Search results

MQA hasn't changed their marketing materials accordingly - only just recently updating their "Is MQA lossless?" page. Everything else I quoted in my previous posts here is recent or still live.

You're sidestepping the main point I am making in that post: MQA was making claims about losslessness. GoldenSound set out to test those claims. To test a claim of losslessness, that requires measurements and structural analysis / comparison. It's not a case of "finding religion when it comes...

What? I'm not really sure what your intent is with this post but it comes off as bullying to me - this is completely unrelated to the topic at hand. There is a difference between: 1. Evaluating/reviewing something subjectively by giving feedback from listening tests. and 2. Evaluating a...

Their old logo had LOSSLESS in it (since changed). Their old FAQ page ("Is MQA Lossless?") had the following: Other claims are usually very carefully-worded -- not technically false, not technically claiming to be lossless, but specifically-worded to give off that impression on a first glance...

That's just the thing though: People have asked you questions (myself included) and you seem to be avoiding the harder-hitting ones. You say you don't want incorrect technical/business/industry information to spread but I can't find anything from you speaking out against MQA's misleading...

...hail hydra

The argument isn't that qualifications are never relevant. For surgery? Yeah, you want someone qualified. You don't want just anyone cutting into you with no prior education or track record of success. But this has nothing to do with qualifications being necessary to verify a claim or offer a...

Where? When I was going through this thread, I never saw Amir offer any such criticisms of their marketing or claims of losslessness etc, though it's possible I missed it somewhere. At least, for several pages now, if anything, the pro-MQA crowd has been giving a pass to their marketing and...

I don't know enough about Qobuz or AmazonHD / haven't looked into them yet, so I have no comment on either one. But I'd extend the same criticism to any business that puts out pseudoscience or unsubstantiated/misleading claims. This thread happens to be about MQA so that's the focus here.

I mean, so many of the MQA-defenders in this thread ignore most of the harder-hitting critiques and give an implicit pass to blatantly misleading advertising and then wonder why people are critical of Bob Stuart, MQA's claims, etc. If you don't think the criticism is warranted, then you need to...

Yes, that has been my argument so far: I take issue with their marketing. But I am also disagreeing with your usage of the word "lossless" for the same reasons. Not sure what "virtue signaling" has anything to do with any of this.

"Lossless to the listener" is still misleading. You're still losing data, so it's lossy, not lossless. One major quality-assessment metric of a lossy compression algorithm is to what extent the result is indistinguishable from the original by humans. Just because something happens to be hard to...

I'm not talking about a CD though - I'm talking about the claim that "MQA is lossless." It isn't, and I don't really understand why people want to defend MQA's usage of the word when people are clearly getting the wrong idea.

The introduction of the reframing like that, to me, comes off as trying to justify using the word "lossless" in a non-standard way. You can always move the goalposts by saying something is "lossless" with respect to a low-hanging fruit that no one is naturally considering, especially laypeople...

He went into great detail here about this subject: http://archimago.blogspot.com/2018/10/musings-on-rmaf-2018-mqa-talk.html Plenty of people do know who he is, and if he were being dishonest about his background or connections, it would have come out by now. Either way, "how much you know"...

I mean, this is the same discussion that happens with any lossy compression: How much (and what kind) of the relevant information can be retained while compressing the filesize? You may argue that it's "perceptually indistinguishable from lossless" in some contexts, which is a separate...

Some people will withhold their real name specifically because they don't want to introduce the possibility of a character/credential attack to distract from the actual argument in question, or because they don't want to get harassed by people with nefarious intent, etc. If the argument itself...

Normally I might agree with you, but there are several more examples of questionable claims using the word "lossless" that I quoted, not just this one. If this video were the only example of the word being invoked, I might give them the benefit of the doubt. But it's not, so I don't. To address...

So I admit I don't know much about the whole MQA situation, which is why I sort of went in with fresh eyes here as an outsider and transcribed those conversations from earlier, to get a more clear outlook of what it is MQA is actually claiming and what value they are providing, if any. To my...

I saw a number of points/questions written about things that I'd see referenced in MQA's material (including how they treat the various ranges being discussed on this page). So I figure, why not go straight to their videos on YT and see what they have to say, so we're talking apples to apples...