Jump to content
IGNORED

Stereophile Series on MQA Technology


Recommended Posts

On 12/6/2017 at 8:32 PM, Rt66indierock said:

I will be offering a prize for the person who does the best job debunking each part of Jim Austin’s series on MQA technology. The first part is scheduled to hit the newsstands later this week with the January issue of Stereophile. The prize will be a $10.00 gift card of your choice that I can acquire in The Valley of the Sun (greater Phoenix Arizona metro area).

 

There is a lot of information to get you started on this site. Have fun.

 

RT66indierock, Stereophile is calling you a troll! 

 

They speak about you in promoting their January issue:

 

"JA also kicks off the issue with a look at the controversy raised by MQA. Controversy? Also in the January Stereophile, Jim Austin examines the time-domain performance of MQA-equipped DACs and one Internet troll is already offering a $10 bounty for anyone who debunks one of Jim's findings!"

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/january-already

 

So, it seems that if you have issues with MQA, the people of Stereophile consider you a troll. How nice... 

 

 

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said:

Calling me a troll is pretty weak. I still laugh to myself when I remember Jason Victor Serinus called me "the most dangerous man in audio" at RMAF 2017. 

 

I've done better reporting and encouraged others to do the same about MQA than Stereophile has. That has to bother John Atkinson.

 

Was Jason Victor Serinus serious when he said that? Or, was it just a joke?

 

From what you are saying, some of the Stereophile people know you. Did Stereophile know your true identity when they called you a troll? If they did, that would make it kind of personal...

 

You seem to be in the audio business, probably at the studio level, engineering, etc. But, I admit I don't know your true identity. I don't know if it is common knowledge for other posters. I am not trying to make you identify yourself; that is your business if you do or don't. 

 

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, mav52 said:

I like this little write up on Schits website as some of the reasons why Schits is not doing MQA.

 

"""

  • Licensing fees from the recording studios
  • Licensing fees from the digital audio product manufacturers
  • Hardware or software access/insight into the DAC or player
  • Subscription fees from every listener via Tidal, and/or royalties from purchases of re-releases by the recording industry  ""

 

I spoke to people at my dealer about this. From what I understood, they have been told by audio representatives, that if they sign on to include MQA in their DACs, they must provide MQA with complete blueprints and schematics of the DAC. They essentially have to surrender intellectual property and trade secrets of their gear. 

 

It is therefore not surprising that most (self respecting) companies have refused to implement MQA in their gear.

 

That made me think "bullshit" when I read this passage in the Stereophile article:

 

"It's reasonable to be concerned about MQA. It's a big deal. There's already much support from record labels and DAC manufacturers."

 

 

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, GUTB said:

Wow. Jim Austin is shattering under-informed commentators in the comments section now. Must read.

 

jimaustin.thumb.PNG.c66592ef31ae0c7d223050210b747041.PNG

 

CRUNCH!

 

There are under-informed commentators on both sides of the MQA debate. There are under-informed commentators on every single subject known to humans. I agree 100% with that.

 

But, just because a few under-informed people who are against MQA show their ignorance; it does not mean that everyone who has problems with MQA is wrong or under-informed.

 

Yes, ignorant people who scream loudly and are wrong, hurt the cause and the message. It does not mean everyone else who is on "the same side" is wrong. 

 

Those people would be better off, being more careful before just writing something on the Internet, without fully knowing that what they write is accurate. Jim Austin is no dummy, and he is correct and justified in correcting those who make unverified and incorrect statements. But, some people are making it really easy for him to do that...

Link to comment
1 minute ago, GUTB said:

 

Yes, but notice when the usual tiresome crowd of "engineers" who have a very basic student-level understanding of the topic screech at someone with actual experience, because that's the basic operating mode on the forums -- and are now getting brutally shot down. 

I added this to my original post, while you were quoting me:

 

"Those people would be better off, being more careful before just writing something on the Internet, without fully knowing that what they write is accurate. Jim Austin is no dummy, and he is correct and justified in correcting those who make unverified and incorrect statements. But, some people are making it really easy for him to do that..."

 

I agree, that the Internet has too many screaming and angry "experts". 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, crenca said:

 

 

GUTB, are you really Steve Guttenberg?

 

I have to say that this analysis of MQA reveals more about the culture of "high-end" than the consumer based rejection of it.  I would call it adolescent, but I don't think it rises to that level sadly (i.e. "it's "in" to pretend MQA is the enemy")

 

You did get it right however to recognize the line in the demographics...

 

He can't really be Steve Guttenberg, can he? I can't find the link, but John Atkinson of Stereophile once wrote that all Stereophile staff, had to use their real names on websites. Is Guttenberg exempt from this, because he is a freelancer for Stereophile, and not paid staff? 

 

I don't believe he is Steve Guttenberg. But, he should answer the question directly.

Link to comment
8 hours ago, GUTB said:

And yet, very outspoken opponents of MQA won't post their systems...

 

MQA is worthless. MQA is a solution looking for a problem. I don't have an MQA enabled DAC. But, I have compared a few MQA albums on Tidal, to hi res versions I own of the same album. My hi res copies sound better than the Tidal MQA versions.

 

If MQA is that good, even partially unfolded, it should sound better than "ordinary" PCM hi res, should it not? I don't see the point of MQA. I see its creator trying to push it on everyone, while he has dollar signs in his eyes. 

 

Steve Jobs did something similar. But, Jobs gave people things they wanted or desired. Bob Stuart is trying to sell people a shit sandwich disguised as bacon lettuce and tomato.

 

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/profile/26564-indydan/?tab=field_core_pfield_3

 

 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

You have a very nice power delivery system. Are the Shunyatas as good as everyone says? I remember someone saying you should rob a bank if you have to get one.

 

In regards to the first unfold (no MQA DAC), I found no benefit at least with the DFR.

 

 

Thank you. The Shunyata power cables deserve their excellent reputation. I have tried a good number of power cables from different companies (Audioquest, Nordost, Furutech, Cardas, etc). They are all better than stock cords, but Shunyata beats them all. 

 

By the way, I edited and expanded my previous comment after you quoted it. 

Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 5 months later...
10 hours ago, firedog said:

Andy's should say: "Threw a hissy fit and quit just as he was about to be banned"

I like it!

 

MQA "enthusiast"                        Reason for no longer posting on CA

Peter Veth                                                          BANNED

WitchDoctor                                                      BANNED

Lee Scoggins                              SCARED of his BS being called out

Michael Lavorgna                      BANNED for telling someone to go fuck his mother

Peter Veth (as Peter Markus)  BANNED for acting like a dick and being an MQA shill

Jim Austin                                         Had a little bit of a meltdown on CA

Andy Schaub as Galileo365     Threw a hissy fit and quit just as he was about to be banned

Link to comment

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...