JVS Cheerleads an MQA CD..Sis Boom Bah!

[Spacehound]

48 minutes ago, Indydan said:

My post is probably borderline childish; but what's the deal with Lavorgna's avatar picture on Audiostream? He looks as if he is releasing a primal scream, or screaming in pain! 

 

Maybe playing another gig with his boy band will make him feel better!  

 

 

 

 

Typical old farts music - you could see it coming  

 

We find it only works on Curry Night in  a UK country pub. They are only 'miming' to a proper band anyway.

[Archimago]

2 hours ago, crenca said:

 

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 Crenca... Well, I'm surprised at your surprise of my surprise :-).

 

Yeah. Maybe some things are just irremediable... Will have to see. What is clear is that MQA has overstepped the "balance in the force" and stretched the disagreements between polarities:

 

- objectivism <--> subjectivism as ways of assessing truth, quality, fidelity, and goals in the hobby

- audiophile magazines <--> forums as sources of reliable information

- industry <--> consumer interests represented in viewpoints

 

IMO, magazines, certain web sites and individuals like Lavorgna are in an identity crisis of sorts brought on by their loyal to the Industry. Just what is his role in all of this other than being a cheerleader as there is little technical understanding he can offer, is unable to reasonably promote his viewpoints calmly, and as far as I can tell, no authoritative value in his comments?

 

His avatar and many of his posts over the last few months that I have seen I believe are representative of this as he projects what appears to be dismay and perhaps even anger in imagery and words.

[rickca]

3 minutes ago, Archimago said:

loyal to the Industry

Maybe it's this loyalty/cheerleading that gets him a continuous stream of products to review, invitations to launch events and briefings under NDA.  That is, until you lose your readership by blowing your credibility ... then your value as a messaging conduit is gone.

[Rt66indierock]

6 minutes ago, Archimago said:

 

Hey Crenca... Well, I'm surprised at your surprise of my surprise :-).

 

Yeah. Maybe some things are just irremediable... Will have to see. What is clear is that MQA has overstepped the "balance in the force" and stretched the disagreements between polarities:

 

- objectivism <--> subjectivism as ways of assessing truth, quality, fidelity, and goals in the hobby

- audiophile magazines <--> forums as sources of reliable information

- industry <--> consumer interests represented in viewpoints

 

IMO, magazines, certain web sites and individuals like Lavorgna are in an identity crisis of sorts brought on by their loyal to the Industry. Just what is his role in all of this other than being a cheerleader as there is little technical understanding he can offer, is unable to reasonably promote his viewpoints calmly, and as far as I can tell, no authoritative value in his comments?

 

His avatar and many of his posts over the last few months that I have seen I believe are representative of this as he projects what appears to be dismay and perhaps even anger in imagery and words.

 

There is something like an identity crisis going on I see it in the press reaction to me at shows. There is confusion in the industry because of our reaction to MQA but many see the pendulum swinging back towards more objectivity as a good thing. 

[mansr]

17 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

There is something like an identity crisis going on I see it in the press reaction to me at shows. There is confusion in the industry because of our reaction to MQA but many see the pendulum swinging back towards more objectivity as a good thing. 

Anyone not in the snake oil business should appreciate a more objective approach.

[Rt66indierock]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

Anyone not in the snake oil business should appreciate a more objective approach.

 

Agreed I do try to avoid the more obvious snake oil folks.

[Archimago]

6 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

There is something like an identity crisis going on I see it in the press reaction to me at shows. There is confusion in the industry because of our reaction to MQA but many see the pendulum swinging back towards more objectivity as a good thing. 

 

Good to hear Rt66. Man, you get around :-). It's about time a more objective thinking permeates the hobby after all these years of the cult-of-personalities and their hierarchies of authority figures. I'm sure it's rather obvious to the guy on the street that audio technology is applied science/engineering and doesn't approach anything close to the boundaries of theoretical quantum this or that! And while there is much to learn in the neurosciences, there's no reason to think the neural network architecture is capable of miraculous feats of perception beyond the measurement limits of current objective analysis.

 

Subjective preference is another matter of course given idiosyncratic determinants of what is "pleasurable"; but that's not what we're arguing about with MQA being able to provide "the sound of the studio" and claims of "there's a problem with digital - it's called blurring"!

 

8 minutes ago, rickca said:

Maybe it's this loyalty/cheerleading that gets him a continuous stream of products to review, invitations to launch events and briefings under NDA.  That is, until you lose your readership by blowing your credibility ... then your value as a messaging conduit is gone.

 

Maybe. But as you alluded to, it's only as good as the readership remains faithful to the message. Credibility, like respect, honor, trustworthiness do need to be earned over time. They cannot be bestowed - and certainly not because one knows Bob Stuart or have his business card handy :-).

 

[rickca]

They took all the trees and put them in a tree museum

And they charged the people a dollar and a half just to see them

Joni Mitchell

 

This is the MQA plan to regain control of distribution.  Most people won't even realize what we've lost till its gone.

[crenca]

1 hour ago, Archimago said:

 

Hey Crenca... Well, I'm surprised at your surprise of my surprise :-).

 

Yeah. Maybe some things are just irremediable... Will have to see. What is clear is that MQA has overstepped the "balance in the force" and stretched the disagreements between polarities:

 

- objectivism <--> subjectivism as ways of assessing truth, quality, fidelity, and goals in the hobby

- audiophile magazines <--> forums as sources of reliable information

- industry <--> consumer interests represented in viewpoints

 

IMO, magazines, certain web sites and individuals like Lavorgna are in an identity crisis of sorts brought on by their loyal to the Industry....

 

1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

There is something like an identity crisis going on I see it in the press reaction to me at shows. There is confusion in the industry because of our reaction to MQA but many see the pendulum swinging back towards more objectivity as a good thing. 

 

I agree Archimago, MQA has proved to a bridge too far even for this industry, this culture of Audiophiledom.  In the terms I have used, Bob Stuart broke the rules of the confidence game with what is nothing other than an old fashioned overreach.  This has attracted unwanted attention to certain details that the culture of confidence relies on not being unexamined.  A Ted Denney is but one room in a large mansion and lends a bit of fun to the whole enterprise (or as Stereophile describes, his "excellent adventure").  MQA on the other hand reached into every room. This is the "identity crisis" to which you both refer.

 

However (and lending support to my argument that this culture is irremediable, at least in the short/medium term) the two big trade publications have essentially doubled down on MQA.  Why?  I think they have seen this movie before and have confidence in the resiliency of the Audiophile culture in general and the confidence game in particular.  I think they are largely correct - the only thing that can and will change Audiophiledom is mortality/demographics 

[crenca]

2 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

delete

[james45974]

35 minutes ago, crenca said:

However (and lending support to my argument that this culture is irremediable, at least in the short/medium term) the two big trade publications have essentially doubled down on MQA.  Why?  I think they have seen this movie before and have confidence in the resiliency of the Audiophile culture in general and the confidence game in particular.  I think they are largely correct - the only thing that can and will change Audiophiledom is mortality/demographics 

 

And in this change add the possibility of neither of the two trade publication being in paper for too much longer!  Yes demographics are changing, I would hate to see the average age of their paper reader.  And ML & JA are not spring chickens either! 

 

You would think the confidence game would be easier to put down in the digital age but it seems like it is even more pervasive.

[Archimago]

1 hour ago, crenca said:

 

 

I agree Archimago, MQA has proved to a bridge too far even for this industry, this culture of Audiophiledom.  In the terms I have used, Bob Stuart broke the rules of the confidence game with what is nothing other than an old fashioned overreach.  This has attracted unwanted attention to certain details that the culture of confidence relies on not being unexamined.  A Ted Denney is but one room in a large mansion and lends a bit of fun to the whole enterprise (or as Stereophile describes, his "excellent adventure").  MQA on the other hand reached into every room. This is the "identity crisis" to which you both refer.

 

However (and lending support to my argument that this culture is irremediable, at least in the short/medium term) the two big trade publications have essentially doubled down on MQA.  Why?  I think they have seen this movie before and have confidence in the resiliency of the Audiophile culture in general and the confidence game in particular.  I think they are largely correct - the only thing that can and will change Audiophiledom is mortality/demographics 

 

Well then... Let's see what "doubling down" gets them.

 

I dunno, I actually think the traditional Audiophile Culture is already very weak with little to support these "old skool" kinds of audiophile beliefs. I think the actual numbers who would be strongly interested in the tweaky, expensive pseudoscience products ($$$$$ cables, Ted Denney "The Third" types, etc.) are very small already. By continuing to grow the Internet Audiophile Culture with more objective thought and reasonable insights, I think this will go much further in promoting this hobby than whatever "power" the trade publications think they have. And if the hobby goes away from "high end" products, so be it... There will always be folks interested in good gear, good sound, and good music. While the magazines are great for colorful pictures, entertaining anecdotes, product announcements, I don't think many in the hobby take them seriously any more as reliable, factual sources of information. Already the Internet provides more timely content with much better interactivity and drama .

 

And as you say, each year that goes by, mortality/morbidity/hearing loss will take their claim of the older generation (just stating reality, not wishing anyone ill health).

 

Now as for MQA. Hopefully this ends soon... I doubt the industry will try anything to court DRM through the audiophile media for awhile after this PR disaster which has done nothing good for the mainstream audiophile media's reputation. (Yes, I remain optimistic .)

 

[crenca]

One detail that has me not quite as optimistic as you @Archimago is the taste for MQA on the Roon forum.  Roon strikes me as a product that would attract a good number of the traditional subjectivised audiophile, but I would expect at least half (if not an outright majority) of the customers would be a more modern, "digitally aware" customer.  Yet, my reading of the temp in the room is that at least 2/3 rds are quite positive on MQA.  Roon blames their users for having to accommodate MQA in their code, and I believe them.  I suppose it is time for that Brian Lucey quote again:

 

"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."  

[Fluffytime]

5 hours ago, Indydan said:

My post is probably borderline childish; but what's the deal with Lavorgna's avatar picture on Audiostream? He looks as if he is releasing a primal scream, or screaming in pain! 

 

Maybe playing another gig with his boy band will make him feel better!  

 

 

 

 

Uhm... Is this video supposed to be an attempt at comedy?

[Archimago]

1 hour ago, crenca said:

One detail that has me not quite as optimistic as you @Archimago is the taste for MQA on the Roon forum.  Roon strikes me as a product that would attract a good number of the traditional subjectivised audiophile, but I would expect at least half (if not an outright majority) of the customers would be a more modern, "digitally aware" customer.  Yet, my reading of the temp in the room is that at least 2/3 rds are quite positive on MQA.  Roon blames their users for having to accommodate MQA in their code, and I believe them.  I suppose it is time for that Brian Lucey quote again:

 

"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."  

 

Interesting with Roon.

 

However, I think because there is quite the integration with Tidal and since one has either paid $499 lifetime or $119/year for Roon plus Tidal monthly fee, I suspect the customer basically wants to access all that Tidal has to offer for their money's worth. Whether ultimately he/she notices a significant difference with MQA decoding is to be seen.

 

I suspect once MQA Core "unfolding" is rolled out, it'll likely be "been there, done that...", "what's next?" for the customers. Just the nature of the human psychology...

 

Hmmm... I wonder how much it will cost to license MQA decoding for developers like Roon?

 

[Kimo]

I have tried reading along on the pros and cons, but I guess I am more confused now then when i started.

 

From what I can tell, MQA adds processing and lowers resolution, but might sound better because it reduces timing errors? 

 

Maybe, I am way off here, but if that is the case, why don't I just truncate everything to 16 bits and run it all through a NOS ladder dac?  Wouldn't that effectively do the same thing? 

[Spacehound]

16 hours ago, Fluffytime said:

 

Uhm... Is this video supposed to be an attempt at comedy?

No, it make them  look silly, which they don't realise.

 

One's faking  Tourettes syndrome  and the music you hear is coming from somebody else's recording. 

[eclectic]

17 hours ago, crenca said:

One detail that has me not quite as optimistic as you @Archimago is the taste for MQA on the Roon forum.  Roon strikes me as a product that would attract a good number of the traditional subjectivised audiophile, but I would expect at least half (if not an outright majority) of the customers would be a more modern, "digitally aware" customer.  Yet, my reading of the temp in the room is that at least 2/3 rds are quite positive on MQA.  Roon blames their users for having to accommodate MQA in their code, and I believe them.  I suppose it is time for that Brian Lucey quote again:

 

"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."  

 

I've also noticed that at the Roon forums. I made a few posts critical of MQA and a few regulars piled in to disagree. There are quite a few fanboys who will attack anyone who is in any way critical of any decisions made by Roonlabs.

 

Also, Jim Austin has been quietly pushing a pro MQA agenda on the forum. 

[Spacehound]

12 minutes ago, eclectic said:

 

I've also noticed that at the Roon forums. I made a few posts critical of MQA and a few regulars piled in to disagree. There are quite a few fanboys who will attack anyone who is in any way critical of any decisions made by Roonlabs.

 

Also, Jim Austin has been quietly pushing a pro MQA agenda on the forum. 

Anyone who pays their high  monthly subscription or pays 350 or so dollars in advance to an outfit that only exists at all  because of Meridian  shutting down their Sooloos  failure and  could go bust next week is likely to defend  their choice.

 

For what? So you can find out that  one  of the guys you hear now was 32nd assistant under-drummer twenty years ago  on a record you have never heard of. 

[plissken]

On 2/19/2018 at 11:19 AM, The Computer Audiophile said:

@Brinkman Ship You're causing me to receive emails about potential copyright violations. Please stop copy / pasting entire articles form other sites. Just use the snippets that matter to make your point.

 

There needs to be a primer on how to properly cite source material.... 

 

The issue is that even if that is done to standard I think you will still receive those notices because there are people that are making sure it's turned in because on their own forum they can simply silence people with the ban hammer, and on others they can simply DMCA you.

 

I never thought I would end up seeing the day for forum would need an attorney on retainer to push back at the industry trade people that are most likely stooping to this level.

[plissken]

On 2/19/2018 at 11:41 AM, John_Atkinson said:

 

Thank you Chris.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

 

You're a real piece of work John. 

[plissken]

Here is the EFF page in IP and Fair Use. I say use it and then tell J.A. and Stereophile to go pound salt. 

[Spacehound]

5 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

You're a real piece of work John. 

He seems to have vanished.  I await his replacement.

 

Yet another duck for the beginner's shooting gallery.      Pull!        

[plissken]

Quoted from 

First Major-Label MQA CD: Steve Reich on Nonesuch. Jason Victor Serinus. 2/19/2018

 

Quote

When played as 24/96 FLAC without MQA, the sound is extremely clear and direct. While well-suited to conveying the complex, shifting patterns that are central to Reich's music, the music sounds somewhat dry and studio-bound. (I can't resist noting the irony of a recording that was made at Air Studios, Lyndhurst Hall, London, and mixed by John Kilgore in New York, sounding dry and airless.) Switch to MQA (mastered by Robert C. Ludwig in Portland, ME), and everything opens up.

Let's tease the obvious issues apart:

 

There are two RE-mastering studios: Air studios, Lyndhust Hall, London and Ludwig in Portland, ME. 

 

So here is the other issue: What format was delivered to these to mastering engineers? This would be a good place to start.

 

Then who was the original MIXING engineer? 

 

Another issue is the appeal to authority and it's shortcoming and that is

Quote

"I can't resist noting the irony of a recording that was made at Air Studios, Lyndhurst Hall, London, and mixed by John Kilgore in New York, sounding dry and airless."

 

So what JVS is doing at this point is saying that no matter the source tracks provided, no matter that somehow John Kilgore's work, allusionaly bespoke, has been great in the past, but somehow now doesn't have any of the 'magic'. 

 

And for J.A and to protect CA and Chris from his shenanigans: 

 

 

Under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research.

 

 

 

 

[Brinkman Ship]

14 minutes ago, plissken said:

Quoted from 

First Major-Label MQA CD: Steve Reich on Nonesuch. Jason Victor Serinus. 2/19/2018

 

Let's tease the obvious issues apart:

 

There are two RE-mastering studios: Air studios, Lyndhust Hall, London and Ludwig in Portland, ME. 

 

So here is the other issue: What format was delivered to these to mastering engineers? This would be a good place to start.

 

Then who was the original MIXING engineer? 

 

Another issue is the appeal to authority and it's shortcoming and that is

 

So what JVS is doing at this point is saying that no matter the source tracks provided, no matter that somehow John Kilgore's work, allusionaly bespoke, has been great in the past, but somehow now doesn't have any of the 'magic'. 

 

And for J.A and to protect CA and Chris from his shenanigans: 

 

 

Under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research.

 

 

 

 

Just to clarify for accuracy.

 

There were not 3 RE Mastering studios. There was the original recording venue/studio, a studio used to mix, and then a studio used to master.

 

When Ludwig was done, and felt "something else" was needed (cough, cough..) he sent it out to the Magic MQA Factory to be "de-blurred". There are NO MASTERING TOOLS for MQA. It is post processing DSP that is lossy. His story is so absurd, considering that with 40 years in the business and with every conceivable state of the art tool at his disposal, running it through a crappy software algorithm puts the final special sauce. To say the credibility of this premise is stretched to the limit is an understatement.

 

So-

Recording done in London, Mix done in New York, and Mastering done in Portland, ME.

 

In fact we don't know how many ADCs were used..was mixed in the box? Converted to analog then back to digital Same for the mastering.

 

The whole premise of "de-blurring" is so preposterous is gives me a good laugh daily.