MQA The Truth lies Somewhere in the Middle

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

MQA has built time filters for most studio ADCs.  That took a while.  They now have an algorithm based on that data that can identify the right filter to use.

So when multiple ADCs are used in each song for the newest GnR album, you’re saying MQA will clean them all up after the fact? Truly amazing ? 

[Brinkman Ship]

1 minute ago, rickca said:

You have to bang on the desk while you say that to get your point across.

?

[Lee Scoggins]

11 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Bruno Mars and Beyoncé didn’t hear the added noise in the studio because it was added by the MQA process. 

 

my slides also point out why this isn’t correct. Jbara made a comment that the mastering engineers don’t own the content. That has zero to do with the sound of the studio and everything to do with changing the sound for financial gain. 

 

I am not completely following the point about Bruno Mars and Beyonce.  Are you saying the MQA process added noise?

 

Jbara's point is a business one.  To get MQA to a wider audience, the focus has been on building the ecosystem.  My day job has me partly responsible for building ecosystems for our firm and our clients which is why I am interested in how Jbara's strategy in gaining partner firms is working.  It's really hard to establish a new standard that has wide appeal.  A lot of companies have to align their incentives.  That is why MQA has been honest about wanting to make a return.  Everyone in that solar system has to make money for it to work.

[Brinkman Ship]

2 minutes ago, opus101 said:

 

What happens when different brands of ADCs are used in a single recording? Also how does MQA deal with synthetic sounds which have never been through an ADC?

..good question..let’s see what he pulls out of thin air as a BS reply...

[MikeyFresh]

10 minutes ago, Hugo9000 said:

How is some automated process going to get back to what the artist and producer wanted in the studio? 

It can't, of course.

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, Lee Scoggins said:

Are you saying the MQA process added noise?

Absolutely 100%. It was in my presentation but you may have missed it because of the interruptions. 

[Lee Scoggins]

5 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

This was in my slides as well. Recordings have many ADCs involved and a mix of lossy and lossless content.

 

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

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, Lee Scoggins said:

 

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

Make it stop. 

[Brinkman Ship]

1 minute ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

I am not completely following the point about Bruno Mars and Beyonce.  Are you saying the MQA process added noise?

 

Jbara's point is a business one.  To get MQA to a wider audience, the focus has been on building the ecosystem.  My day has me partly responsible for building ecosystems for our firm and our clients which is why I am interested in how Jbara's strategy in gaining partner firms is working.  It's really hard to establish a new standard that has wide appeal.  A lot of companies have to align their incentives.  That is why MQA has been honest about wanting to make a return.  Everyone in that solar system has to make money for it to work.

Rubbish...total blather....

 

one poster was correct..you are a laughing stock...you would not know a good business model if it hit you on the head. 

 

Troll.

[Lee Scoggins]

Goodnight.

[Brinkman Ship]

I love tone deaf charlatans who take vicious humiliating beatings and come back for more.?

[opus101]

1 minute 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.

 

Its been a while since I've been in a studio, though I did for a while work for a console company. I recall that external effects boxes are sometimes used, nowadays seems likely they're going to contain ADCs and DACs. Presumably those converters won't be on MQA's list of studio ADCs?

[MikeyFresh]

26 minutes ago, Hugo9000 said:

Perhaps if he'd been paying attention, instead of heckling and brown-nosing his masters...

 

Yes, I think that is the problem. @FredericV demonstrated the uselessness of MQA/DRM's little LED some time ago.

[opus101]

5 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Absolutely 100%. It was in my presentation but you may have missed it because of the interruptions. 

 

I guess those interruptions were considered 'deblurring' in MQA-speak.

[MikeyFresh]

29 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

Like I said above, the goal is really to get back to what the artist and producer wanted in the studio.

 

Exactly how would MQA/DRM accomplish that goal if neither the artist or producer is even involved in this scheme?

[FredericV]

19 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

MQA has built time filters

More money please:
 

 

[Brinkman Ship]

i just realized what a renaissance.man Scoggins is..a brilliant consultant, an award winning recording engineer, a golden eared “reviewer”, a researcher, and an expert on so many topics and a master-debater....lol...?

 

 

[tmtomh]

26 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

It depends on how you view the approach of MQA.  If you hear benefits as I do, then the authentication light does mean better quality for most recordings.  That can come from the fingerprinting of the ADC to correct problems, the temporal deblurring, etc. If the green light comes on, the sound will generally be good. It remains to be seen how this is perceived by the consumer.

 

In the mean time, I am listening to a wider selection of hirez.

 

Have you been listening to hirez, or MQA?

[esldude]

16 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

MQA has built time filters for most studio ADCs.  That took a while.  They now have an algorithm based on that data that can identify the right filter to use.

I'd like to see this tested.  My initial response is hilarious laughter. 

 

But I'd like to see it tested.  You give us a list of ADC's you have an algorithm for which can pick the right filter.  Let some third party provide some recordings using some of those on the list.  Let them go thru some normal processing, mastering and such.  Then see if your algorithm can determine which ADC was used back at the beginning.  This has to be automated if people are doing entire back catalogs.  A good first step.  We need not even consider what filters are chosen we just need to see if you can determine the initial ADCs. 

[tmtomh]

15 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

So when multiple ADCs are used in each song for the newest GnR album, you’re saying MQA will clean them all up after the fact? Truly amazing ? 

I know, right? So amazing, in fact, that it sounds impossible!

[Hugo9000]

@MQA Spokespeople:

 

So how is this bulk processing handling all of the analog recordings?  You do realize, don't you, that the majority of back-catalogue music was recorded on analog tape?  The original (and sometimes even second, third, fourth, fifth, etc lmao) conversions to digital for release on CD were not HiRes.  Are the old and crummy digital conversions of those recordings simply being upsampled (like so much fake HiRes we read about) and batch-converted to MQA?

 

If there were any legitimacy to the procedure whatsoever, they would handle it like Sony did with their Living Stereo SACD series, going back to the session tapes themselves (you can ask Kal Rubinson about it, he wrote a nice article about his visit to SoundMirror, who handled that project for Sony, if I recall correctly).  It's very labor and research intensive to do it properly.  And even with digital recordings, the documentation is often lacking.  Sony did a better job than most, at least when they acquired the RCA catalogue, but the mess with Warner and Universal must be beyond belief...

 

Oh, and I'm talking here about classical recordings.  What about the horrors of pop/rock like all the tapes being recycled or discarded and documentation thrown away that we've read about over the years, even with legendary artists?  Even if MQA was real, and capable of fixing errors of the past, the reality of the music industry is such a mess it still would be a pipe dream for all but a few select and lucky artists of the past.

[MikeyFresh]

27 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

That can come from the fingerprinting of the ADC to correct problems, the temporal deblurring, etc

 

Which ADCs (if any) have been fingerprinted to date?

 

How did MQA/DRM positively identify them, and what measurements were used to identify their "correctable" faults?

 

Do the manufacturers of those ADCs acknowledge/agree with these supposed faults and so moving forward they will alter their designs accordingly?

[esldude]

13 minutes 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.

Oh yes, hilarious laughter was exactly the appropriate response.  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!

 

But okay let us just say it is hypothetically typically true.  You have some of the old mix tapes and master tapes (tape being tape or being digital).  Some processing was done maybe sending to outboard analog gear, and coming back in to the same ADC (we know they wouldn't use a different one right?  wink wink).  And you'll be able to determine if no notes were made which ADCs were used.   HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

[esldude]

13 minutes ago, opus101 said:

 

Its been a while since I've been in a studio, though I did for a while work for a console company. I recall that external effects boxes are sometimes used, nowadays seems likely they're going to contain ADCs and DACs. Presumably those converters won't be on MQA's list of studio ADCs?

No presumably from what we've been told by Lee, as he runs bravely away, is sure almost any ADC is on the list.  

[opus101]

23 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said:

 

Says no one except you. Their showing was deplorable, and I see no one coming to their defense but you.

 

Actually he's changed his tune somewhat. Yesterday he and those two were 'generally civil' (like Leonard Cohen's 'generally faithful') but today the 'generally' has been dropped for the MQA guys alone. Now we know this isn't because he's been uncivil, all agree he's been polite (if evasive).