MQA is Vaporware

[botrytis]

The site is back up now.

[fas42]

Maybe this is why Meridian 'invented' MQA ... a clip of their top speaker in action.

 

 

😉

[botrytis]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

Maybe this is why Meridian 'invented' MQA ... a clip of their top speaker in action.

 

 

😉

 

More than likely, they lost the DSD/DVD-A battle so they want their slice of the pie.

[FredericV]

Our well known MQA opinion maker / influencer still believes some would like to copy MQA. But why?

All that's left in MQA is a proprietary PCM file size reduction scheme by first dithering the audio to be encoded to 17/96 (which can be done more efficient with sox dithering) and a clever way to transform this 17/96 dithered version into a 24/48 file (folding) which can be optionally truncated to 16 bits, and put the inverse process behind a license fee.

For formats based on 44.1 multiples, that is 17/88.2 transformed into a 24/44.1 file.



The renderer has been fully reverse engineered. The data format of the encrypted bits in a 24 bit MQA distribution file for the first unfold, have not yet been reverse engineered, but that's where the encoding of the test tones becomes relevant: it proves MQA uses leaky downsample filters which alias the high frequency content into the baseband, and does not deblur or correct the recording, rather adding new problems to the existing master, and calling the altered version the master.

The metadata format has been reverse engineered (e.g. mqascan tool)

Then to answer Peter's question why people are worried, this proves he did not finish the video or understand it. He seems not to care that real audiophiles will no longer have access to lossless hi-res PCM, which would become a fact when MQA is the dominant format.

Furthermore he keeps repeating end-to-end deblurring as if he learned nothing from the video:

 

There is no deblur. It would have been interesting if  @GoldenOne had encoded a 50 or 60 kHz tone (e.g. try to send a 24/192 file for MQA encoding) as that tone would no longer be in the final MQA encode due to the 17/96 dithering. It would once again prove there is no end-to-end.

Research has show certain instruments have 100+ kHz signals in the analog domain, so 17/96 is not going to cut it, and never be end-to-end

[Currawong]

Indeed, PV can't have gotten to the point where GoldenOne said that he was never asked for the details of the encoding ADC or software, so the actual idea of de-blurring, if it existed, is not being implemented at all. 

 

I guess that, when you don't have the answer to a criticism, the only solution is to make something up to counter it. 

[firedog]

1 hour ago, Currawong said:

Indeed, PV can't have gotten to the point where GoldenOne said that he was never asked for the details of the encoding ADC or software, so the actual idea of de-blurring, if it existed, is not being implemented at all. 

The MQA comeback is that they have software that analyzes the files and figures out what the original ADC was, if you believe that.

[MikeyFresh]

6 hours ago, firedog said:

The MQA comeback is that they have software that analyzes the files and figures out what the original ADC was, if you believe that.

For every ADC and combination of different ADCs ever produced and used on any given recording? I do not believe that one bit.

[firedog]

10 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said:

For every ADC and combination of different ADCs ever produced and used on any given recording? I do not believe that one bit.

In the early days of digital there were only a few ADC's in use, so it's probably possible. Today, not so much.

[Thuaveta]

21 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said:

I do not believe that one bit.

 

Why would you ? MQA encoding is a 3-bit scam...

[The Computer Audiophile]

48 minutes ago, firedog said:

In the early days of digital there were only a few ADC's in use, so it's probably possible. Today, not so much.

Plus the subtle differences between units as they age. 

[manisandher]

On 4/15/2021 at 5:13 PM, manisandher said:

So, I just wrote this to TIDAL:

 

Hi,

I've noticed that you're increasing the number of MQA albums/tracks and reducing the number of lossless flac albums/tracks available for streaming. After a number of years listening to MQA now, it's clear that it is DETRIMENTAL to the sound.

I do not want to listen to MQA. I want lossless flac. If you continue with your MQA push, I will cancel my TIDAL subscription. I am active on a few well-known hifi forums. I will advise that others also cancel their TIDAL subscription.

Stop this MQA nonsense. Lossless flac is plenty good enough for us audiophiles.

Cheers, Mani.

 

I just received this pretty lame response from TIDAL:

 

Hello Mani,

Thank you for contacting TIDAL Support.  My name is ********* and I am happy to assist you with your request.

We are sorry to hear that you are not happy with MQA. We strive to provide the best possible service to all our users. 

We value your opinion and are constantly working on improving our product. 

If you have any additional feedback or require additional assistance please don't hesitate to email us back.

Thank you for being an active and engaged TIDAL customer.

Have a wonderful day!

Should I have expected anything other?

 

It looks like I have 13 days of TIDAL left. Cue Qobuz...

 

Mani.

[KeenObserver]

19 minutes ago, manisandher said:

We value your opinion and are constantly working on improving our product. 

 

Implementing MQA is improving their product?

Tidal has a warped sense of providing value to their customers.

[botrytis]

On Reddit/Audiophile

Well it has been said...

[botrytis]

A reponse to the above post in Reddit was - "I didn't realize the Tidal supports 'Cancel Culture'"

[botrytis]

I saw this on Reddit too - :D

 

[UkPhil]

13 hours ago, firedog said:

In the early days of digital there were only a few ADC's in use, so it's probably possible. Today, not so much.

Many recordings today are developed from multiple digital files sometimes at different bit rates and compressions then pieced together, that’s some amazing system if it can work out the multiple ADC chain from that digital soup 

[mevdinc]

On 4/16/2021 at 10:08 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

You need the html decoder. 

It's not that simple. Don't forget the unfolding stage.

[botrytis]

A gent from Reddit trying to get into the private FB MQA group. Think he will get in? 🤣

 

[UkPhil]

Latest strap line from the company, not sure if this is will wash with the consumers after this weekends video revelation,  now 66,000 views and counting. 

[GregWormald]

1 hour ago, UkPhil said:

Latest strap line from the company, not sure if this is will wash with the consumers after this weekends video revelation,  now 66,000 views and counting. 

As a psychotherapist I had to learn how to unravel 'political speak' and words without explicit meaning.

 

Let me help:

wider world of audio--undefined,

improves--subjective not objective therefore unprovable.

quality--undefined,

high-resolution experiences--nonsense masquerading as something important.

 

I hope this helps. 

 

 

[FredericV]

1 hour ago, UkPhil said:

Latest strap line from the company, not sure if this is will wash with the consumers after this weekends video revelation,  now 66,000 views and counting. 

Let's FACT CHECK that a little bit:

 

Quote

The ability to transmit the full gamut of high-resolution sound with no wastage of data, that is, in a smaller right-sized stream.

24 bit at x2 or x4 or x8 rate dithered to 17/96 with sox results in smaller file sizes compared to MQA's 17/96 decimation: MQA wastes data

24 bit at x1 rate becomes much bigger due to the crypto DRM added by MQA which flac can't encode well: MQA wastes data

Full gamut of highres include 100+ kHz signals, which MQA can't encode as 17/96 does not describe this gamut

https://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm
 

Quote

Efficient modern coding with a clearer sound than normal digital using matching deblur technology in the encoder and decoder.

Unproven, but MQA adds distortion and higher noise floor = proven
 

Quote

Authentication – an MQA light or indicator to confirm that the listener has the exact result intended; that the audio had not been modified on the journey to the listener.

BS, we can strip 8 bits, truncate the file, or replace 8 bits with garbage, and the MQA light will still shine
 

Conclusion: more BS from BS ....

[Ryan Berry]

On 4/17/2021 at 9:55 AM, MikeyFresh said:

For every ADC and combination of different ADCs ever produced and used on any given recording? I do not believe that one bit.

 

And as long as one can distill every DAC and ADC down to simply the chip being used and ignore the idea that analog circuit designs, power supply designs, etc. all have a factor in what a piece sounds like, of course.  

[Chris_87]

In my oppinion this is clearly misleading advertising. See the first question.

https://www.mqa.co.uk/newsroom/qa/is-mqa-lossless

 

There is more than enoght evidence that MQA is everything but lossless.

 

Has anybody living in the UK informed CMA already. For me living in Austria this has become quite difficult since brexit.

[sphinxsix]

2 hours ago, Chris_87 said:

Has anybody living in the UK informed CMA already.

You mean Competition and Markets Authority or one of the other CMAs:

https://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/CMA

[Chris_87]

I ment Competition and Markets Authorithy. They should be responsible for this m***.