Jump to content

Paul R

Premium
  • Content Count

    13652
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Paul R

  • Rank
    Ph.D. (un)Level Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    South West Wyoming

Recent Profile Visitors

20735 profile views
  1. No, you are rationalizing here. The point was there are plenty of "measurements" of MQA sound out there on the net, and from some pretty respectable sources. That was the question you know. Mansr and Danny scoffed at it, but that is really arrogant tunnel blindness, and as you say, taking the review in utter isolation against what one might know. The review simply said turning on the MQA On switch improved the sound. I have seen nothing here that invalidates or even casts doubt on that. If it sounds better with the MQA switch on, then it is also quite reasonable to assume that the MQA switch engages MQA processing. In this case, probably just a MQA filter, which, by sufficient stretch of the imagination, could be construed as "turning on MQA." I personally would not agree with that, however, I would be enraged if they had pulled that on a iPhone. And shocker - Darko and others say their music sounds better on the iPhone with MQA processing. Obdurate is insisting that everyone else in the world must agree with you because you are RIGHT! Why can't those knuckleheads see that? I do not think I am often guilty of that. Perhaps occasionally, but not here on this subject. MQA is an. extreme example, you do find that behavior all over audiophile culture though. We used to regularly get missionaries from Hydrogen Audio over here to "save us" from our foolishness. How is this utterly cretinous MQA crusade any different? Or insisting that Digital sounds better than Vinyl, or vice versa? And what, except very specific knowledge and understanding of actual MQA performance, gathered pretty much exclusively here I suspect, would make you suspect that the MQA ON switch does not turn on MQA processing? Perhaps I am being influenced a bit because am researching some historical happenings surrounding WWI lately. I don't think that there has ever been a greater set of lies sold with "facts" than at that time.* An incredibly nasty war, fought for reasons that were nothing more than a fabrication of lies. Then many more lies and the even worse horrors of WWII. It may have been a hundred years ago, but people do not seem to have changed all that much today. In a very small way, this MQA crusade is exactly like that. People are choosing a particular set of facts, in isolation, and pushing them as the absolute truth that can not be denied.That is exactly as inappropriate as telling someone they are not an audiophile because they have not spent enough money on their equipment, or because they don't like vinyl, or don't like digital, or are not subscribed to Tidal, or what have you. Its just like when we used to get missionaries from Hydrogen Audio every week or so, all determined to save us from our totally unscientific ridiculous beliefs that DACs could sound different, or any cable can be better than 18g zip cord. Except the people here are the missionaries today, torches, boiling oil, tar, feathers, and pitchforks arrayed against MQA or anyone who says a damn thing they don't like about it. *Well, except perhaps for some of the damn yankees during reconstruction. Still telling the same lies today. Or maybe during the McCarthy era. (*sigh*) Maybe it just never ends.
  2. I have always enjoyed the humor of the misnomer in your chosen moniker. A sorcerer continually plying deceitful Magic’s! 🙃
  3. Are you really so tunnel blind? Does that alter the “fact” that turning on MQA mode made it sound better? Most people are not going to care why.
  4. Because MQA is not usually measured as itself, but as part of the measurement of a device. Did you read the part where they turned on MQA? It is probably far more relevant to most people than how many bits are reconstructed (or lost) in an MQA unfold.
  5. They are not all that difficult to find, some are even well done measurements, as in this article. Do note that I have far more confidence in Archimago’s test results. But I strongly suggest that there is a case of tunnel vision happening here and in other places. “Facts” can and are being used as weapons to support agendas. Also note most most people do not care about MQA as a stand-alone thing, only how it sounds in products they own. Facts may not be compelling if a MQA version sounds better than a Redbook quality file to someone. It is likely that will lead to questioning of the facts.
  6. Well said John. You seem to have the the ability to think about a subject, apply your knowledge and experience, and come to a conclusion. Always being willing to re-examine a conclusion when new information becomes available. That is rare - most people want “the” answer and then not to be bothered thinking about it anymore. Audiophiles in general are exceptions to that rule, at least within the hobby. Most audiophiles are generally willing to accept that they should keep looking at new ideas, products, and technology. Something might sound better to them, and that is where a lot of the fun is in the hobby of course. And if it isn’t fun, why bother with it? That wonderful attitude does make us rather uniquely vulnerable to hucksters though, at least to, some degree. Religious crusades always make me nervous. Even if I don’t see it, I am pretty certain someone is out to make money off any crusade, no matter how innocent it may appear.
  7. The biggest lies ever told were full of “facts” and “measurements” - and of course were justified as saving ignorant <fill in the blank> people from the nefarious other <fill in the blank> people. That isn’t saying that mansr or archimago are doing anything with nefarious intentions. But blind belief in anything is usually a bad thing for this hobby. See above.
  8. There real problems are with those that think they know something, but really have no understanding of what they are talking about. Nor the will to study hard enough to learn. Those are the people that poison our hobby, especially those who "get on a mission to save the poor audiophools..."
  9. Seems like a case for Detective Dee... MQA sorcery?
  10. No problem, to each their own and on top of that, there is a huge spectrum of audiophiles. PRaT to me is rather a synergy thing more than the result of gear being high end. You can get plenty of PRaT from very modest gear I think, if the components are well designed to work with other. Also, it is at least partly environmental, as in a listening room vs at a Barbecue party. I do think that PRaT is totally a different thing than the emotion in the music however. The emotion in music is art, not tech. At least, it is to me from where I am at on the Audiophile spectrum. 🙄 I am quite sure it will be different for other people though, and that is quite okay with me too.
  11. But you think you can only hear the emotion in music on a very well crafted high end system? Perhaps I simply misunderstood you? We often don't agree on things, such as RAM in a music server having an audible effect, but this is rather basic and I was surprised to see any disagreement at all. -Paul P.S. I do love my little Harbeths. But I also love the Maggies. And the ancient Advents.
  12. It is absolutely true, and the answer is yes. Have you? You can hear the emotion in music over an elevator speaker. -Paul
  13. I am am wondering if it is not a matter of detail? At the micro level you are correct in saying that the FR will show any differences. However at the macro level two different speakers both rated as flat between 20-20hz are are going to sound different. The difference between say, an electrostatic and cone speaker will dominate, even if the differences will show in a more detailed or more exact measurement of frequency response. Assuming matched SPLs and so on of course. The efficiency f a speaker may dominate the “sound” as well.
×
×
  • Create New...