Jump to content
IGNORED

MQA is Vaporware


Recommended Posts

Well, MQA is stretching the truth - the FLAC packaging is lossless, but the information in the FLAC package is not. That is basically what they said. That the FLAC package is lossless.

 

What about the heap of crap inside the package? A whole 'nother animal.

Current:  JRiver 24 on Win 10 PC (AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with 32 GB RAM) or Daphile on an I5-2500K with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590

Amplification - Pioneer M-22 (winter) - Sony TA-N55ES (summer)

Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers

Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and DiMarzio Interconnects

Link to post
Share on other sites

In their FAQ I linked above they claim in the first answer that MQA is lossless. No word on the container itself.

 

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

Quote

Q. Is MQA Lossless?

A. Yes. 

...

This is clearly missleading.

Something like

 

Q: Can a petrol car drive without fuel?

A: Yes

 

But only a few feet in case the 1st gear is engaded and you will use the engine starter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 hours ago, Chris_87 said:

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.

 

2 hours ago, Chris_87 said:

In their FAQ I linked above they claim in the first answer that MQA is lossless. No word on the container itself.

 

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

This is clearly missleading.

Something like

 

Q: Can a petrol car drive without fuel?

A: Yes

 

But only a few feet in case the 1st gear is engaded and you will use the engine starter.

 

I also think informing Competition and Markets Authority or some other relevant authority (I unfortunately can't say what organization could it be) could be quite fruitful. Maybe even more than almost a thousand of pages of this (great) thread.

 

What’s true of all the evils in the world is true of plague as well.
It helps men to rise above themselves.
 
  ―  Albert Camus, The Plague.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw this on Reddit and modified it to fit the facts....

MQA.jpg

Current:  JRiver 24 on Win 10 PC (AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with 32 GB RAM) or Daphile on an I5-2500K with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590

Amplification - Pioneer M-22 (winter) - Sony TA-N55ES (summer)

Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers

Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and DiMarzio Interconnects

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does MQA use dual standards for spectrum plots?

It's interesting to see that MQA stops tracking the music spectrum above 48 kHz in the first Bob Talks article (the gold curve stops at exactly the limit of their 17/96 dithering). The gold curve should not stop at around 48 kHz ...

https://bobtalks.co.uk/blog/mqaplayback/origami-and-the-last-mile/

image.thumb.png.7d63f5f8c915bbdd959f1930349453c1.png

 

If we look at other resources, there's music content above 48 kHz:

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

https://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/fig1a.gif

 

even the Stereophile industry pieces on MQA mention such content:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-questions-and-answers-informative-topic-spectral-content-music

https://www.stereophile.com/images/816mqafeature.MQAfig17.jpg

 

So why did MQA truncate the gold curve in Bob's origami article?

These old skool music boxes seem to generate a lot of content not within MQA's encoding triangle:
 

 

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 post
Share on other sites

It is obvious that this has nothing to do with the quality of the music. The claims have all been debunked and refuted.

This has to do with ego.

They are going to ram this down the music consumers throats whether they like it or not.

"WE'LL SHOW THEM WHO RUNS THE MUSIC BUSINESS"

It's like the car salesman that uses every trick in the sales book to rack up another "win".

This whole MQA thing is just disgusting.

Boycott Warner

Boycott Tidal

Boycott Roon

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

It's also evidently better than lossless, and the only advancement of significance in audio distribution in the last 20 years:

 

406297344_ScreenShot2021-04-20at2_05_47PM.thumb.jpeg.e30625b5957dc40734ea275a6e7ae1f2.jpeg

 

 

We have been clearly witnessing the birth of a new audio format category - it's neither (oldfashioned) lossy nor lossless - it's more than that, so it's clearly gainy! Hence all lossless formats are actually lossy (cause ex definitio they lose to gainy MQA) when you compare them with MQA!

And you're complaining, guys.. x-D

 

What’s true of all the evils in the world is true of plague as well.
It helps men to rise above themselves.
 
  ―  Albert Camus, The Plague.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JoshM said:

Not sure whether this is better placed in this thread, the thread on @GoldenOne’s video, or the ASR thread, but:

 

1) Over at ASR, John Atkinson is claiming that Golden’s test is invalid since everyone knows a lossy encoder (we’re now apparently conceding that MQA is lossy) can’t handle the signals Golden encoded. This is the same claim Amir made, and if you look at John’s “likes” at ASR, he’s “liking” every post criticizing Golden’s test and defending MQA. 
 

2) Amir has just given a response that completely negates the point of every measurement he’s ever done:

 

6B82EB57-42F5-4B53-8F02-64E145E75F48.jpeg

 

 

I always thought that John Atkinson was well respected from his days at Stereophile as Editor through many stormy seas with various ownership changes. 

 

And, he may still be - all those years of careful deliberation and quantitative measurements that build a reputation shouldn't be lost that easily.  

 

But I do recall some fuzziness way back when all this MQA talk started - he seemed to be on the supportive side initially, and it would seem may still be.  Hasn't he posted on this topic here a few times?  

 

I suppose we all have the right of some flexibility in our opinion, but certainly with MQA there isn't much more room for deliberation from a technical perspective, particularly with the detailed and methodical testing done recently by GoldenSound.  

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...