The Computer Audiophile Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 Perhaps the Q in MQA was ahead of its time 🤣 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 @Kevin Brock Are you aware of the studies done by Jonathan Berger showing kids have a preference for MP3 now? Lossy music like MQA can be preferred by people, but it isn’t because it’s accurate. http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/03/the-sizzling-sound-of-music.html MikeyFresh 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post Daren F Posted March 21, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 21, 2021 2 hours ago, MikeyFresh said: It's not a short read, however the full technical debunking details, and the argument for why MQA is bad for all aspects of the music creation and delivery system (excepting themselves and the greedy record labels) is all there if you parse through it. This is why I can't accept your "it's quite simple" statement, not when it's your very first post here. You seem to be missing or ignoring a ton of details in your assessment. This tread needs an executive summary. Something straight and to the point outlining just the facts. A list of bullet points. Then, whenever someone comes along preaching the gospel about MQA, a simple referral to the summary is available. This tread is probably the most comprehensive source of factual information about MQA on the internet. Unfortunately, it's way too long to actually be educational at this point. Don Hills, UkPhil, MikeyFresh and 2 others 5 Link to comment
Popular Post firedog Posted March 21, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 21, 2021 1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said: Remember this part of the story Kevin? The fraudulent claim that MQA was lossless. And the claim that MQA can "unfold" to 176k,192k, 352K, and 384k - it can't and doesn't. It's simply upsampling. No one needs an MQA DAC to do upsampling to 4X or 8X rates. MikeyFresh, maxijazz, lucretius and 1 other 4 Main listening (small home office): Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments. Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three . Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup. Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. All absolute statements about audio are false Link to comment
Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted March 21, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 21, 2021 24 minutes ago, firedog said: And the claim that MQA can "unfold" to 176k,192k, 352K, and 384k - it can't and doesn't. It's simply upsampling. No one needs an MQA DAC to do upsampling to 4X or 8X rates. Yeah, renaming upsampling to unfolding certainly has many MQA fans believing it’s revolutionary. MikeyFresh, yahooboy and KeenObserver 1 1 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post botrytis Posted March 21, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 21, 2021 20 hours ago, Kevin Brock said: You know it is quite simple. If you don’t like MQA then don’t use it. And if you haven’t heard it over a decent period of time then you aren’t qualified to comment. I’ve listened for at least two years using Tidal. I’ve tried two DAC’s. A Meridian Explorer2 and now PS DirectStream Jnr. I hear the difference. MQA to my ears is usually better than CD. That’s all that matters. But if you don’t agree then fine. Don’t use it. Blimey, lie down in a darkened room with a glass of something and find some peace. I find it with MQA...But of you find it through Qobuz, MP3’s or 78’s that’s great. Problem is this is the coming from the people who sells us these files. MQA is a way for them to control digital music front to back. That is NOT what I want. MQA might actually break the DMCA in the US, I am not a lawyer. Jes saying it is possible. Once MQA gets more mainstream, it will be hard to impossible to stop. I wanted it stopped now. Have you done blind listening with MQA? I have. It is not worth it and it doesn't sound better, to me so why should I pay MORE for something that sounds like crap to me? Don't say my equipment isn't good enough, because that is bullshit (one of the classic things MQA mavens say). Currawong, MikeyFresh and UkPhil 2 1 Current: Daphile on an AMD A10-9500 with 16 GB RAM DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590 Amplification - Benchmark AHB2 amplifier Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and Blue Jean Cable Balanced Interconnects Link to comment
Popular Post KeenObserver Posted March 21, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 21, 2021 The renewal of the BS stream leads me to believe that MQA and the majors have not given up on their efforts to inflict their vile scheme on the music consumer. This is indeed a point of paradigm shift. This is the point where we still have access to the undamaged original recording ( from those studios that care about the quality of the music ). If MQA and their backers have their way, you will only have access to a facsimile of the original recording. And, it will cost you at every point of the music reproduction chain. MQA is a curse on the music consumer. botrytis and MikeyFresh 2 Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
Popular Post KeenObserver Posted March 21, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 21, 2021 5 hours ago, Daren F said: This tread needs an executive summary. Something straight and to the point outlining just the facts. A list of bullet points. Then, whenever someone comes along preaching the gospel about MQA, a simple referral to the summary is available. This tread is probably the most comprehensive source of factual information about MQA on the internet. Unfortunately, it's way too long to actually be educational at this point. The problem is that so many claims were made and so many carefully crafted repudiations were posted that it would take many pages to post. Right from the beginning MQA was making claims and hiding them behind carefully orchestrated " demonstrations". MQA was all smoke and mirrors right from the beginning. And the whole cycle seems to be starting again. MikeyFresh and botrytis 2 Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
Popular Post KeenObserver Posted March 21, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 21, 2021 Lightly dismissing DRM is misleading. I think DRM is the underlying purpose of MQA. botrytis and jcbenten 2 Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
Ishmael Slapowitz Posted March 22, 2021 Share Posted March 22, 2021 Yet another Master Quack zombie shill. Yawn. No ordinary person would spend that much time and energy preaching the gospel of Master Quack to the non believers. What a joke. Don't feed the trolls. MikeyFresh 1 Link to comment
KeenObserver Posted March 22, 2021 Share Posted March 22, 2021 1 hour ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said: Yet another Master Quack zombie shill. Yawn. No ordinary person would spend that much time and energy preaching the gospel of Master Quack to the non believers. What a joke. Don't feed the trolls. Sadly, there are many out there repeating the MQA mantra. They drank the "Tot". Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
yahooboy Posted March 22, 2021 Share Posted March 22, 2021 11 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said: Remember this part of the story Kevin? The fraudulent claim that MQA was lossless. The same fraudulent claim that they keep on repeating on their website MikeyFresh 1 Link to comment
jcbenten Posted March 22, 2021 Share Posted March 22, 2021 16 hours ago, KeenObserver said: Lightly dismissing DRM is misleading. I think DRM is the underlying purpose of MQA. Absolutely agree...all the unfolding, upsampling, and other propaganda is handwaving to hide the DRM facet of the technology. A win for the labels, a win for BS and his cohorts in licensing fees, and a big loss for consumers in added costs and availability. MikeyFresh 1 QNAP TS453Pro w/QLMS->Netgear Switch->Netgear RAX43 Router->Ethernet (50 ft)->Netgear switch->SBTouch ->SABAJ A10d->Linn Majik-IL (preamp)->Linn 2250->Linn Keilidh; Control Points: iPeng (iPad Air & iPhone); Also: Rega P3-24 w/ DV 10x5; OPPO 103; PC Playback: Foobar2000 & JRiver; Portable: iPhone 12 ProMax & Radio Paradise or NAS streaming; Sony NWZ ZX2 w/ PHA-3; SMSL IQ, Fiio Q5, iFi Nano iDSD BL; Garage: Edifier S1000DB Active Speakers Link to comment
Popular Post Daren F Posted March 22, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 22, 2021 16 hours ago, KeenObserver said: The problem is that so many claims were made and so many carefully crafted repudiations were posted that it would take many pages to post. Right from the beginning MQA was making claims and hiding them behind carefully orchestrated " demonstrations". MQA was all smoke and mirrors right from the beginning. And the whole cycle seems to be starting again. Problem is that no one new is going to read through a thread with 21K+ posts. Every time someone new comes along (as you say) the whole cycle starts again. There's nothing left to be said that hasn't already been said ad nauseum. When a MQA supporter on another forum was directed to this thread the response was "If you're serious about sound quality, attempt a rigorous ABX comparison with an MQA DAC instead of reading endless internet forum claptrap". The MQA: A Review of controversies, concerns, and cautions article is very good however it was written in 2018. It's also a long read, out dated and IIRC, doesn't mention anything about the batch conversion of CD quality FLAC to lossy MQA CD. Fake news is still being spread. Came across this Wired trash piece a couple days ago. Best music streaming service for audiophiles - Tidal. A summary at the beginning of this thread, similar (but shorter) to the A novel way to massively improve the SQ of computer audio streaming thread would be very useful as an educational tool. The length of this tread scares people off. Few read it so few will learn from it. The Computer Audiophile and botrytis 2 Link to comment
Popular Post Currawong Posted March 24, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 24, 2021 On 3/22/2021 at 9:38 AM, Ishmael Slapowitz said: Yet another Master Quack zombie shill. Yawn. No ordinary person would spend that much time and energy preaching the gospel of Master Quack to the non believers. What a joke. Don't feed the trolls. One of the credible things that can be pointed out about this "yet another" member is that, instead of looking into the facts, they immediately attack the people here, instead of actually attempting to discuss a different point of view. When you post comments like this one, it allows the pro-MQA crowd to discredit what is posted here in the same way, using posts such as yours as justification towards suggesting people ignore this thread and its contents. I've had it in mind, for quite some time, to make a video about MQA. If anyone is interested in helping with that, please PM me. Confused, Don Hills and opus101 3 Link to comment
Popular Post botrytis Posted March 24, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 24, 2021 13 hours ago, Currawong said: One of the credible things that can be pointed out about this "yet another" member is that, instead of looking into the facts, they immediately attack the people here, instead of actually attempting to discuss a different point of view. When you post comments like this one, it allows the pro-MQA crowd to discredit what is posted here in the same way, using posts such as yours as justification towards suggesting people ignore this thread and its contents. I've had it in mind, for quite some time, to make a video about MQA. If anyone is interested in helping with that, please PM me. Both sides do it, calling names. It is not one side or the other. It really doesn't matter but it kind of does. I mean Chris did not have to put up with the crap he did at RMAF. That shows the Pro-MQA people are more interested in not having the truth out. MikeyFresh and yahooboy 1 1 Current: Daphile on an AMD A10-9500 with 16 GB RAM DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590 Amplification - Benchmark AHB2 amplifier Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and Blue Jean Cable Balanced Interconnects Link to comment
John Dyson Posted March 24, 2021 Share Posted March 24, 2021 1 hour ago, botrytis said: Both sides do it, calling names. It is not one side or the other. It really doesn't matter but it kind of does. I mean Chris did not have to put up with the crap he did at RMAF. That shows the Pro-MQA people are more interested in not having the truth out. When telling the 'truth', sometimes it best to be simple (but not excessively over-simplified). The most simple, and most straightforward technical complaint about MQA is that people are typically thinking that they are getting full 16bit distribution quality (bait), but with MQA, without ADDITIONAL STUFF, they are only getting 14bits of quality (switch.) In fact, the processing with the 2 lost bits are lossy, and the quality in the truly audible frequency region (<21kHz) is less because the use of the bits is necessarily lossy in that frequency region for misguided application in regions that are both noisy and inaudible at the levels that those >20kHz frequencies are played.. So, from a quality standpoint ALONE (not even considering the political and control issues), MQA is a loss to the average consumer who is purchasing a product of a certain, expected quality. Above, I am simplifying the issue, and not talking about a lot of other disadvantages/side-effects against the consumer, but if someone wants a simple, honest, accurate argument -- the above is it. Link to comment
Popular Post botrytis Posted March 25, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 25, 2021 Currawong, MikeyFresh, Daren F and 1 other 3 1 Current: Daphile on an AMD A10-9500 with 16 GB RAM DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590 Amplification - Benchmark AHB2 amplifier Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and Blue Jean Cable Balanced Interconnects Link to comment
manueljenkin Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 Not here to defend or accuse MQA but to learn something about signals. One major thing people tend to forget is most recordings done using delta Sigma adc don't have the high frequency content at all due to the noise shaper structure (and the brickwall that follows). Pulling through a windowed fft based spectrum analyser software like spek I seldom found anything to have ANY content above 20khz regardless of recordings. Very few recordings had such content preserved. https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/mqa-time-domain-accuracy-digital-audio-quality?amp Paragraph below sampling evolution - "There are other approaches that don’t suffer the same uncertainty between time and frequency information that is inherent in the Fourier model... and developments in advanced mathematics over the last 15 years or so (particularly in relation to Wavelet Theory and complex image processing) have led to many momentous advancements in both the fundamental concepts and the practical techniques of sampling theory. Of particular interest are new techniques which essentially discard brick-wall anti-alias filtering as we currently know it, and employ new forms of sampling and reconstruction kernels that can resolve transient signal timing with extraordinary resolution, even conveying positional time differences that are shorter than the periods between successive samples! This seems counter-intuitive but it is possible if, instead of using traditional adjacent rectangular sampling periods, a series of overlapping and time-weighted triangular sampling kernels are used (see Figure 6). Even better results are possible using higher-order ‘B-spline’ kernels, which allow both the position and intensity to be identified of two or more separate pulses occurring within the same sampling period!" Any idea where I can find the math about such time weighted kernels and whole of wavelets in general? Currawong 1 Link to comment
jparvio Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 Not sure what to make out of this. What exactly has been changed in MQA: https://positive-feedback.com/industry-news/simaudio-announces-tidal-master-mqa-problem-with-the-moon-mind-2-fix-coming/ Jussi Arvio Contributing Editor Hifimaailma Magazine Link to comment
Popular Post FredericV Posted March 25, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 25, 2021 1 hour ago, manueljenkin said: Of particular interest are new techniques which essentially discard brick-wall anti-alias filtering as we currently know it, and employ new forms of sampling and reconstruction kernels that can resolve transient signal timing with extraordinary resolution, even conveying positional time differences that are shorter than the periods between successive samples! This seems counter-intuitive but it is possible if, instead of using traditional adjacent rectangular sampling periods, a series of overlapping and time-weighted triangular sampling kernels are used (see Figure 6). Even better results are possible using higher-order ‘B-spline’ kernels, which allow both the position and intensity to be identified of two or more separate pulses occurring within the same sampling period!" Any idea where I can find the math about such time weighted kernels and whole of wavelets in general? This is BS, as PCM can already do this, even on very cheap hardware. MQA did not reinvent the wheel. Watch from 21:00 Regarding their triangular sampling kernel, there are no MQA ADC's except for one Mytek, which is almost never used by any studio. If MQA from a standpoint of sampling was so revolutionary, we should have seen more studio gear vendors jumping on it. But it hasn't happened. opus101, UkPhil, MikeyFresh and 1 other 4 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 comment
manueljenkin Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 28 minutes ago, FredericV said: This is BS, as PCM can already do this, even on very cheap hardware. MQA did not reinvent the wheel. Watch from 21:00 Regarding their triangular sampling kernel, there are no MQA ADC's except for one Mytek, which is almost never used by any studio. If MQA from a standpoint of sampling was so revolutionary, we should have seen more studio gear vendors jumping on it. But it hasn't happened. I'm sorry, I wasn't asking your opinion on MQA or some random video. Can we keep a check on unsolicited comments? I was asking for books/resources on wavelet theory and time weighted kernels. Not sure how hard that is to understand. I have done enough math to know that the particular paragraph I have quoted has no mistake (not sure of the rest of the article and I couldn't care less). Link to comment
opus101 Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 7 minutes ago, manueljenkin said: Can we keep a check on unsolicited comments? Why would we when they're calling out other people's erroneous comments? MikeyFresh 1 Link to comment
manueljenkin Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 There's absolutely nothing wrong in the content I posted (the link is just a reference and the content that I agree with I have quoted). @The Computer Audiophile I wasn't expecting to face random condescending comments for a gentle post requesting resources on a particular topic relevant to this thread. Link to comment
manueljenkin Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 18 minutes ago, opus101 said: Why would we when they're calling out other people's erroneous comments? There's absolutely nothing wrong in the content I posted (the link is just a reference and the content that I agree with I have quoted). @The Computer Audiophile I wasn't expecting to face random condescending comments for a gentle post requesting resources on a particular topic relevant to this thread. If their claim is on basis of wavelets isn't it necessary to understand what wavelet is first and what they are claiming to achieve before jumping into conclusions based on a particular number chart. Pretty sure wavelets are more capable and complex than a simple stft. Anyway again my intention is not to praise or discredit mqa, I just wanted to analyse it thoroughly and I felt certain degree of knowledge is needed. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now