Archimago's MQA listening test results

[Blumlein 88]

Cell Phone BW.

Yes, much streaming in the car, around places away from home, work, wherever is using the phone as a source of streaming music. Most people still have to pay more or less per gigabyte for the data.

 

[svart-hvitt]

Yes, much streaming in the car, around places away from home, work, wherever is using the phone as a source of streaming music. Most people still have to pay more or less per gigabyte for the data.

You don’t need MQA to stream cheaper on the go:

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/n...igh-quality-streaming-service-xstream-w478281

 

[svart-hvitt]

It is not to save us bandwidth but the content streaming company. There is hardly any profit in selling music so saving bandwidth is something they like to do. There is also server storage cost.

If MQA essentiallly is about saving the environment through lower energy and storage needs - which at the same time gives the streaming company lower costs - then why all this marketing of MQA in the hifi press? Why get Stereophile on board if MQA is about a smarter central infrastructure? Why get hardware producers on board with their authentication LED lights?

You need a creative mind to understand the technological logic (sic!) of MQA.

I can only see the inconsistencies in the MQA story. Maybe I can’t see the forest...

 

[Thomas savage]

If MQA essentiallly is about saving the environment through lower energy and storage needs - which at the same time gives the streaming company lower costs - then why all this marketing of MQA in the hifi press? Why get Stereophile on board if MQA is about a smarter central infrastructure? Why get hardware producers on board with their authentication LED lights?

You need a creative mind to understand the technological logic (sic!) of MQA.

I can only see the inconsistencies in the MQA story. Maybe I can’t see the forest...

That a easy question to answer, sales ! Push MQA in the hifi press as the vested interests involved need these ever changing formats to sell their products.

The ever shrinking market and those involved are huddling together in a life raft called MQA. With such a coordinated effort it may well prevail but to what end? We all buy new DAC's but are we getting better sound or increased functionality ? ... probably not . ( unless they do make a more HIFI system orientated digital master) .

How does room correction work with MQA?

In the end it's all about reinvention, as indeed is the story of all of us and everything, every system we create .

Is the new wheel better than the old wheel? .., probably not but it's something to do, something to invest in and get distracted by.

 

[DonH56]

If MQA essentiallly is about saving the environment through lower energy and storage needs - which at the same time gives the streaming company lower costs - then why all this marketing of MQA in the hifi press?

I'd guess more about saving money, not the environment, for the content providers... As for the rest, see post above from Thomas, it's New and Improved, just like my breakfast cereal.

 

[svart-hvitt]

OK, so what you guys - Thomas and Don - say, is that there is zero innovation, yet a price is paid.

And that’s my whole point:

=> MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING

=> GETTING SOMETHING FOR NOTHING

 

[amirm]

If MQA essentiallly is about saving the environment through lower energy and storage needs - which at the same time gives the streaming company lower costs - then why all this marketing of MQA in the hifi press? Why get Stereophile on board if MQA is about a smarter central infrastructure? Why get hardware producers on board with their authentication LED lights?

No, it is not about saving the environment. As I said, there is next to no margin in selling music online. Just look at how many companies have tried and failed. Only Amazon and Apple have succeeded because they have other things to sell to make money. To that end, anything that reduces costs is important and MQA does that for high-resolution audio.

Without MQA, we are pumping out tons of useless data as there is very little useful info above ultrasonics. And what is there doesn't need 24 bits to describe it. Or even 8 bits in many cases.

As to why go after Stereophile, high-resolution audio in the form of MQA or PCM is a very hard sell to general press. It is not a mass market offering so you have to go to vertical press that has affinity for it and hence stereophile. It also doesn't hurt that stereophile knows Meridian, Bob Stuart, etc.

 

[Thomas savage]

OK, so what you guys - Thomas and Don - say, is that there is zero innovation, yet a price is paid.

And that’s my whole point:

=> MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING

=> GETTING SOMETHING FOR NOTHING

Oh no there's innovation, it's just that won't sell something like this on its own. You need 'the system' to get behind you and that looks to be happening. Then of course those vested interests repurpose the product to suit their agendas and market it accordingly.

I don't really see what the issue is as all that's happening is yet another choice is being presented, it's not like anyone is going to come and take our PCM away. If you don't want to bother with MQA you don't have to.

It seems ( as amir explained it to me when I was abusing his hospitality recently) to be a elegant idea technically, it's efficient kind of beautiful really . Do we need it? No of course not but then we don't need 95% of the stuff with consume and surround ourselves with so how's that any kind of valid criticism?

But amir knows far more about launching ideas into the market place and being successful than me certainly, I'm just a beer exotic tea drinking drywall operative.

 

[DonH56]

OK, so what you guys - Thomas and Don - say, is that there is zero innovation, yet a price is paid.

And that’s my whole point:

=> MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING

=> GETTING SOMETHING FOR NOTHING

What? No, I would not say there is no innovation, though if you wade through other threads some argue it is all old stuff (*); my only point was that the likely fundamental reason for reducing the number of bits stored stored and streamed is the cost savings, not environment savings. I have never heard an MQA file nor done anything with one so I have no idea if it helps, hurts, or does nothing to the sound. So I have no input either way on your points.

(*) I long ago decided most circuit innovation was done long ago using tubes. We just keep re-inventing it. I have come up with some ideas I thought pretty durn good, and got other engineers to agree, but later found the same general scheme in some old reference or patent. Having never seen it before, I would argue it does not make me less creative/innovative, but may make it harder to obtain a patent.

 

[Jinjuku]

Cell Phone BW.

Hi-Rez over a cell phone is an oxymoron. Just go with a good lossy CODEC and save even more BW.

Sorry I don't buy 24/96 or better over the DAC in a cell phone over earbuds, or BT to the car.

 

[NorthSky]

Cell Phone BW.

You got me here Ray.

 

[svart-hvitt]

No, it is not about saving the environment. As I said, there is next to no margin in selling music online. Just look at how many companies have tried and failed. Only Amazon and Apple have succeeded because they have other things to sell to make money. To that end, anything that reduces costs is important and MQA does that for high-resolution audio.

Without MQA, we are pumping out tons of useless data as there is very little useful info above ultrasonics. And what is there doesn't need 24 bits to describe it. Or even 8 bits in many cases.

As to why go after Stereophile, high-resolution audio in the form of MQA or PCM is a very hard sell to general press. It is not a mass market offering so you have to go to vertical press that has affinity for it and hence stereophile. It also doesn't hurt that stereophile knows Meridian, Bob Stuart, etc.

No margins in online audio?

Use your imagination. Why is Spotify worth billions?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-direct-listing-on-nyse-sources-idUSKBN18821T

 

[RayDunzl]

 

[amirm]

No margins in online audio?

Use your imagination. Why is Spotify worth billions?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-direct-listing-on-nyse-sources-idUSKBN18821T

From your article: "Spotify, which has yet to post a profit as it expands in markets worldwide and builds new offices in New York, lost 173 million euros ($189 million) in 2015, according to the latest figures disclosed by its Luxembourg-based holding company."

 

[svart-hvitt]

From your article: "Spotify, which has yet to post a profit as it expands in markets worldwide and builds new offices in New York, lost 173 million euros ($189 million) in 2015, according to the latest figures disclosed by its Luxembourg-based holding company."

Indeed. But market valuations are forward looking, not backward. Hence my notion about «imagination»

 

[Wayne]

Without MQA, we are pumping out tons of useless data as there is very little useful info above ultrasonics. And what is there doesn't need 24 bits to describe it. Or even 8 bits in many cases.

@Amir: I do not understand your (above) statement. What procedure is "...pumping out tons of useless data...." I don't think you are referring to "remastered" CDs or to up sampled WAV files.

 

[Wayne]

The ever shrinking market and those involved are huddling together in a life raft called MQA. With such a coordinated effort it may well prevail but to what end? We all buy new DAC's but are we getting better sound or increased functionality ? ... probably not . ( unless they do make a more HIFI system orientated digital master) .

How does room correction work with MQA?

In the end it's all about reinvention, as indeed is the story of all of us and everything, every system we create .

Is the new wheel better than the old wheel? .., probably not but it's something to do, something to invest in and get distracted by.

Makes me want to buy the music I like on CDs, rip to the computer and just listen to the ones I like.....

Wait a minute, that is just what I do! I can live without the music that is not offered on CD or in WAV or a lossless format. Just my $0.0002

Hope that is not grounds for getting booted from the forum.....

 

[amirm]

@Amir: I do not understand your (above) statement. What procedure is "...pumping out tons of useless data...." I don't think you are referring to "remastered" CDs or to up sampled WAV files.

High-resolution PCM. It represents a "rectangular channel" that has full bit depth from 1 Hz to 96 Khz (for 192 Khz sampling). Yet, there is little above 20-30 Khz.

Assuming the circled area is actually music, its levels are so low as to not require hardly any bits (out of 24) to represent it. And if it is noise, it can be discarded altogether. PCM assigns full 24 bits to that entire band. FLAC compression gets rid of some of that but still is not as efficient as an encoder which examines that region and only allocates what is needed (or nothing at all).

 

[watchnerd]

We all buy new DAC's .

I think we're rapidly approaching peak DAC, if we haven't already hit it.

You don't need a standalone DAC if you're using active wireless speakers or, if passive, one of the new "super integrateds" that have network connections for streaming already built-in.

Separate DACs may become a retro thing, though, like tubes and vinyl. In fact, that's already happening with the resurrection of legacy DAC architectures like R2R/multibit.

 

[watchnerd]

PCM assigns full 24 bits to that entire bad.

That might be relevant if people could pass an ABX test of lossless 16bit vs 24bit.

But everything I've read (and personally experienced) points to 'no, they can't differentiate'.