MQA The Truth lies Somewhere in the Middle

[lucretius]

32 minutes ago, crenca said:

 So the middle becomes the only place anyone would want to be. 

 

False equivalence.

[lucretius]

4 hours ago, rickca said:

MQA is like a sandwich.  The baloney is somewhere in the middle.  MQA is the mystery meat of high res.

 

Am I going to need my baloney detection kit?

[lucretius]

50 minutes ago, crenca said:

Hans Beekhuyzen??

 

Hans Beekhuyzen, John Darko, Srajan Ebaen  --  good examples demonstrating the hard of hearing can find employment.

[lucretius]

1 hour ago, ARQuint said:

A question worth asking is why the MQA people felt that they could and should be as aggressive as they were.

 

 

That public display of aggressiveness is bad for business. Wouldn't smiling, helpful folk be better for the MQA image?

[lucretius]

9 hours ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Consultants never met stupid, greedy, incompetent, and soiciopathic corporate executives they didn’t love.

 

Their livelihood depends on it.

[lucretius]

10 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

3.  Ken has an issue with Archimago being anonymous.  I am less bothered by this but I feel he has a good point.  Hiding behind a user ID is unnecessary and cowardly when good people are trying to have an honest debate.

 

Perhaps Ken would like the address too? Is he trying to arrange a hit?

[lucretius]

3 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

The more I think about this the more I believe the biggest thing MQA is afraid of is the general public learning about the DRM aspects of MQA. If the general public hear’s DRM again wrt audio they will revolt and give the labels a flashback to the Napster days. When the mainstream press writes about DRM getting back into audio, I’m willing to bet the labels will flinch. 

 

In addition, which streaming service wants to be associated with DRM? 

 

Perhaps it’s time to take the gloves off, get real and write some brutally honest articles and contact my friends at the NY Times (who’ve interviewed me in the past). People are always looking for a good story. 

 

Anyone else interested in getting the word out?

 

 

 

Yes.  Going forward, you should write "MQA/DRM", whenever you would have written "MQA".

[lucretius]

8 hours ago, Shadorne said:

PCM 24/96 is already a perfectly good format for the foreseeable future. SACD wasn’t necessary and neither is DSD. Give us better mix/masters - ones that aren’t overly compressed to the extent it really ruins audio quality. (I am not against tasteful compression in pop/rock but we are far beyond that in most cases) 

 

I've noted that for DSD files there always appears to be more headroom -- never gets anywhere close to or over 0 dbms.  I cannot say the same thing for PCM files.

[lucretius]

8 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

BTW, Stereopile has an article out now on how well MQA does over a 3G network (!!)  - maybe they have not heard of 5G?

 

3G is the lowest common denominator.

[lucretius]

1 hour ago, mansr said:

Does anyone remember the (original) Microsoft Network (MSN)?

Or CompuServe?

[lucretius]

10 minutes ago, sls said:

...

3) Streaming is better than CDs

...

As I see it, the fundamental problem with MQA is that there ABSOLUTELY NOTHING obvious to the average potential consumer why they should buy it. It just serves no purpose. They go on about "education" of the consumer, but completely miss the point that if they have to explain why the consumer should buy it the product has failed already. 

 

Apparently, they don't think they need to convince the consumers; they convinced the major labels, some equipment manufacturers, and TIDAL -- it's incorporated in TIDAL (streaming service). Presumably the less informed TIDAL subscriber will not even notice. The real problem is or was that the format could replace existing formats. But now it doesn't look like that's going to happen.

 

 

[lucretius]

1 hour ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

I do believe the translation of the word "wank" has been misinterpreted when it was exported to the USA, or other.

 

One can have a "wank", which is a rather pleasurable experience. What is the difference between an egg and a "wank" ?. You can beat an egg.

 

One can call another person a "wanker" which is derisory, but in a nice way. Similar to calling someone a "dipstick", it is meant to infer stupidity, or silly behaviour.

 

The term you may wish to use is "fannying around", where this means dilly dallying, or even "prevaricating", with disruptive intent possibly.

 

Regards,

Shadders.

 

wank·er

ˈwaNGkər/

noun

vulgar slang•British

noun: wanker; plural noun: wankers

1. a person who masturbates (used as a term of abuse).

[lucretius]

11 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

In my own studio experience, there is usually only 1 ADC per track and more commonly the same ADC per album.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but your experience is limited to recordings of small orchestras and string quartets in the Atlanta area.

[lucretius]

1 hour ago, Hugo9000 said:

 

The idea would be that there should be a "Chinese wall" between the editorial and advertising sides of a magazine to prevent any conflicts of interest or appearance of impropriety.  (To prevent accusations or suspicions of "bought" reviews:  "Here is your glowing review in exchange for your lovely new ad!")

 

A Chinese Wall seems unreasonable.  JA would have to refrain from picking up Stereophile for fear of discovering the advertisers and he'd have to refrain from talking to folks in the industry for fear they may be advertisers, and he'd have to refrain from talking to subscribers and "audiophiles", etc. This is absurd.

[lucretius]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

The idea is still good. If the advertisers don't have control over where their ads are displayed, there is no incentive to please them.

 

I do not follow.  Where the ads are displayed is of fundamental importance.

[lucretius]

3 hours ago, Odd Magnus Bjerkvik said:

Not sure if it has been posted. 

The seminar filmed from the audience

Also captures the "aftermath"

 

 

Never invite a salesman to a presentation.

[lucretius]

45 minutes ago, semente said:

 

After how many pints? ?

 

Apparently two.  I thought Britts could hold their liquor.

[lucretius]

15 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

No, that is not accurate.  I worked at Chesky Records in the 90s on roughly two dozen sessions in roles ranging from production assistant to assistant producer.  I also helped on strategy for the company in the early to mid 2000s.  I have recorded several orchestras in Atlanta and many jazz sessions.

 

Most of the recording engineers I meet are very particular about the ADC they use.  They tend to use one model until they find something better.  So if you know the engineer and the time period, I can guess the ADC.  All the MQA guys have done is figure out the distortions in the ADCs and have engineered a filter to correct them.

 

Thanks for the correction.  Perhaps recording for orchestras and jazz sessions differs from pop music?  What about multitrack recording? Also, what if the signal is fed through the ADC more than once? 

[lucretius]

On 10/9/2018 at 10:09 AM, Shadders said:

This is the MQA mob outside the venue lecture :

 

More like this:

 

 

 

[lucretius]

21 minutes ago, firedog said:

And btw, the Mytek DAC plays back all material with MQA filters once MQA is activated, unless you manually go in and switch the filtering each time. So did you do that, or did you cripple the demo of the non-MQA files by playing them back with the inappropriate MQA filters? 

 

Correction -- the Mytek DAC plays back all PCM material with the MQA filter once MQA is activated; DSD material is not affected and will be played back with the DSD filter as set for DSD.

[lucretius]

48 minutes ago, jtwrace said:

Yet another MQA shill:

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/rmaf-starting-day-mqa

 

 

 

So my takeaway from this article is that you need many tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipment in order to hear the benefits of MQA. And yet somehow MQA should be good for mobile phones, and TV's. So why not demonstrate using phones and TV instead of the pricey  equipment, only few will ever buy?

 

 

 

[lucretius]

4 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

I'm not saying the labels have no history in DRM interest.  I just think it's not a driving factor here.  I think it's about revenue and having more cash flow to pay off debt.  And probably also to drive the business more to the digital world.

 

The goals of DRM and revenue generation are consistent.

 

What does "drive the business more to the digital world" mean?

[lucretius]

3 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

Many of the labels carry heavy debt loads.  As a result they are focused on revenue growth.  MQA is a way to sell premium pricing in exchange for better quality sound.

 

It's not like the labels' contracts with bands resulted in bands accumulating debt with every release thanks to promotional costs, recording bills and advances labels recoup?  And it's not like the labels have treated consumers as poorly as they’ve treated artists?

[lucretius]

3 hours ago, KeenObserver said:

 

I am in awe of all the time and effort you put in defending, and putting out MQA fires!

 

All for the sake of Hi-rez music!

 

You,sir, are a truly noble human being!

 

Methinks Lee is fishing for a job.

[lucretius]

11 minutes ago, copy_of_a said:

You can‘t save souls in an empty curch!

 

But MQA conducts every service like the room was full (though it is empty). They speak over our heads, then turn and walk out where they had come in.