Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country



About Currawong

  • Rank
    Headphone Audio

Personal Information

  • Location
    Fukuoka, Japan

Recent Profile Visitors

4221 profile views
  1. I captured the output of the Qobuz version of track 1, and it looks like MQA, with a band of noise above 16 kHz, so very possibly not. Ignore the extra at the end of the track, it continued to track 2 before I stopped it. If they did their "white glove" treatment of it, then it might be ok.
  2. Interesting that there is only one, 4-second video about the Wave on their channel. I still believe that they never planned to complete it.
  3. Ok then, if we know, please explain exactly what software and settings are used that results in, say, the changes in perceived soundstage Jack Johnson MQA recordings vs. the high-res originals.
  4. Currawong


    I think that Apple has lost the plot with UI. Someone made, using the Swift UI, a duplicate of the iOS 4 interface as an installable program for a current iPhone. The differences between the original, intuitive UI of the original iOS, and the confusing mess that is the present iOS, are stark.
  5. I think this is unwarranted. We don't know exactly what MQA does when it processes a file, except what GoldenOne has shown us when he had files processed by TIDAL with MQA. Having an industry professional with extensive experience of the effects of different processing methods listen to the output can give us a hint as to what is being done.
  6. Have a listen to some of the more recent recordings, such as Jack Johnson on TIDAL. MQA is definitely screwing with the timing information as it sounds weird through something like an Yggdrasil, which uses an uncommon filter. I'm not aware of multiple masters of this music. Likewise all the old jazz, which universally just seems to have boosted bass. I think that MQA genuinely does have a processing system for music that they are using, based on the AES whitepapers and existing Meridian tech which, if they hadn't attempted to sell it alongside a load of lies about the origami compression
  7. Aside from that, there is clearly some DSP applied to many MQA files and albums (not, say, the old jazz albums that are bass-boosted). The effect is much more than you'd get just switching digital filters.
  8. Thank you for taking the time to do this. If your professional friend is willing to share any more impressions, they would be most welcome. I've been waiting for such a person to do something like this for some time. I had guessed that a seasoned professional would be able to take a good guess at what was being done to the music. It's rather like tweaking a photo to make it pop I guess. It's very visible to me when people oversaturate the colours in photos to make them pop. Looks impressive to the untrained eye, but the experienced one can see it isn't representative of t
  9. https://daringfireball.net/linked/2021/06/08/cue-spatial-audio Eddy Cue on Dolby Atmos/Spacial Audio: *COUGH*
  10. Some time earlier, someone made the valid point that any audible interaction of those frequencies would be picked up by the microphones. It's also debatable whether even high-quality microphones can pick up ultrasonic frequencies. Just some thoughts. Even with all that discussion, I think it's more relevant to the topic that MQA doesn't encapsulate useful ultrasonic data, and where it does, it causes significant issues in the audible range even before we consider what DSP processing is applied to the music. Since when is a page of a magazine a "complete work"
  11. You could always transcribe the call. "C" is very often just sigma-delta noise from the ADC, not music content. You can see this clearly in the spectrum of the 2L recordings. Not sure why anyone would want to keep that in the music. It's to the point that I now just stick to 24/96 as a maximum when streaming or downloading high-res. ...but misses addressing the actual point of the video, which is whether or not MQA is lossless. GoldenOne never, as far as I can remember, claimed anything about the test tones being related to actual music. I think w
  12. In your first post, not after the omission is pointed out. Indeed, if you had done as I suggested, you could have added the one exception and mentioned it to your advantage, mentioning your disagreement. But, back on to MQA, do you not feel any responsibility for having promoted MQA, which has subsequently been shown to have behaved dishonestly? Even, at the very least, people who like it who believe they are getting the "real deal" with all the batch-processed music on TIDAL, when they clearly are not?
  13. Then he should have added something like "With one exception in the past...". It's not hard to be complete factual. If anything, I've been fairer on JA than other people here. The main point is, to use myself as an example, that what I say as a reviewer will influence what people buy. I'm very wary that people will spend money as a result of what I say. I believe that John has to consider the responsibility he has for hyping MQA, as a clear consequence of being duped by Bob Stuart in a rigged demonstration, using questionable science which wasn't properly investigated and turned ou
  14. Unless it was Sam Tellig, who was Tom Gillett posting under a pseudonym. So... not true.
  15. The fact is: GoldenOne isn't anonymous. He just doesn't put his name on his Youtube channel. He doesn't actually hide his identity though, unlike nwavguy did, who used an anonymous Swiss proxy when posting on forums to ensure nobody could possibly know who he was. I'm sure, if either agreed to post anything on Stereophile, they'd also agree to your terms. However, that has nothing to do with the point and you know it. The game is putting credentials and industry status as having more meaning than actual facts. So when someone with high credentials supports a
  • Create New...