterprises, there have been very few companies that could stand up and say, “let’s make a standard”. That was done when for vinyl LP and CD”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[John Dyson]

44 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

I was just saying that we are getting substandard stuff normally anyway.   If they clean up their act, and give the good stuff to us before MQA encoding, the loss of a few low order bits is a lot less damaging than the 15-20dB of staged compression already in many/most recordings.   Sadly, many people cannot hear the compression in CDs anyway nowadays.

 

I am NOT advocating MQA -- NO WAY...    It is mostly just a way of adding 'digital-damage' to the already egregiously 'analog-damaged' recordings.

 

I am imagining in another 30yrs -- the audiophile will be accomdated to the already existant 20dB of multi-layer compression in current recordings, plus the loss of a few low order bits and other high-frequency damage.

 

This 'imagining' pictures an almost evolutionary change in the audiophile hearing, where there is the currently expected 20dB of analog compression and 14dB of effective digital dynamic range.   The audiophile ear will only be able to *situationally* perceive 40dB of dynamic range -- and anything that is recorded directly from a microphone onto media will sound 'damaged', perhaps missing high frequency content because a natural signal doesn't have a 10-15dB relative gain-up on the highs.

 

It would be SO helpful if more audiophiles could convert into high-fidelity listeners by hearing more non-processed pure recordings.    Or, at least, connect a stereo pair of condenser microphones to some amplified headphones, and listen to a REAL piano.   Perhaps listen to a real, non-processed clarinet...   The expectations will change, perhaps creating more frustrated customers who will REALLY KNOW the cr*p quality of recordings being sold today.

 

I am becoming convinced that the damage is occuring in the distribution phase.  I just did a youtube grab of a relatively new 'pristine' boutique recording, and it definitely DID NOT sound live.  My hearing is NOT that perverse.

 

John

 

In my message above, I didn't intend to write 14dB of effective digital dynamic range, but perhaps a loss of several low order bits of dynamic range capability.   Both what is happening NOW, and MQA that appears to be looming -- both are not so good for the high-fidelity oriented audiophile.

 

 

[R1200CL]

@John Dyson

My Theta Generation VIII S3 is limited to 24/192. I hope it’s qualities is good enough even at today’s standard.
Where is the best place I can get some examples of “hearing more non-processed pure recordings.”

2L maybe ?
I use Roon with Qobuz and Tidal. Doesn’t any of those have some recording with your suggested quality ?

(I usual don’t listen to classical, though I like Bond when they do Vivaldi😀)
 

Maybe I misunderstood your last post. 

[lucretius]

7 hours ago, R1200CL said:

Yes, I noticed (some) albums is only MQA. Now actually 2 versions of MQA. 16 and 24 bit. This doesn’t make sense at all. Why this 16 bit version ? Anyone has a good explanation ?

 

16 bit MQA -> Premium level subscribers ($9.99 USD a month)

24 bit MQA -> HiFi level subscribers ($19.99 USD a month)

 

For comparison, Qobuz:

(up to) 24/192 flac -> $14.99 USD a month ($149.99 USD billed annually)

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

46 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

16 bit MQA -> Premium level subscribers ($9.99 USD a month)

24 bit MQA -> HiFi level subscribers ($19.99 USD a month)

 

For comparison, Qobuz:

(up to) 24/192 flac -> $14.99 USD a month ($149.99 USD billed annually)

 

 

The MQA tax. 
 

 

[lucretius]

5 hours ago, firedog said:

What do you mean? Not to digital, to the world.  Robert Harley compared it to a discovery on the level of Copernicus-a scientific revolution.....

 

Let's not forget @John_Atkinson's "birth of a new world".  I wonder if he still feels that way?

[R1200CL]

45 minutes ago, lucretius said:

16 bit MQA -> Premium level subscribers ($9.99 USD a month)

24 bit MQA -> HiFi level subscribers ($19.99 USD a month)

I’m afraid your right, though Tidal doesn’t state exactly this. 

You forgot to include Dolby Atmos Music and and Sony 360 Reality Audio 😀

Have anyone tested these formats ? Hard to find information about what kind of format this is. Require HMDI ?

 

[PeterSt]

1 minute ago, R1200CL said:

Sony 360 Reality Audio

 

That can only be played through smartphones (AFAIK).

[KeenObserver]

Should it come to pass that the only music being produced is MQA, Audiophiles should remember that it was TAS and Stereophile that were the main promoters of this scheme.  You would think that the publications that most rely on Audiophiles would think twice before promoting a scheme that screws the Audiophile.

Audiophiles should remember the people who warned about MQA, some of whom have passed.  They warned about the consequences of MQA and would not include MQA in their equipment.  When it comes time to buy equipment, the Audiophile should remember.

[firedog]

4 hours ago, KeenObserver said:

Should it come to pass that the only music being produced is MQA, Audiophiles should remember that it was TAS and Stereophile that were the main promoters of this scheme.  You would think that the publications that most rely on Audiophiles would think twice before promoting a scheme that screws the Audiophile.

 

They don't actually care about "audiophiles",they care about "the industry". And their connections/advertising dollars in the industry.

Note how the editor of Stereophile (Jim Austin) argued that even if MQA is bad for ultimate music quality, we should go along with it b/c it is "good for the industry".

That tells you all you need to know.

[Thuaveta]

11 hours ago, lucretius said:

 

Let's not forget @John_Atkinson's "birth of a new world".  I wonder if he still feels that way?

 

For shits and giggles, a certain pirate site allows us to know how much of a breakthrough MQA really is: the HiresAudio rip of Ariana Grande's latest is 523.3 MB, the Tidal MQA rip is 494.3... as the kids would say, "Much wow, very compression".

[mevdinc]

I am afraid it was obvious that MQA would win in the end. The most important decider is the content owner/provider (record/music labels such as Warner, Sony...) and I'm sure they have been supporting the format from day one. Almost all new DACs seem to come with MQA support too. This is the sad reality...

[FredericV]

1 hour ago, UkPhil said:

These quotes are from Bob Stuart recently :

.” MQA is now used in the whole of Warner Music new and back catalogue, and Universal’s too – plus Sony is coming, and a lot of the independent label”

I found his quote here:

https://www.stereonet.co.uk/features/inside-track-bob-stuart-mqa

Is real PCM as we know it soon dead and being replaced by a crypto DRM scheme? How does this benefit the consumer in any way?

[KeenObserver]

5 hours ago, firedog said:

They don't actually care about "audiophiles",they care about "the industry". And their connections/advertising dollars in the industry.

Note how the editor of Stereophile (Jim Austin) argued that even if MQA is bad for ultimate music quality, we should go along with it b/c it is "good for the industry".

That tells you all you need to know.

 

They "care" about audiophiles to the extent that they can sell product.  The readership of these publications consider themselves as "Audiophiles".  Audiophiles should remember who foisted MQA on them.

[KeenObserver]

12 minutes ago, FredericV said:

I found his quote here:

https://www.stereonet.co.uk/features/inside-track-bob-stuart-mqa

Is real PCM as we know it soon dead and being replaced by a crypto DRM scheme? How does this benefit the consumer in any way?

 

It benefits MQA and the labels.  The music consumer pays for it.

 

MQA and Warner are forcing "TOT" (contaminated brandy) on the music consumer.

 

MQA and Warner look upon the music consumer as Kaffir.

[KeenObserver]

Back many years ago when video was changing from VCR to disc, from analog to digital, space was a critical matter.  Digital video was orders of magnitude more space hungry than audio.  It still is. Compression is still a critical issue with video.  It is in reality of little matter with audio and is becoming less so by the day.

Dolby made it's bones with compression and bought out Meridian's MLP.

It is apparent that Bob Stuart saw the success of Dolby and figured that a similar scheme involving audio processing would be a money maker.  The problem is that the scheme is at least twenty years behind the times.  The Genie has already been let out of the bottle.  People have been listening to Hi-Rez for years.  And file size has become a non issue.

How do you sell it? You claim it is lossless. You claim it corrects recording problems.  You claim it "deblurs".  You claim it sounds better than the original.  All BS that was not widely accepted.

So now what do you do?  You conspire with Warner to force it on the music consumer.

 

I have come to despise Bob Stuart for what he is doing to the music consumer.

[PeterSt]

24 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

I have come to despise Bob Stuart for what he is doing to the music consumer.

 

I suppose the solution is to become a producer.

[DuckToller]

Universal has bid for the Bob Dylan catalogue. Soon to be had in MQA qualities  ...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/dec/07/bob-dylan-sells-publishing-universal-music

[firedog]

Question about MQA DACs: is it true that newer DAC chips that incorporate MQA know how to switch filters automatically between MQA and non MQA filters, depending on program material? I'm thinking about chips like the AK4497 and the newest ESS chips. I was told this, wat to know if it's true.

[UkPhil]

4 minutes ago, firedog said:

Question about MQA DACs: is it true that newer DAC chips that incorporate MQA know how to switch filters automatically between MQA and non MQA filters, depending on program material? I'm thinking about chips like the AK4497 and the newest ESS chips. I was told this, wat to know if it's true.

I know my Project S2 DAC switches in and out of MQA as there is a noticeable gap in sound when standard PCM is detected as it switches on and off, plus speaking to John Westlake the designer he confirmed this, no guarantee this is done on all DAC’s equipped this way,  I believe one of SMSL DAC’s stayed on 

[DuckToller]

1 minute ago, firedog said:

Question about MQA DACs: is it true that newer DAC chips that incorporate MQA know how to switch filters automatically between MQA and non MQA filters, depending on program material? I'm thinking about chips like the AK4497 and the newest ESS chips. I was told this, wat to know if it's true.

AFAIK MQA capabilities are provided by the XMOS Chip programming in conjunction with the DAC chip (i.e. BB DSD1793 from 2003 used by iFi), I have noticed only the newest ESS DAC (Gustard X16) having MQA on the chip.

Do you have information that the AKM 4497/4499 have that function on the chip implemented as well?

For the iFi iDSD BL the user had the choice to use either a firmware with DSD512 or one with DSD256 and MQA, as the XMOS could not manage both. For the new iDSD signature both functions are announced, however the MQA firmware (5.30) on my review model did neither perform DXD / DSD256 flawless nor offers 2xDXD/PCM768/DSD512.
It's understood that I did not care to test MQA ...