Jump to content
IGNORED

JVS Cheerleads an MQA CD..Sis Boom Bah!


Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, randyhat said:

When I read all of these MQA threads and see the anger, commitment and passion that so many have over this issue I realize I am not taking this hobby seriously enough.

Actually MQA has little to do with this hobby..it has much larger implications..there are serious anit-consumer forces at play, and all music lovers should be seriously concerned. The fact that it is another bottle of high end audio snake oil is secondary.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Brinkman Ship said:

JVS has had to correct him self numerous times after his initial post because he literally just made stuff up.

 

Here is is latest embarrassment-A PORTION of his last comment.

 

"Mastering Engineer Robert Ludwig explains to me that the way records are made follows this progression: Recording, mixing, mastering, and distribution. While the non-MQA files sounded a bit dry to me, Bob thought the sound "lovely and totally appropriate to the music.

 

For the record, John Kilgore mixed the two pieces with Grammy Award-winning producer Judith Sherman and Steve Reich sitting right next to him. Both approved the mix, and were happy with what they heard. Bob says, "As usual, I try to take everything that is given to me and make it sound better. So I mastered it as I have done for every Nonesuch project in my career." In other words, every mix of this recording has been mastered by Bob.He continues, "After mastering it, I thought that there was one more thing that it needed, and that was something I cannot do by myself, and that was to have MQA de-blur added to it."

https://www.stereophile.com/content/first-major-label-mqa-cd-steve-reich-nonsesuch#wa5wjBWkgg4AHMoo.03

 

We have a definitive statement that Bob Ludwig did NOT IN FACT "master" the MQA version. There ARE NO MASTERING TOOLS FOR MQA.

 

He had to have the process done AFTER THE FACT..to the files that the artist and production team PREVIOUSLY approved.

 

MQA is a total lie and it is ADDITIONAL UNNECESSARY PROCESSING. 

 

 

 

You just forgot to include the lines where BL says he had it sent away for MQA processing b/c he knew it would improve the sound, and it did. 

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Rexp said:

Thanks for the feedback, I can enjoy the whole album in MQA, sadly I can barely get through one track in flac, cheers

So you like stuff distorted. That's all anyone can say really. 

 

PS: Flac? You could just try a record you like of course. I do that sometimes.

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, firedog said:

You just forgot to include the lines where BL says he had it sent away for MQA processing b/c he knew it would improve the sound, and it did. 

Did not forget a thing..remember, I can only paste a "portion" of any comment other wise the crybabies complain.

 

And in fact, it did not improve the sound, that is a fabrication. Ludwig claimed "mastered for iTunes" improved the sound.

 

 

Link to comment
27 minutes ago, firedog said:

tYou just forgot to include the lines where BL says he had it sent away for MQA processing b/c he knew it would improve the sound, and it did. 

Not quite.

It was performed in London. The 'mixed' and 'mastered' and approved (liked in fact) by the performers,  result was sent several thousand miles some time later and some guy  sat all by himself altered it to his personal preferences, stuck MQA on top and played  it to some suits. Who nodded their heads.

 

How does that 'improve' the 'sound quality'? It doesn't, it makes it worse as he changed it from the original to something the performers never heard at all. Which is just his  personal ego trip.

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, church_mouse said:

No problem.  It was an interesting listen.

 

Do you find all other non-MQA redbook flac so barely listenable or just this one?

Right from the start all his questions and comments were loaded in favour of MQA.

I think  about that. Do you? He  can hold whatever opinions he wants. But starting with two loaded questions, adding loaded comments when he has the 'results',  then asking at least one more loaded question, then  again loading the answer he got make me deeply suspicious.

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Still,th prforExactly. No one in the room during the final mix gave a toss or a micro second of consideration to MQA.

 

Let's look at the logic of this claim about MQA..Golden Ears Ludwig masters it to everyone's satisfaction at 24/96.then sends it off the the MQA Magic Factory, which through out bits and caused aliasing, to 'deblur".

 

If anyone believes that it sounded better,  and is a superior product to the pure master, well then....what a farce.

Still, the performers had a nice trip, see the changing of the guard, drink some warm beer, meet some naughty ladies (or men depending on their SO), listen to people whingeing about the EU,  whatever,

Link to comment
50 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Exactly. No one in the room during the final mix gave a toss or a micro second of consideration to MQA.

 

Let's look at the logic of this claim about MQA..Golden Ears Ludwig masters it to everyone's satisfaction at 24/96.then sends it off the the MQA Magic Factory, which through out bits and caused aliasing, to 'deblur".

 

If anyone believes that it sounded better,  and is a superior product to the pure master, well then....what a farce.

Part of my point was that Ludwig says it sounded better:

I could tell that the MQA was going to help it a lot, and it did! As usual, an engineer does their very best to make the best musical product they can make. Then in this case, a piece of technology does something that nothing else can do! It is quite remarkable."\
 

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, firedog said:

Part of my point was that Ludwig says it sounded better:

I could tell that the MQA was going to help it a lot, and it did! As usual, an engineer does their very best to make the best musical product they can make. Then in this case, a piece of technology does something that nothing else can do! It is quite remarkable."\
 

Nothing remarkable about screwing things up.

Link to comment
26 minutes ago, firedog said:

Part of my point was that Ludwig says it sounded better:

I could tell that the MQA was going to help it a lot, and it did! As usual, an engineer does their very best to make the best musical product they can make. Then in this case, a piece of technology does something that nothing else can do! It is quite remarkable."\
 

I understood your point, and I would say IN MY OPINION he is a compensated liar.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Brinkman Ship said:

I understood your point, and I would say IN MY OPINION he is a compensated liar.

 

Perhaps I'm missing something. I'm wondering how well-founded you believe this opinion is and specifically why? How high is your confidence in the accuracy of this opinion?

 

I'm also wondering how other members would evaluate the degree of credibility this opinion has and why? That is, if anyone would care to respond.

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

Perhaps I'm missing something. I'm wondering how well-founded you believe this opinion is and specifically why? How high is your confidence in the accuracy of this opinion?

 

I'm also wondering how other members would evaluate the degree of credibility this opinion has and why? That is, if anyone would care to respond.

Perhaps I'm missing something. I'm wondering how you feel about the topic of thread?

 

Anything you post that has nothing to do with the topic, will BE IGNORED.

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Perhaps I'm missing something. I'm wondering how you feel about the topic of thread?

 

Anything you post that has nothing to do with the topic, will BE IGNORED.

 

 

Yes you are the OP. I have responded to a statement that you made and politely requested further clarification and qualification of that statement, and invited others to respond. 

 

As to ignoring, there is an "ignore"option here.

 

I will continue to raise questions that are relevant and appropriate to the best of my understanding. We may disagree on what questions are relevant and appropriate. It is my understanding that on this forum, these things can be discussed. Perhaps Chris Connaker can weigh in on this.

 

I do have a follow-up question related to your post, but it might be a bit sensitive, so I'd like to take a little more time to time to formulate it carefully.

 

 

Link to comment
32 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

Ooo,oooo pick me pick me!! :)

 

Seriously,  Bob Ludwig has been an early "supporter", is featured in MQA adds, videos, social media site promotions, etc.

 

I have no way of knowing if he is directly compensated.  I do know that the culture of this industry very very often "cross pollinates" as it were - so and so "respected" individual says this about this piece of gear, this technique, this recording.

 

All this adds up to me of a reasonable assumption of some kind of quid pro quo.  Even if it is not direct monetary exchange, it is at the very least exposure for both parties and gives the trade publications and web sites (including this one) something to talk about.  This sort of $free$ exposure is often accounted to be very worthwhile.  Also, in the relatively small market/community of Audiophiledom this sort of stuff seems to be part of many successful ventures and individuals.

 

I rate my confidence in the "accuracy of this opinion" high.  I believe it in essence to be not only correct, but all rather obvious to all but the most casual observers.  If a detail here or there is incorrect, it does not change the larger picture significantly.

 

"MQA has been targeting the weakest players in our world, the audiophiles.  And they’re targeting those most dependent on pimping new tech, the audiophile press. "  Brian Lucey, Fair Hedon interview 11/17

 

 

 

Thanks for weighing in. If you don't mind I may follow up on your post with a few questions tomorrow.

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...