Jump to content
IGNORED

JVS Cheerleads an MQA CD..Sis Boom Bah!


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

Back to the topic I typed MQA cd in Google and sorted by past week. First is Stereophile of course but second is this thread. Carry on.


MQA CD will be even more rare than DTS CD

There's a chance MQA CD behaves like how it behaves in our 24 bit to 16 bit truncating topic:

1. the data for the first unfold is no longer there (as it has been truncated)

2. MQA decoding of the truncated version will still generate some fake ultrasonic content between 20 and 26 Khz because of their leaky filters, which some may misread as actual content. We measured the truncated MQA files after decoding, audio from the baseband is aliased into the ultrasonics.

3. it will still upsample to the original resolution as dictated in the control stream, so customers will believe they get 24/352.8K from a redbook CD

We would need to get our hands on an MQA CD and then the 24 bit MQA distribution file of the same track, to see if the redbook version was basically truncated, and their truncating behaves like our own truncating, or if they use a different encoding scheme for MQA CD.

The fact that there are so few MQA CD's may suggest they took the very easy route: truncating 24 bits to 16 bits.

Designer of the 432 EVO music server and Linux specialist

Discoverer of the independent open source sox based mqa playback method with optional one cycle postringing.

Link to comment
27 minutes ago, FredericV said:


MQA CD will be even more rare than DTS CD

There's a chance MQA CD behaves like how it behaves in our 24 bit to 16 bit truncating topic:

1. the data for the first unfold is no longer there (as it has been truncated)

2. MQA decoding of the truncated version will still generate some fake ultrasonic content between 20 and 26 Khz because of their leaky filters, which some may misread as actual content. We measured the truncated MQA files after decoding, audio from the baseband is aliased into the ultrasonics.

3. it will still upsample to the original resolution as dictated in the control stream, so customers will believe they get 24/352.8K from a redbook CD

We would need to get our hands on an MQA CD and then the 24 bit MQA distribution file of the same track, to see if the redbook version was basically truncated, and their truncating behaves like our own truncating, or if they use a different encoding scheme for MQA CD.

The fact that there are so few MQA CD's may suggest they took the very easy route: truncating 24 bits to 16 bits.

 

I guess step one is to for me to buy this MQA CD tonight and start to find out.

Link to comment

MQA CD is laughable. The main reason it is silly to bring out a new CD type format, is that CD sales are going down like a rocket. Also,  some manufacturers (probably most I would expect) are not developing any new CD players. A few years from now, there might not be very many new CD players available for purchase. 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Indydan said:

MQA CD is laughable. The main reason it is silly to bring out a new CD type format, is that CD sales are going down like a rocket. Also,  some manufacturers (probably most I would expect) are not developing any new CD players. A few years from now, there might not be very many new CD players available for purchase. 

 

Japan is different. I was reminded of this when Michael L questioned whether I really had Bob Stuarts contact information yesterday. The back of his business card was partially in Japanese.  People are still listening to CDs there. He questioned whether people who oppose MQA have met Bob Stuart and discussed conspiracy theories. I told him I've met Bob and how can something be a conspiracy when what I wrote has been read by a large number of people . 

 

 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Japan is different. I was reminded of this when Michael L questioned whether I really had Bob Stuarts contact information yesterday. The back of his business card was partially in Japanese.  People are still listening to CDs there. He questioned whether people who oppose MQA have met Bob Stuart and discussed conspiracy theories. I told him I've met Bob and how can something be a conspiracy when what I wrote has been read by a large number of people . 

 

 

 

Very true, Japan is different. That still amounts to a small market all things considered.

 

You had a little debate with Michael Lavorgna yesterday? Is this in an Internet forum ? If so, I would very much like the link. 

 

I just hate the fact that MQA sycophants, call the solid technical arguments put forth against MQA, "conspiracy theories". 

Link to comment
20 minutes ago, Indydan said:

 

Very true, Japan is different. That still amounts to a small market all things considered.

 

You had a little debate with Michael Lavorgna yesterday? Is this in an Internet forum ? If so, I would very much like the link. 

 

I just hate the fact that MQA sycophants, call the solid technical arguments put forth against MQA, "conspiracy theories". 

 

AudioStream "Is MQA DRM?" (page 2) I'll address Steve Plaskin's comments on Audio Asylum. Starting with rewrite your SOtm sMS-200 so its only wrong and we'll talk. That talk will be about just who is hurting the industry. 

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

AudioStream "Is MQA DRM?" (page 2) I'll address Steve Plaskin's comments on Audio Asylum. Starting with rewrite your SOtm sMS-200 so its only wrong and we'll talk. That talk will be about just who is hurting the industry. 

 

If you don't mind, I will post a copy paste of the exchange. Atkinson will probably scream copyright infringement. I will let Chris decide if that is the case. If Chris has to delete my post, no hard feelings from me :-)

 

 

Until I know exactly...
Submitted by Michael Lavorgna on February 22, 2018 - 7:27pm
...how near you are to Bob Stuart's contact info, I don't believe a word you say.

;-)

Well
Submitted by rt66indierock on February 23, 2018 - 8:24am

I have Bob Stuart’s business card between my wrists as I write this. On the English side his name is in the upper left corner with a gold underline. The MQA logo and website address is in the lower right corner.

The other side has what I think are Japanese characters in the upper left corner and same MQA logo and website address as the front in the lower right corner.

Oh. My. God!
Submitted by Michael Lavorgna on February 23, 2018 - 9:09am
Say it ain't so!

You clearly are an authority ;-)


Read more at https://www.audiostream.com/content/mqa-drm#jjB4KURwpaCwGe4w.99

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Indydan said:

 

If you don't mind, I will post a copy paste of the exchange. Atkinson will probably scream copyright infringement. I will let Chris decide if that is the case. If Chris has to delete my post, no hard feelings from me :-)

 

 

Until I know exactly...
Submitted by Michael Lavorgna on February 22, 2018 - 7:27pm
...how near you are to Bob Stuart's contact info, I don't believe a word you say.

;-)

Well
Submitted by rt66indierock on February 23, 2018 - 8:24am

I have Bob Stuart’s business card between my wrists as I write this. On the English side his name is in the upper left corner with a gold underline. The MQA logo and website address is in the lower right corner.

The other side has what I think are Japanese characters in the upper left corner and same MQA logo and website address as the front in the lower right corner.

Oh. My. God!
Submitted by Michael Lavorgna on February 23, 2018 - 9:09am
Say it ain't so!

You clearly are an authority ;-)


Read more at https://www.audiostream.com/content/mqa-drm#jjB4KURwpaCwGe4w.99

I don't think links infringe copyright - they are the 'original'. And they like people to see their nonsense.

 

And if they want they can  prevent links from other sites.(Even if you are over 18 years old :))

Link to comment
8 hours ago, Archimago said:

 

Maybe there's more in the earlier part of the exchange not posted here (not interested enough in Lavorgna's views to find out). I find it fascinating in that exchange that having the contact information or some kind of link to BS implies anything at all! I don't even see why to "believe a word you say" is contingent at all on knowledge of BS's particulars.

 

The problem is that I assume Lavorgna believes the only truth must be that which comes from BS's mouth or some official word from MQA. This is rather disturbing. Highly "faith based" in nature as if appealing to a "higher authority"  and orthodoxy of the Pope himself; anyone else not of that faith or dares question the papal decrees should be literally "excommunicated" and ignored.

 

Archimago, I am surprised at your surprise!  (not really - just riffing off your post :) )

 

In Audiophiledom, the ground of all knowledge and experience is high subjectivised.  Thus, the subject is the source of truth, not any kind of measured objective reality (known physics and engineering reality & principles, etc.).  ML and the like do not have confidence in just anyone (RT66, etc.) - the hierarchy of expertise is a relatively small group of subjects within their world, most of whom are industry insiders upstream from themselves in the industry.  This is their criteria of truth of everything related to Audiophiledom (and if the truth were ever told, their whole lives are probably lived this way).

 

One of the interesting consequences (there are many) of the above is that these folks can not imagine a Bernie Madoff like conspiracy where someone comes in with expert knowledge of the culture and invents a product that seeming gives a little something to everyone like MQA (i.e. DRM to labels, SQ boost to audiophiles, convenience/bandwidth savings to average consumers, end to end, etc. etc.).  They can not imagine it because they do not have a criteria from which to judge except the larger paradigm of subjectivism that leads to the con in the first place.  It's like asking me beat Michael Jordan in a game of one on one, or a child to reason like a man - it is not in their nature.

 

Circling back around to our conversation about Audiophiledom and the rehabilitation of the term "audiophile" (from a week or so ago), I don't think it can be done, or would be worthwhile even if it could.  Sometimes terms/symbols become too "loaded" to be useful anymore.  Imagine trying to rehabilitate the swastika!!  Extreme example I know, but I think we have to be realistic about the culture of modern Audiophiledom (say, since 1980).  IMO, the shift that the personal audio crowd is bringing into this hobby (objective truth criteria, an expectation of value, etc.) is going to eventually roll audiophiledom into the grave...

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
11 hours ago, Indydan said:

In that exchange between Lavorgna and RT66, Lavorgna tries to discredit RT66 by doubting his contact with Stuart. He adds a wink emoji as if he's joking. Plan A: He can then be happy he has shut RT66 up if RT66 stops posting, or claim he was being sarcastic if RT66 provides evidence (because of the wink emoji), that is Plan B. This is a classic two faced manipulation technique: set up a binary result that results in a win or win for the manipulator. 

 

Well, except for when people realize what the two faced manipulator is trying to do. 

 

And when RT66 provides evidence he has Stuart's contact info, Lavorgna goes to plan B (as planned) and makes a snarky remark to discredit RT66, as if the initial premise he himself put forward (RT66 did not have Stuart's contact info) was not really important. 

 

Don't forget he lost the original arguments. If there is no DRM you can't stop me from cloning it because MQA Ltd would have to show that I circumvented the DRM to protect their rights or if there is DRM they would have to disclose it to stop me. Meaning every statement made  that MQA has no DRM is untrue.  And how can anybody say there is a conspiracy about MQA and DRM? I started writing about it January 2, 2017 and lots of people have read it (thanks everyone) nothing secretive about it Michael you just didn't read it.

 

 

Link to comment
12 hours ago, Indydan said:

 

If you don't mind, I will post a copy paste of the exchange. Atkinson will probably scream copyright infringement. I will let Chris decide if that is the case. If Chris has to delete my post, no hard feelings from me :-)

 

 

Until I know exactly...
Submitted by Michael Lavorgna on February 22, 2018 - 7:27pm
...how near you are to Bob Stuart's contact info, I don't believe a word you say.

;-)

Well
Submitted by rt66indierock on February 23, 2018 - 8:24am

I have Bob Stuart’s business card between my wrists as I write this. On the English side his name is in the upper left corner with a gold underline. The MQA logo and website address is in the lower right corner.

The other side has what I think are Japanese characters in the upper left corner and same MQA logo and website address as the front in the lower right corner.

Oh. My. God!
Submitted by Michael Lavorgna on February 23, 2018 - 9:09am
Say it ain't so!

You clearly are an authority ;-)


Read more at https://www.audiostream.com/content/mqa-drm#jjB4KURwpaCwGe4w.99

An Audiostream/Lavorgna article yesterday: 

"Forget the cable is an electronic filter (completely in the face of science)"

I stopped reading at that point.

 

Atkinson? He seems to have vanished like the rest of his ilk. If so we await his inevitable replacement.

 

"Next duck for the beginner's shooting gallery    Pull!"

 

 

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...