Stereophile Series on MQA Technology

[GUTB]

30 minutes ago, mevdinc said:

Here we go!
https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-some-claims-examined
 

 

Read it yesterday. Seems just to be a preamble.

[mav52]

46 minutes ago, mevdinc said:

Here we go!
https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-some-claims-examined
 

 

Sounds like the article was drafted by the secret invite only MQA Facebook society to put down all negative MQA views.

[NOMBEDES]

2BARROWS. Sez:

 

 2. MQA almost entirely requires consumers to purchase new hardware to take full advantage of it, when the complete "unfold"

 

~  I do not think anyone would go out and purchase MQA enabled equipment just to get MQA.   MQA will just be another feature and will be "in the box".     

[barrows]

30 minutes ago, NOMBEDES said:

~  I do not think anyone would go out and purchase MQA enabled equipment just to get MQA.   MQA will just be another feature and will be "in the box".  

Right now manufacturers are being pressured by customers to implement MQA; because they read in the journals about MQA's "amazing sound quality".  I do not know the exact licensing fees charged by MQA to add it to one's hardware (and if I did it would probably be under NDA) but I do know that the cost is significant.  This means DAC prices go up to add MQA or DAC performance goes down in other areas to save cost in order to have enough BOM room for the additional cost of MQA.

I would rather not have to pay more for a feature I will never use.

[mav52]

20 minutes ago, barrows said:

Right now manufacturers are being pressured by customers to implement MQA; because they read in the journals about MQA's "amazing sound quality".  I do not know the exact licensing fees charged by MQA to add it to one's hardware (and if I did it would probably be under NDA) but I do know that the cost is significant.  This means DAC prices go up to add MQA or DAC performance goes down in other areas to save cost in order to have enough BOM room for the additional cost of MQA.

I would rather not have to pay more for a feature I will never use.

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  ""

[GUTB]

The real reason why Schiit doesn’t implement MQA is because they’re on such tight margins with thier no-questions-asked return policy direct dealer model. They put out cheap gear in large quantities. The reason why they don’t implement DSD seems to just be lack of expertise.

 

Most of the high end is embracing MQA simply because thier clientele are much more demanding than Schiit’s or the standard Chinese shovelware users.

[Shadders]

56 minutes ago, GUTB said:

The real reason why Schiit doesn’t implement MQA is because they’re on such tight margins with thier no-questions-asked return policy direct dealer model. They put out cheap gear in large quantities. The reason why they don’t implement DSD seems to just be lack of expertise.

 

Most of the high end is embracing MQA simply because thier clientele are much more demanding than Schiit’s or the standard Chinese shovelware users.

Hi,

This is funny. Your tone towards those manufacturers against MQA, is derisory, similar to you calling people who challenge MQA, as haters. Yet, you are the person hating everyone against MQA.

 

Anyway, how do you know the margins for Schiit are tight. It could be that MQA Ltd are asking exorbitant amounts for implementing MQA, and Schiit choose not to pay that amount as it offers no value.

 

Anyway - if MQA does take off - someone will offer an optical in, and optical out, box that decodes MQA, so all manufacturers have to do is offer an extra optical in, on their box. Before you state that MQA needs to know the DAC IC in the DAC - it doesn't, as others have shown that everyone is treated the same regardless of the DAC manufacturer/IC - no special filtering for the "supposed" dispersion correction.

 

Regards,

Shadders.

[Samuel T Cogley]

58 minutes ago, GUTB said:

The real reason why Schiit doesn’t implement MQA is because they’re on such tight margins with thier no-questions-asked return policy direct dealer model.

 

Well, I just learned that you have no problem presenting sheer speculation as fact.  And I thought it was a "fact" that "GUTB will not steer you wrong". 

 

Before you get that foot any further down your throat, you should watch this.

 

 

 

[GUTB]

6 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

This is funny. Your tone towards those manufacturers against MQA, is derisory, similar to you calling people who challenge MQA, as haters. Yet, you are the person hating everyone against MQA.

 

Anyway, how do you know the margins for Schiit are tight. It could be that MQA Ltd are asking exorbitant amounts for implementing MQA, and Schiit choose not to pay that amount as it offers no value.

 

Anyway - if MQA does take off - someone will offer an optical in, and optical out, box that decodes MQA, so all manufacturers have to do is offer an extra optical in, on their box. Before you state that MQA needs to know the DAC IC in the DAC - it doesn't, as others have shown that everyone is treated the same regardless of the DAC manufacturer/IC - no special filtering for the "supposed" dispersion correction.

 

Regards,

Shadders.

 

Let's be real for half a second -- the real reason why the forums are generally against MQA is because of the cultural death of high-end audio. The interest in and pursuit of high-performance audio is in the pits -- culturally. Every show I've been to has been nothing but graying old and middle aged men. Millenials and gen Z seem to have little or no interest in it. There's older people on this thread but they are more or less just going along with the cultural norms online.

 

So it's "in" to pretend MQA is the enemy. Part in parcel with that is to dismiss quality gains. Anything but actually listen to it because we don't do that anymore in audio apparently.

[barrows]

1 hour ago, GUTB said:

The real reason why Schiit doesn’t implement MQA is because they’re on such tight margins with thier no-questions-asked return policy direct dealer model. They put out cheap gear in large quantities. The reason why they don’t implement DSD seems to just be lack of expertise.

 

Most of the high end is embracing MQA simply because thier clientele are much more demanding than Schiit’s or the standard Chinese shovelware users.

WOW!  I could not have foreseen a more transparent "shill" response for MQA if I imagined it myself.  Schitt is a disruptive and positive force in the audio industry (and no, I have never owned a Schitt product and I am not a Schiit fanboy).

As long as the "powers that be" in audio continue to champion ultra high priced gear, and nonsense like MQA, the industry will actually suffer.  Outsiders look at high end audio gear pricing and just laugh and laugh and they go away never to return.  This approach is killing the industry, as we are not attracting new audiophiles with it.

Schiit should be heralded for what they are doing, forcing companies to take a good look at their performance/value equation, while at the same time allowing  there to be a reasonable gateway product to true high end sounds and doing this while manufacturing in the US, amazing! 

[Shadders]

Just now, GUTB said:

So it's "in" to pretend MQA is the enemy. Part in parcel with that is to dismiss quality gains. Anything but actually listen to it because we don't do that anymore in audio apparently.

Hi,

No one is pretending MQA is the enemy. People are just presenting facts in opposition to any fiction about MQA.

Regards,

Shadders.

[Matias]

My stance on MQA: just ignore it and it will go away.

[Indydan]

1 hour ago, GUTB said:

The real reason why Schiit doesn’t implement MQA is because they’re on such tight margins with thier no-questions-asked return policy direct dealer model. They put out cheap gear in large quantities. The reason why they don’t implement DSD seems to just be lack of expertise.

 

Most of the high end is embracing MQA simply because thier clientele are much more demanding than Schiit’s or the standard Chinese shovelware users.

When I read your post, I enthusiastically looked for a downvote button. Sadly, there is none.

[GUTB]

1 minute ago, barrows said:

WOW!  I could not have foreseen a more transparent "shill" response for MQA if I imagined it myself.  Schitt is a disruptive and positive force in the audio industry (and no, I have never owned a Schitt product and I am not a Schiit fanboy).

As long as the "powers that be" in audio continue to champion ultra high priced gear, and nonsense like MQA, the industry will actually suffer.  Outsiders look at high end audio gear pricing and just laugh and laugh and they go away never to return.  this approach is killing the industry, as we are not attracting new audiophiles with it.

Schiit should be heralded for what they are doing, forcing companies to take a good look at their performance/value equation, while at the same time allowing  there to be a reasonable gateway product to true high end sounds and doing this while manufacturing in the US, amazing! 

 

Schiit doesn’t disrupt anything. They’re a market force because they appeal to millennial buyers by offering very low prices by offering low-cost products and cutting out the dealer network. A few of Schiit’s multibit DACs may be considered high-end in terms of performance but for the most part their products are firmly entry level.

 

There is a very depressing, self-defeating trend in high-end audio which caters solely to well-off empty nester middle aged men going through their mid-life crisis. High-end gear should be priced accordingly, obviously, but I think everyone agrees mortgaging your home to afford it is totally off the deep end. A D’Agostino Momentum is vastly superior to a Vidar, but 35 times the price better? Obviously, no...not even remotely. If that doesn’t slam the door in the face of a coffin-aparartment-living mellenial I don’t know what does.

[barrows]

1 minute ago, GUTB said:

There is a very depressing, self-defeating trend in high-end audio which caters solely to well-off empty nester middle aged men going through their mid-life crisis. High-end gear should be priced accordingly, obviously, but I think everyone agrees mortgaging your home to afford it is totally off the deep end. A D’Agostino Momentum is vastly superior to a Vidar, but 35 times the price better? Obviously, no...not even remotely. If that doesn’t slam the door in the face of a coffin-aparartment-living mellenial I don’t know what does.

Exactly, and this why Schiit should be praised.  I do not expect SOTA performance at their prices, of course, but they do offer very, very good performance and an incredible value.

Of course the pricing of gear like the Momentum you mention, and dCS, etc. is comparable to the ridiculous income differential we currently have in the US, equally offensive, unsustainable (as soon few of us will be able to spend money at all if we keep going this direction) and indefensible.

I really will not criticize the manufacturers for offering these absurdly priced products, as long as there is a market for them, but it is clear that one does not get an appreciable commensurate gain in actual performance with them vs. things at 1/10 the price (still fairly expensive).

[Indydan]

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."

 

 

[barrows]

2 minutes ago, Indydan said:

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. 

Yeah, and that design info is going to, a direct competitor, Meridian, nuts!

[Indydan]

8 minutes ago, barrows said:

Yeah, and that design info is going to, a direct competitor, Meridian, nuts!

 

This is the biggest shell game in audio, and some manufacturers have fallen for it. It is true that there is a sucker born every minute.

 

Let's look forward to seeing Meridian's new DACs; the Meridian Brokelyn and the Meridian Barkeley Dusign Alfa. 

[Shadders]

19 minutes ago, barrows said:

Exactly, and this why Schiit should be praised.  I do not expect SOTA performance at their prices, of course, but they do offer very, very good performance and an incredible value.

Of course the pricing of gear like the Momentum you mention, and dCS, etc. is comparable to the ridiculous income differential we currently have in the US, equally offensive, unsustainable (as soon few of us will be able to spend money at all if we keep going this direction) and indefensible.

I really will not criticize the manufacturers for offering these absurdly priced products, as long as there is a market for them, but it is clear that one does not get an appreciable commensurate gain in actual performance with them vs. things at 1/10 the price (still fairly expensive).

Hi,

As an aside, i do not see why SOTA cannot be purchased cheaply. Clock circuits with femto second jitter are available for less than £10, top of the range DAC IC - less than £20. Filters - build your own - using an FPGA - less than £20. Extremely fast, low distortion op-amps - less than £10.

Similar with amplifiers - components that actually amplify are cheap.

The SOTA systems use the same components as everyone else. They may have a nicer, unusual case, but that is about it.

Regards,

Shadders.

[Norton]

44 minutes ago, Shadders said:

 

No one is pretending MQA is the enemy. 

 

Other than those on this site who instantly label as a shill anyone seen to be remotely hesitating in condemning MQA.

 

And just for absolution, I have never heard MQA, don't stream, don't own an MQA dac or music, nor have any intention to.  I do though prefer reasoned debate from forum members prepared to admit the possibility of a different viewpoint, honestly held.

 

 

[semente]

34 minutes ago, Matias said:

My stance on MQA: just ignore it and it will go away.

 

Are you sure you mean MQA and not GUTB?

[semente]

40 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

Schiit doesn’t disrupt anything. They’re a market force because they appeal to millennial buyers by offering very low prices by offering low-cost products and cutting out the dealer network. A few of Schiit’s multibit DACs may be considered high-end in terms of performance but for the most part their products are firmly entry level.

 

There is a very depressing, self-defeating trend in high-end audio which caters solely to well-off empty nester middle aged men going through their mid-life crisis. High-end gear should be priced accordingly, obviously, but I think everyone agrees mortgaging your home to afford it is totally off the deep end. A D’Agostino Momentum is vastly superior to a Vidar, but 35 times the price better? Obviously, no...not even remotely. If that doesn’t slam the door in the face of a coffin-aparartment-living mellenial I don’t know what does.

 

With an S/N ratio of 80dB the Momentum is far from SOTA...not even in the 50s. But, yes, that's high-end.

[NOMBEDES]

2 hours ago, barrows said:

Right now manufacturers are being pressured by customers to implement MQA; because they read in the journals about MQA's "amazing sound quality".  I do not know the exact licensing fees charged by MQA to add it to one's hardware (and if I did it would probably be under NDA) but I do know that the cost is significant.  This means DAC prices go up to add MQA or DAC performance goes down in other areas to save cost in order to have enough BOM room for the additional cost of MQA.

I would rather not have to pay more for a feature I will never use.

 

Agree. I do not like to pay for features I do not use (I be lookin' at you Comcast) ~ anyway ~ I just can't see that many consumers running out to buy a new DAC just to get MQA, my DAC does DSD but I did not buy the DAC for that feature, and I don't think I have ever used it.   When you buy a new TV there has to be 10+ icons on the box, I doubt if 1 out of 9 consumers know what all of them represent.  

[GUTB]

6 minutes ago, semente said:

 

With an S/N ratio of 80dB the Momentum is far from SOTA...not even in the 50s. But, yes, that's high-end.

 

What does s/n have to do with anything?

[NOMBEDES]

13 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

As an aside, i do not see why SOTA cannot be purchased cheaply. Clock circuits with femto second jitter are available for less than £10, top of the range DAC IC - less than £20. Filters - build your own - using an FPGA - less than £20. Extremely fast, low distortion op-amps - less than £10.

Similar with amplifiers - components that actually amplify are cheap.

The SOTA systems use the same components as everyone else. They may have a nicer, unusual case, but that is about it.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

SOTA does not necessarily mean better components inside the box, it means building your component out of a solid block of metal, that milling cost money.

 

On the other hand:  

 

You should read how the $45K Pass phono amp (the X phono amp cost more than the $38K pre amp!) is constructed......they buff the insides of the wire holes in the high temperature ceramic composite circuit boards..etc etc..that cost money also.  Not $45K worth of course, but still.  (DAGOGO:  Pass Laboratories Xs Phono - Technical background by Wayne Colburn, Designer)