MQA is Vaporware

[danadam]

16 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

If you don’t like AS, you are free to leave at anytime. 

Er... ok. Thank you for informing me about this fact, I guess.

 

Other than the link annoyance it's mostly fine, though.

 

But I get the message. I will refrain from expressing my opinion on the link switcheroo in the future.

 

16 hours ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

What color are your ASR knee pads? Do they have the ASR logo on them?😅

See! This is the quality content I visit this forum for. What's not to like?

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, danadam said:

Er... ok. Thank you for informing me about this fact, I guess.

 

Other than the link annoyance it's mostly fine, though.

 

But I get the message. I will refrain from expressing my opinion on the link switcheroo in the future.

 

See! This is the quality content I visit this forum for. What's not to like?

 

You do know why I had to disable links, right?

[Josh Mound]

16 hours ago, JoshM said:

I don’t think we need to read to deeply into why Amir has a soft spot for DRM schemes.  From the DOJ’s antitrust case against Microsoft:

 

To provide a little context for this, Zune and MS’s competitor to the iTunes Store used a DRM version of WMA designed by Amir. This was also part of Amir’s vision for MS’s video codecs, which caused him to be taken to task by Cory Doctorow, among others. 

[John_Atkinson]

7 hours ago, JoeWhip said:

John, do you not think that the differences you heard could be created in settings in playback software?

I don't think so. Also, peak levels were matched.

 

When a manufacturer visited a while back (pre-pandemic) we were talking about MQA so I asked him if he would mind taking part in a single-blind listening test. He agreed, so with peak levels matched I played him the original 24/88.2k files and the MQA-encoded 24/44.1k versions unfolded to 88.2k with Roon. I didn't identify what he was listening to until afterwards. And as I was sitting behind the manufacturer and to the side, he couldn't see my face and my body language would not influence the results.

 

I played A-B, B-A, etc, so the usual fact that the second time the file is played will be preferred was not a factor.

 

He consistently preferred the unfolded MQA files, and described the difference in the same terms that I have written about in the magazine. See

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

[JoeWhip]

Not sure you understood my point JA. It is that I can use filters and settings in software like Sox etc. to end up with the same sonic signature on a given mqa file. Hence, we do not need Mqa. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 minutes ago, JoeWhip said:

Not sure you understood my point JA. It is that I can use filters and settings in software like Sox etc. to end up with the same sonic signature on a given mqa file. Hence, we do not need Mqa. 

Plus, there all kinds of plugins that can add ultrasonic noise, smear transients, and remove a few bits. 

[Archimago]

On 4/20/2021 at 2:04 PM, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Ok, so let me see if I'm following this logic:

 

• Amir literally makes a name for himself by...... using test signals to test DAC performance.  Not music, TEST SIGNALS
• But test signals are suddenly not suitable to evaluate the performance of an audio CODEC

 

I call shenanigans!!!  We know a lot about the performance of CODECs such as MP3 and AAC because..... TEST SIGNALS!!!

 

 

 

Well said @Samuel T Cogley.

 

I respect what Amir does with the test gear that he has but I've generally been a bit cold to his personality and the idiosyncrasies we can see in the way he talks and how he claims certain things. Inconsistencies have been present for quite awhile and one can sense a significant level of self-interest. Who knows, maybe he would like to take over from JA as the technical editor of Stereophile or something...

 

Knowledge can be learned, but a man's personality is a much harder thing to change.

 

Madrona Digital distributes for many brands I believe, so who knows if MQA capability is present in some of the lineup and whether this affects his thinking. Anyone know which brands the company deals in?

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

1 hour ago, John_Atkinson said:

I don't think so. Also, peak levels were matched.

 

When a manufacturer visited a while back (pre-pandemic) we were talking about MQA so I asked him if he would mind taking part in a single-blind listening test. He agreed, so with peak levels matched I played him the original 24/88.2k files and the MQA-encoded 24/44.1k versions unfolded to 88.2k with Roon. I didn't identify what he was listening to until afterwards. And as I was sitting behind the manufacturer and to the side, he couldn't see my face and my body language would not influence the results.

 

I played A-B, B-A, etc, so the usual fact that the second time the file is played will be preferred was not a factor.

 

He consistently preferred the unfolded MQA files, and described the difference in the same terms that I have written about in the magazine. See

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

This is a classic fallback reviewers have used for decades...anonymous listening buddies/panels/manufacturers who "confirm" subjective listening impressions. It was old then and old now.

 

Be a mensch, post WAV or AIFF clips of your master file and the Master Quack versions. Don't hide behind copyright excuses.

 

60 seconds is all that is needed.  We are waiting. 😗

[Dr Tone]

1 hour ago, Archimago said:

Madrona Digital distributes for many brands I believe, so who knows if MQA capability is present in some of the lineup and whether this affects his thinking. Anyone know which brands the company deals in?

Berkeley as mentioned by Amir himself in his review of a Alpha prototype.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

1 hour ago, Archimago said:

 

Well said @Samuel T Cogley.

 

I respect what Amir does with the test gear that he has but I've generally been a bit cold to his personality and the idiosyncrasies we can see in the way he talks and how he claims certain things. Inconsistencies have been present for quite awhile and one can sense a significant level of self-interest. Who knows, maybe he would like to take over from JA as the technical editor of Stereophile or something...

 

Knowledge can be learned, but a man's personality is a much harder thing to change.

 

Madrona Digital distributes for many brands I believe, so who knows if MQA capability is present in some of the lineup and whether this affects his thinking. Anyone know which brands the company deals in?

I have tell you Arch, there is overwhelming evidence that Madrona Digital is a sham or shell company.  They have the most generic cut and paste website with stock photos. They list employees that have not been there for years. The job titles are laughably absurd. And under "Careers" even more absurd, like an "opening" for "Journeyman Technician" lol..

 

The last social media entry on any platform, was from 2015. 

 

Amir at one point claimed to have a walk in store, which he closed, not surprising, since anyone with half a brain figured out he is a charlatan, dishonest, and a pathological liar.

[Archimago]

21 minutes ago, Dr Tone said:

Berkeley as mentioned by Amir himself in his review of a Alpha prototype.

Thanks.

 

I see that the latest Berkeley Series 3 DACs have incorporated MQA. 

 

Obviously, I hope reviewers can recognize that a product like a DAC can still be excellent despite MQA. Sometimes reading these reviews it's almost like the reviewer somehow needs to kowtow to MQA and make a point about how beneficial this is. I like Roon despite the MQA software decoding 🙄.

 

The problem is that paying money on an MQA product probably also means that one has subsidized the company; which sucks. 🤢

[The Computer Audiophile]

16 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

I have tell you Arch, there is overwhelming evidence that Madrona Digital is a sham or shell company.  They have the most generic cut and paste website with stock photos. They list employees that have not been there for years. The job titles are laughably absurd. And under "Careers" even more absurd, like an "opening" for "Journeyman Technician" lol..

 

The last social media entry on any platform, was from 2015. 

 

Amir at one point claimed to have a walk in store, which he closed, not surprising, since anyone with half a brain figured out he is a charlatan, dishonest, and a pathological liar.

Here’s some info on it. 
 

https://opengovwa.com/labor-industries-contractor/MADROD*877JR

[Archimago]

28 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

I have tell you Arch, there is overwhelming evidence that Madrona Digital is a sham or shell company.  They have the most generic cut and paste website with stock photos. They list employees that have not been there for years. The job titles are laughably absurd. And under "Careers" even more absurd, like an "opening" for "Journeyman Technician" lol..

 

The last social media entry on any platform, was from 2015. 

 

Amir at one point claimed to have a walk in store, which he closed, not surprising, since anyone with half a brain figured out he is a charlatan, dishonest, and a pathological liar.

 

Interesting angle Ishmael.

 

Dunno, but will keep an eye on this. I have a buddy in Bellevue I can visit when the borders open so if there is a store front, I can show up at some point 😉. I see what you mean about the generic website. Hard to know exactly what the company is about; a bit of everything...

 

[Josh Mound]

50 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Here’s some info on it. 
 

https://opengovwa.com/labor-industries-contractor/MADROD*877JR

Well, it exists enough to have received $180k in PPP.

https://projects.propublica.org/coronavirus/bailouts/loans/hometechusa-llc-6118618500

[MikeyFresh]

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Here’s some info on it. 
 

https://opengovwa.com/labor-industries-contractor/MADROD*877JR

Interesting, if that information remains up-to-date, it would appear their license to operate in WA was suspended in August 2019?

 

2 hours ago, JoshM said:

Well, it exists enough to have received $180k in PPP.

https://projects.propublica.org/coronavirus/bailouts/loans/hometechusa-llc-6118618500

 

Perhaps calls into question under what circumstances they were approved by B of A for a PPP loan in the amount of $180,000 just this past March 2nd. That might also raise the question of what other (if any) PPP loans were previously granted, and just how many employees' jobs were supposedly sustained by those loan(s).

 

I guess it's also possible if the loans are not in the category of "forgivable", that makes little difference when the business in question subsequently closes their doors for good.

[Archimago]

More? American tax payers are awesome.

 

https://www.federalpay.org/paycheck-protection-program/hometechusa-llc-bellevue-wa

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

46 minutes ago, Archimago said:

American tax payers are awesome.

Ha! Treasury just prints more money as needed :~)

[Currawong]

9 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

I don't think so. Also, peak levels were matched.

 

When a manufacturer visited a while back (pre-pandemic) we were talking about MQA so I asked him if he would mind taking part in a single-blind listening test. He agreed, so with peak levels matched I played him the original 24/88.2k files and the MQA-encoded 24/44.1k versions unfolded to 88.2k with Roon. I didn't identify what he was listening to until afterwards. And as I was sitting behind the manufacturer and to the side, he couldn't see my face and my body language would not influence the results.

 

I played A-B, B-A, etc, so the usual fact that the second time the file is played will be preferred was not a factor.

 

He consistently preferred the unfolded MQA files, and described the difference in the same terms that I have written about in the magazine. See

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

 

It'd be interesting to get your impressions on some of the music I've been comparing lately, between the Qobuz hi-res original, and the TIDAL MQA versions as a comparison to your experiences with your own music. The classical I've tried seems to have been de-noised and has lost the sense of atmosphere in the music after MQA processing. Jazz music, such as Miles Davis, seems to have an odd bass boost and a loss of detail. 

[Luistergek]

@GoldenOne at first many thangs for your article “I published music on Tidal to test MQA”

I heard from a HiFi dealer that the MQA story is even worse. According to him one of his “Manufacturers” claimed that they are forced to have the MQA decoder chip in the digital path when playing non MQA encoded music. 
Of course, this doesn’t have to be a problem, but he also told me the MQA decoder chip isn’t lossless when “processing” non MQA encoded music. And this would make an honest comparison with the same dac impossible. 
This delayed there version of a DAC supporting MQA regarding high demands from customers in Asia.
I don’t know if he was referring to the filtering like you mention talking about the ifi GTO filter or something else.

In My opinion we must be able to check this as a community by capturing the digital I2S stream from the MQA decoder chip to the actual DAC chip. This way we can also recover the decoded MQA stream in the true digital format. 
Please share us your thoughts on this.
 

[John_Atkinson]

12 hours ago, JoeWhip said:

Not sure you understood my point JA. It is that I can use filters and settings in software like Sox etc. to end up with the same sonic signature on a given mqa file. Hence, we do not need Mqa. 

 

As I was comparing a hi-rez file with an MQA version of the same file, use of plugins would have been a confusing variable.

 

And I have no idea if the audible improvement in sound quality that I reported finding with MQA could be duplicated with plugins.

 

John Atkinson

Technical Editor, Stereophile

[GoldenOne]

2 hours ago, Luistergek said:

@GoldenOne at first many thangs for your article “I published music on Tidal to test MQA”

I heard from a HiFi dealer that the MQA story is even worse. According to him one of his “Manufacturers” claimed that they are forced to have the MQA decoder chip in the digital path when playing non MQA encoded music. 
Of course, this doesn’t have to be a problem, but he also told me the MQA decoder chip isn’t lossless when “processing” non MQA encoded music. And this would make an honest comparison with the same dac impossible. 
This delayed there version of a DAC supporting MQA regarding high demands from customers in Asia.
I don’t know if he was referring to the filtering like you mention talking about the ifi GTO filter or something else.

In My opinion we must be able to check this as a community by capturing the digital I2S stream from the MQA decoder chip to the actual DAC chip. This way we can also recover the decoded MQA stream in the true digital format. 
Please share us your thoughts on this.
 

So I've actually had conversations with not one but TWO manufacturers since the video release about exactly this.

Apparently, MQA is becoming very pushy about manufacturers keeping external processing/upsampling in the signal path at all times. 
This is a direct quote from a manufacturer to me recently:

"Now, the MQA file, un-unfolded, is usually a 44.1kHz or 48kHz file, while unfolded it is played at the highest sample rate supported by the player that is a multiple of these rates (so e.g. 352.8 / 384kHz / 705.6 / 768kHz). There are few to no DACs out on the market that can handle a switch from e.g. 44.1kHz to 705.6kHz without an interruption to the sound, well, I should say I am not aware of any such DAC and certainly none of our company's devices have one, not even sure if it's theoretically possible. This is the reason for the interruptions to the sound many of our users are reporting when beginning to play an MQA track, seeking through it, skipping to another track, basically anything other than playing a whole MQA album in sequence.


Now, MQA understandably do not want to want this to happen to their audio, so the recommendation to all of us, is to resample all incoming audio to their highest 44.1 / 48 multiple, regardless of whether it's MQA, in a manner consistent with MQA unfolding so that no break in the sound would occur.


If we followed this recommendation, we would have to abandon the [name redacted for company anonymity] for bit perfect rendering of PCM audio at different sample rates."

So not only does MQA want manufacturers to add upsampling before the DAC chip itself, they want manufacturers to use THEIR filter....

This was also mentioned here by @Doug Schneider: 

I am guessing this is why ifi in newer products like the iDSD Neo is ONLY using the GTO filter.  (which as shown is basically identical to the MQA renderer filter, and in fact probably IS identical. White noise test shows a slight difference but that might just be from added noise in the track).
This means that with a product like that. You are effectively doing MQA rendering no matter what in order to prevent any interruption. Degrading performance of all standard PCM content just to keep MQA happy.....

[The Computer Audiophile]

Fortunately, I know some manufacturers are gaming the mQa system. Send one version of the DAC to mQa for certification and sell another version to customers. This is how one gets the mQa box checked but keeps much better performance overall. 

[jcbenten]

14 hours ago, Archimago said:

 

...

 

Madrona Digital distributes for many brands I believe, so who knows if MQA capability is present in some of the lineup and whether this affects his thinking. Anyone know which brands the company deals in?

 

Harman is the big one...anything that falls under that umbrella.  He mentions it for every product he reviews that is distributed by Harman (JBL, etc..).

[firedog]

13 minutes ago, jcbenten said:

 

Harman is the big one...anything that falls under that umbrella.  He mentions it for every product he reviews that is distributed by Harman (JBL, etc..).

I don't really see why it is a big deal. He explicitly mentions he is a dealer in every such review. So any reader is free to interpret the resulting review in light of that. There have been cases where he has unfavorably reviewed a Harman product. 

No different than lots of reviewers who get "long term" loans of equipment or free or accommodation pricing. They generally never mention it in their reviews, which is worse, IMO.

[jcbenten]

5 minutes ago, firedog said:

I don't really see why it is a big deal. He explicitly mentions he is a dealer in every such review. So any reader is free to interpret the resulting review in light of that. There have been cases where he has unfavorably reviewed a Harman product. 

No different than lots of reviewers who get "long term" loans of equipment or free or accommodation pricing. They generally never mention it in their reviews, which is worse, IMO.

I do not think it is a big deal....I was only responding to the question of what Madrona distributes...