• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

MQA Bad For Music

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
18,320
Likes
17,125
Location
Seattle Area
#81
German politeness written in international English but a nice analyses of what is going on under the hood of MQA:
https://www.xivero.com/downloads/MQA-Technical_Analysis-Hypotheses-Paper.pdf
Thanks for posting that. I read through it. That is most professional and well done case I have seen against MQA. Yet, it shows great respect and deference to creators of MQA. It should be a model of how people should conduct themselves in opposing MQA: with real data, scientific analysis and professionalism.

BTW, I could take some issues with their points too. :) Their lossless schemes relies on yet to be established aspect of "timing is very important." That is not an assumption that can be used to then draw other conclusions.

There is also the oft-repeated statement that future advancements make us more aware of audible issues of lossy audio compression. Such has not happened and there is no reason to believe advancements in anything will modify our hearing as such.
 

Vincent Kars

Active Member
Technical Expert
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
193
Likes
142
#82
..future advancements make us more aware of audible issues of lossy audio compression,....
I interpreted that statement slightly different.
Up to now, nobody has been able to proof that MQA, although a lossy format, sounds worse than straight PCM.
The same happened to MP3, it is also lossy and perceptually transparent at high bit rates.
Until one day somebody started to decode electronic music (Kraftwerk etc) and discovered all kind of artifacts.
Obvious MP3 is not that good in block pulses.

These killer samples proof the limitations of the MP3 model (brilliant as it is).
The same might happen to MQA.
Lossy , perceptually transparent like MP3 but one day a killer sample might be found.
Or something like this:


 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
18,320
Likes
17,125
Location
Seattle Area
#83
The same happened to MP3, it is also lossy and perceptually transparent at high bit rates.
Until one day somebody started to decode electronic music (Kraftwerk etc) and discovered all kind of artifacts.
Obvious MP3 is not that good in block pulses.
Oh this was known from day one that MP3 could not achieve full transparency. Standardized MPEG clip shows this. Here is Karlheinz Brandenburg (key person behind development of MP3) stating the same (in much detail not quoted here) on this: MP3 AND AAC EXPLAINED KARLHEINZ BRANDENBURG, Fraunhofer Institute for Integrated Circuits FhG-IIS A, Erlangen, Germany

upload_2017-11-17_13-46-50.png


[Layer-3 is MP3]. As you see the target is near-CD.

What you are saying have been true of consumers but not people in research and industry.
 

Cosmik

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
2,706
Likes
1,400
Location
UK
#85
These killer samples proof the limitations of the MP3 model (brilliant as it is).
The same might happen to MQA.
Lossy , perceptually transparent like MP3 but one day a killer sample might be found.
Except MQA isn't doing anything so ambitious as MP3. It starts with something transparent, reduces it to something still pretty much transparent and, most importantly, predictable. And then adds some inaudible fine tuning for psychological/marketing effect. Surely no killer samples are possible..?
 

watchnerd

Major Contributor
Beer Hero
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
4,392
Likes
1,469
Location
Seattle Area
#87
losing access to lossless, non-encoded high resolution files in a not so distant future. I find it sad but at my age it most likely won't have much effect for me. Let them eat cake.
The lossless file sharing communities are still going strong.
 

Sal1950

Major Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
5,055
Likes
2,257
Location
Central Fl
#88

Wombat

Major Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
3,123
Likes
1,393
Location
Australia
#91
Siegfried Linkwitz on Bruno Putzey's Facebook post:

http://linkwitzlab.com/links.htm#Putzeys












His last paragraph lines up with some thoughts I have about the obsession some have with high-level listening. Expectation seems to run beyond the basic evolutionary purpose of hearing, i.e. hearing danger cues and voice communication - both short-term events.

Our attention-span is naturally short and some effort is required to prolong it. This usually requires narrowing of focus and thus missing the bigger picture for that period.
 
Last edited:

RayDunzl

Major Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
6,617
Likes
2,669
Location
Riverview, FL
That's an interesting observation.

Tagged as MQA in production, and the tagging (reportedly) survives the amputation of the lower extremities.

http://bobtalks.co.uk/blog/mqa-philosophy/mqa-authentication-and-quality/
  • The MQA ‘Studio’ (blue light) gives confirmation directly from mastering engineers, producers or artists to their listeners. MQA Studio authenticates that the sound you are hearing is exactly as played in the studio when the music was completed and, by implication, that this is also the definitive version of the recording at that point in time.
  • A second level, ‘MQA’ (green light) is available to indicate that although the stream is genuine, provenance may be uncertain or that it is not yet the final release.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom