NorthSky
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2016
- Messages
- 4,998
- Likes
- 945
I am still waiting for Bob S. to pop up in this thread.
Wake me up ...
Wake me up ...
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
MQA: A Review of controversies, concerns, and cautions
- Thread starter mitchco
- Start date
- Status
The bride is not for turning ..I abandoned the thread but you all keep calling me with references to my alias. Quit it!
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 20,747
- Likes
- 37,557
I think it was smart marketing in some ways. Promised us sound improvement which is a big draw to dedicated audiophiles. Promised to demonstrate this deblurring. Promised some incredible things like to end to end assurance we were getting the masters in all their glory and could know it. The incredible to me idea they could work backwards and fix issues with original ADCs to improve the sound. Claimed to have listening tests which somewhat corroborated and informed their process. Talked about how they did this in a low bandwidth manner using advanced sparse sensing technology, talked about using highly effective for low noise subtractive dither.
All great stuff.
Unfortunately very nearly all of it was a salesman's pitch with nothing behind it. Indeed the seemingly magical fixing of ADC issues which always seemed impossible isn't being done. They use a few stock filters and not good ones from all indications. etc etc etc. So in the end, I have a very high contempt. Basically just lied to us telling us what we wanted to hear when it was mainly a gimmick to become the defacto distribution format. Combine it with their intentionally misleading and secretive demonstrations of the tech, and it only raises my contempt more for the venture. They may be able to furnish a low bandwidth stream that sort of is a high sample rate result though even that is questionable. More like a high sample rate artificial file sounds the same when you could just have skipped that anyway without paying anyone for the privilege.
I had a friend who in another field once promised a big advancement in some technology. He didn't quite understand some of the physics and promised some things physically impossible. He was doing experiments and getting some good improvements, and decided in time he could manage something that was never possible. He was hard headed like many entrepreneurs have to be. He set up a website promising these results with the intent of getting funding to continue his experiments. He was inundated in two days by offers and by interested people wanting to know more about how he could do this incredible thing. One fellow with more credibility than I had with him got in touch and he listened to him. Understood he could not make such things as they violated basic laws of physics. He had to beg off, refuse money and admit OOps this can't be done. I feel like MQA did the reverse, sat down and figured out what promises they could make, and how they could pretend it was almost true in order to sell the idea.
Now if MQA was for real their handling of the rollout of it is one of the dumbest marketing moves in history. Instead, that it still has a chance, and is not for real at all means it was nothing except marketing. They've done a pretty bang up job to get it this far with nothing more than over-promised results to back it up.
All great stuff.
Unfortunately very nearly all of it was a salesman's pitch with nothing behind it. Indeed the seemingly magical fixing of ADC issues which always seemed impossible isn't being done. They use a few stock filters and not good ones from all indications. etc etc etc. So in the end, I have a very high contempt. Basically just lied to us telling us what we wanted to hear when it was mainly a gimmick to become the defacto distribution format. Combine it with their intentionally misleading and secretive demonstrations of the tech, and it only raises my contempt more for the venture. They may be able to furnish a low bandwidth stream that sort of is a high sample rate result though even that is questionable. More like a high sample rate artificial file sounds the same when you could just have skipped that anyway without paying anyone for the privilege.
I had a friend who in another field once promised a big advancement in some technology. He didn't quite understand some of the physics and promised some things physically impossible. He was doing experiments and getting some good improvements, and decided in time he could manage something that was never possible. He was hard headed like many entrepreneurs have to be. He set up a website promising these results with the intent of getting funding to continue his experiments. He was inundated in two days by offers and by interested people wanting to know more about how he could do this incredible thing. One fellow with more credibility than I had with him got in touch and he listened to him. Understood he could not make such things as they violated basic laws of physics. He had to beg off, refuse money and admit OOps this can't be done. I feel like MQA did the reverse, sat down and figured out what promises they could make, and how they could pretend it was almost true in order to sell the idea.
Now if MQA was for real their handling of the rollout of it is one of the dumbest marketing moves in history. Instead, that it still has a chance, and is not for real at all means it was nothing except marketing. They've done a pretty bang up job to get it this far with nothing more than over-promised results to back it up.
I don't really care either way about MQA, do think Amir made some good points and those who are jumping on the anti-Stuart bandwagon should at least look up his credentials before trashing the guy, but had to jump in to say I like my present avatar just fine plus it reminds me that I should be practicing instead of wasting time here.
Which reminds me: @amirm, @amirm, @amirm !
Which reminds me: @amirm, @amirm, @amirm !
The fact that he has actual credentials really just holds him up as deserving more trashing...
Last edited:
NorthSky
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2016
- Messages
- 4,998
- Likes
- 945
I don't really care either way about MQA, do think Amir made some good points and those who are jumping on the anti-Stuart bandwagon should at least look up his credentials before trashing the guy, but had to jump in to say I like my present avatar just fine plus it reminds me that I should be practicing instead of wasting time here.
Which reminds me: @amirm, @amirm, @amirm !
You sure funny Don. If you were truly wasting your time here you wouldn't even read this reply to your quote above.
Gosh darn it....Which reminds me: @amirm, @amirm, @amirm !
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 20,747
- Likes
- 37,557
I don't really care either way about MQA, do think Amir made some good points and those who are jumping on the anti-Stuart bandwagon should at least look up his credentials before trashing the guy, but had to jump in to say I like my present avatar just fine plus it reminds me that I should be practicing instead of wasting time here.
Which reminds me: @amirm, @amirm, @amirm !
Come on Don. Get with the program. Jump on the team and come on in for the big win. We've got to keep our heads until this MQA craze blows over.
Last edited:
It seems that MQA discussions have wasted more bandwidth than the MQA compression will ever recover.
NorthSky
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2016
- Messages
- 4,998
- Likes
- 945
Is MQA related to climate audio change?
Most of it's probably from all the heater current tube amps suck up.
40 pages in, and the only thing this discussion has convinced me of is
- I will actively avoid (and steer others clear of) MQA
- I'm still strongly biased against rent-seeking in the form of protocol or format ownership
From http://www.2l.no/hires/
File waveform comparison,zoomed way in, 3.5ms time, just out of curiosity:
CD version
MQA CD version
24/192 version
Spectrum of 24/192 version
The 24/192 version looks to have just noise (shaped?) above 20kHz (which is at -116dB) or so...
File waveform comparison,zoomed way in, 3.5ms time, just out of curiosity:
CD version
MQA CD version
24/192 version
Spectrum of 24/192 version
The 24/192 version looks to have just noise (shaped?) above 20kHz (which is at -116dB) or so...
NorthSky
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2016
- Messages
- 4,998
- Likes
- 945
The thread was closed two years ago...November 1st, 2016.
{I'm a registered number @ ComputerAudiophile}
_____
About MQA:
"The key point to grasp is that no other system even allows this to happen; if you have a FLAC of a 192/24 it simply cannot be played in many systems or contexts. This technology lets you listen to the file without a decoder." - Bob Stuart
{I'm a registered number @ ComputerAudiophile}
_____
About MQA:
"The key point to grasp is that no other system even allows this to happen; if you have a FLAC of a 192/24 it simply cannot be played in many systems or contexts. This technology lets you listen to the file without a decoder." - Bob Stuart
NorthSky
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2016
- Messages
- 4,998
- Likes
- 945
I can't see what's invisible to my eyes.
NorthSky
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2016
- Messages
- 4,998
- Likes
- 945
That's the same exact link twice.
If there’s no objection I’m going to close this thread, there’s no coherent discussion going on and we have exasperated any comedic value lol. I feel members energy is best served exploring other topics.
Please contact me if you feel aggrieved and have something to contribute.
Please contact me if you feel aggrieved and have something to contribute.
- Status
