MQA technical analysis

[The Computer Audiophile]

I see a few advertising links being offered on this thread...

 

Permit me to offer a non-advertising link for those interested in some objective analysis:

COMPARISON: Hardware-Decoded MQA (using Mytek Brooklyn DAC)

 

Good job on the examination of the underlying code, everyone. Perhaps I missed it in this thread, but I am curious about the filter being used by the MQA decoder. Was there an updated sine sweep looking at the aliasing/nonlinear distortions?

 

Hmm. A non-advertising link. That's kind of a play on words because you are making money through advertising on your site, and driving more traffic to your site through your posts on CA is clearly in your financial interest.

[The Computer Audiophile]

His post is informative and on-topic for this thread. It is not an advertisement for MQA, unlike those other links that were posted recently. Who cares if he makes a few cents off the traffic he gets from here?

I think it's a bit comical that you guys don't trust the commercial interests of one entity, but do trust the commercial interests of another that supports your point of view.

[The Computer Audiophile]

The ads I see on his site are served by Google and Amazon. I don't think they care whatsoever what he writes. This is very different from ads on, say, Audiostream where the advertisers have a direct relationship with the publication.

 

I disagree. Whatever you write about, Google will scrape the text and display ads that will garner the most clicks. Publishers frequently tailor their articles to discuss the topics that produce the best click through rates on the displayed ads. For example, if you talk about mesothelioma, you will make a lot of money. Lawyers will pay $50 per click to Google, who then cuts a percentage to the publisher.

[The Computer Audiophile]

I really don't think Google or Amazon are going to put pressure on random bloggers to write more favourably about things advertised through their networks. Looking at the post linked above, these are the ads I see:

 

- A book about DSP room correction at Amazon

- Amazon links for the products and music mentioned in the text

- Some sort of currency and/or commodity trading site

- Travelodge hotels

- Vinyl records from Amazon

- A Kindle reader from Amazon

- A "master class" on film scoring

 

Those are either completely random or triggered by a single keyword in the text. If you think that is in any way comparable to the highly paid ads placed by high-end audio companies on the usual "review" sites, you are out of your mind.

 

Think bigger. Google doesn't put pressure, the advertising income can put pressure on people. If you write about music, then you'll see Adsense ads for people selling music. One only has to look at the Adsense stats to see which ads are paying him the most, and tailor his content to talk more about the stuff that brings in more income.

 

I'm not suggesting this happens on his site, I'm only suggesting that it's a bit strange for people to suggest advertising on other sites matters, but advertising on his site that supports your view point doesn't matter. that's all.

 

I'm not suggesting his income is comparable (your word) to the other sites.

[The Computer Audiophile]

MQA filters are specifically extremely non-sharp and "poor", so they leak a lot.

Given that Bob Stuart and Peter Craven have some ability to understand digital filters, can you make a guess as to why (if true) they elected to implement filters that are "poor and leak a lot."

[The Computer Audiophile]

Crap, the forum acts up sometimes

 

Completely new site software coming soon. Shooting for end of February.

[The Computer Audiophile]

LOL.

 

OMG Chris, I have "commercial interests"? Come on man... The amount of traffic I have on the blog *pales* to the commercial interests on any of the major audiophile blog and sites I've seen. To put it another way, I make a few bucks off Amazon if there's anything I talk about and readers buy, and another few bucks in AdSense. Notice that not all my posts are about audio, some about video as well; stuff that interests me and experiments that other hobbyists might find interesting.

 

Let me be honest as well. I make more money in my day job in one day than 2 years worth of what I'm getting off blog proceeds... I trust this puts into perspective the level of "commercial interest" I have.

 

I'm interested in truth. I'm interested in having audiophiles be educated in such truth as can be proven with evidence. Not every audio lover will care about a lot of this but I do want the material and measurements out there for reference if one days, an audiophile get to thinking about an alternative viewpoint other than the interests of the "mainstream" audiophile Industry-supported media.

 

Go ahead and do the same with your reviews by adding objective data and I will be a happy man because then I can look forward to answers rather than yet more testimony and opinions rather than facts. I would happily retire when that day comes!

 

I would bring on several more writers like Mitch if I could find them. Good writers are incredibly hard to find.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Very interesting mansr. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

There's no accounting for taste. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

@witchdoctor No more posts in this thread. Your doing your best to derail any MQA discussions that don't mind with your agenda. One more time and you're banned.