Jump to content
IGNORED

MQA is Vaporware


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, R1200CL said:

I wonder if streaming of SACD is realistic to think ever will happen ?

 

 

It's been done on a limited basis. No reason it can't be done. The bandwith is about the same as for a 176 or 192/24 file, and those are streamed without issue.

 

The only real issue is that there isn't enough interest in DSD to make it worth it for the streaming services. Even Qobuz doesn't stock DSD; they have plenty of albums in 24/96 or 24/192 in the catalog whose origin is DSD, yet they only contract to stream the PCM version of the album.

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
On 12/29/2020 at 5:17 AM, botrytis said:

Here is what a REAL Scientific paper looks like.


Since we are discussing audio, is this publication within the frames of a scientific paper ?

https://www.willhowie.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/wh.3Daudio.sample_rate.discrimination.v1.7.pdf

As an example. This document probably isn’t. Read the comments/discussion.
https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/journal/?ID=2
The guy beneath in the video has an interesting comment.

 

If we trust Bob Stuart and Peter Craven saying our auditory system has a time resolution  of 7 µs, which would need a sample rate of 141 kHz or better, it certainly make sense to use 24/192. 
Video gives a good explanation. (I haven’t watched part 2 yet😀)


I just wish BS had stopped there, and didn’t invent the origami. 😀
 

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


Files on Tidal were just HTTP in the past, and HTTPS these days. Both rely on the TCP part of TCP/IP. As TCP uses checksums and retransmissions, it guarantees a bitperfect pipe. There is no need for MQA.

For cybercriminals there would be zero gain to mess with flac files in Tidal's CDN, so we are very sure no MITM is going to take place, so rest assured that HTTPS combined with TCP provides the technical features which guarantee the file is not being changed during transmission. Doing MITM on HTTPS is much harder and while technically not impossible if you have the skills, not worth the effort.

It's much easier to look at player logs to see which URL's are being fetched, or to use an open source Tidal API. Basically when you control and endpoint, all the MITM efforts become pointless.

So to conclude: our existing network protocols guarantee the files are being transmitted bitperfect already, without the need for MQA.

 

I suspected this was the case with respect to transmission between Tidal and end user.  OTOH, what I was saying is that MQA authentication provides assurance that Tidal doesn't alter the files or streams before leaving their control, although I cannot think of a reason why Tidal would do this.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, R1200CL said:

I was expecting DRM ?

Not sure what you mean. SACD's are protected in the sense that SACD players are licensed to output an analog stream, not the direct digital output they read off the disc.

But SACDs are a physical medium, streaming would mean streaming the DSD-digital file the SACD is made from, not the SACD itself. No DRM or copy protection issues, just regular licensing issues like any digital version of the music we listen to. 

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
On 1/5/2021 at 6:47 AM, lucretius said:

It's more than a flag.  There is an actual check of bits - bit checksum.  However, as I have posted before:

Only the 0-22.05/24 kHz frequency range encoded in the first 13-15 most significant bits is authenticated. The 8 least significant bits (of a 24 bit file), which also include the encoding for the 22.05/24 - 44.1/48 kHz frequency range, do not affect authentication and thus can be altered and the "blue light" will remain on. Bob Stuart has already admitted this.  Further, @FredericVhas tested and confirmed this:

 

 

 

27 minutes ago, lucretius said:

I suspected this was the case with respect to transmission between Tidal and end user.  OTOH, what I was saying is that MQA authentication provides assurance that Tidal doesn't alter the files or streams before leaving their control, although I cannot think of a reason why Tidal would do this.

 

So much for the assurance, then!

We will win because our NHS is the beating heart of this country. It is the best of this country. It is unconquerable. It is powered by love.

-- Boris Johnson

 

We are far more united and have far more in common with each other than things that divide us.

-- Jo Cox

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, botrytis said:

People need to do research and actually prove what people are saying not just repeat lies. This seems to be the issue with Audio, more snake oil salesmen involved than actual snakes.

Just like politics!  I guess that makes MQA more of a political issue than a technical improvement idea.  🤪

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Solstice380 said:

Just like politics!  I guess that makes MQA more of a political issue than a technical improvement idea.  🤪

Exactly.

Current:  JRiver 26 on Win 10 PC (AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with 32 GB RAM) or Daphile on an AMD A10-5700 with 8 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Amplification - Audio Research SP-16 > Pioneer M-22 - Bow Technologies Wazoo Integrated (great amp - silly name)

Speakers: Wharfedale Linton Heritage - KEF LS50 - Revel M126Be - others......

Cables: Tara Labs RCS Reference speaker cables and DiMarzio Interconnects

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re reading @Archimago article from 2018, this part even though hypothetical may now be echoing what’s happening since the replacement of 16bit PCM files with MQA versions on the Tidal platform by Warners with more to come allegedly from Universal and Sony.

 

 

“Imagine a world where MQA is wildly successful and the only new digital releases from the major labels are in MQA. You can stream MQA, you can buy the MQA files, and even CDs are MQA-CD (“Buy those unaffected CDs before they all become MQA-CD remasters!”) The unsuspecting music lover who has never come across a critical article on MQA might be impressed initially that these are supposedly “hi-res” 24/48 MQA files or told that the 16/44.1 MQA-CD contains some secret sauce that makes it sound amazing. Initially, the sound quality might be okay on all the equipment he/she owns. But over time, the encoding system starts to degrade the sound of the undecoded data. At some point, what if the undecoded file becomes something like only 10-bits resolution unless it’s played back through an MQA certified device?”

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

“Imagine a world where MQA is wildly successful and the only new digital releases from the major labels are in MQA. You can stream MQA, you can buy the MQA files, and even CDs are MQA-CD (“Buy those unaffected CDs before they all become MQA-CD remasters!”) The unsuspecting music lover who has never come across a critical article on MQA might be impressed initially that these are supposedly “hi-res” 24/48 MQA files or told that the 16/44.1 MQA-CD contains some secret sauce that makes it sound amazing. Initially, the sound quality might be okay on all the equipment he/she owns. But over time, the encoding system starts to degrade the sound of the undecoded data. At some point, what if the undecoded file becomes something like only 10-bits resolution unless it’s played back through an MQA certified device?”

 

I was just recommended this Peter, Paul, and Mary album. I feel bad for people who only have Tidal and no access to the Pure PCM on Qobuz. 

 

Screen Shot 2021-01-06 at 10.49.58 AM.png

Founder of Audiophile Style

Announcing The Audiophile Style Podcast

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hans Beekhuyzen video and information about MQA is 5 to 6 years old. He may have a different view today. And I think he is able to admit errors. 

In part 2 he says MQA sounds quite good, and he stats he know how to listen to pre ringing, jitter etc. 
I’m looking forward what he has to say about this latest redbok MQA format. 

 

As he claims to study this MQA topic a lot, I hope he read this tread or at least Archimango’s blog. (And @mansr website as well). 

With Hans claimed knowledge about MQA, I think he will loose some credibility if he doesn’t post something about Warner’s latest stunt.

 

 

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...