MQA Discussion

[wklie]

I see Lumin is on the list!!! Nice.

I've been wondering for some time when MQA will list Lumin in the partners page, and now it does:
http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/our-partners

A strange thing here is that I see a certain manufacturer, who has been working on MQA, to be missing in both the digitalaudioreview article and on this page...

[Unworthy]

I'm curious as to whether MQA was a hot topic of discussion at Munich other than all the new "partners."

[Kuoppis]

MQA did not strike me as if it would have been very much of a topic in the rooms I visited. Most of the playback came from CD or vinyl. But I was mostly focussing on high end amps and LS.

I am sure it was more of a topic in the mid-fi department.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[wklie]

NUGS.NET OFFERS LIVE CONCERTS IN MQA
Music Fans Step Closer to the Original Performance

New York / London, 24 May 2017 – Nugs.net, the official home of live music for some of the largest touring artists in the world, is adopting MQA’s award-winning technology, to bring fans exclusive live concert recordings in master quality sound. Initially, concerts from GRAMMY Award-winning, Rock & Roll Hall of Fame inductees, Metallica and Bruce Springsteen, are available to download in MQA. Other iconic acts, including Pearl Jam, Phish and Red Hot Chili Peppers, to name just a few, will follow, and later this year, nugs.net subscribers will have the option to stream concert recordings in MQA.

MQA’s technology delivers master quality audio in a file that is small enough to stream or download, and adoption of the technology across music services, record labels and playback partners continues to gain momentum. Nugs.netusers can download the MQA file and it will play back on any device.

Nugs.net’s service offers different tiers of downloads – MP3, Lossless, DSD, and HD-Audio – as well as a physical CD format. MQA appears as an additional option for HD-Audio downloads, alongside existing 24 bit FLAC and ALAC formats.

“Our pursuit of the highest fidelity in our listeners’ playback experience led us to MQA,” explained nugs.net founder and CEO Brad Serling. “We were intrigued when we first read about MQA and were thrilled with the results when the MQA folks first encoded some of our live recordings.”

Mike Jbara, MQA CEO, said, “Nugs.net connects with true music fans like nobody else. Live recordings amplify MQA's mission perfectly and we are very grateful for this exciting partnership. Watch this space!”

Metallica recently kicked off the North American leg of their WorldWired tour in Baltimore, and will be continuing to tour across the US and Canada throughout the summer. Each night’s performance will be released on LiveMetallica.com, the service nugs.net has run for Metallica since 2004. Additionally, recordings of every night Bruce Springsteen and The E Street Band performed on the River Tour from 2016 and 2017 are available now for download in MQA at Live.BruceSpringsteen.net, alongside several releases from Springsteen’s legendary archives. This week Bruce released the 33-song epic tour finale from Helsinki in 2012, available now in MQA.

-Ends-

About nugs.net:
Founded in 1997 as a fan site for downloading live music, nugs.net has evolved into the leading source for official live music from some of the largest touring artists in the world. Metallica, Bruce Springsteen, Pearl Jam, Phish, Red Hot Chili Peppers and many other artists distribute recordings of every concert they play through nugs.net. Nugs.net’s platform includes downloads, CDs, webcasts, and subscription streaming services, delivering exclusive live content to millions of fans on a daily basis. Additionally, nugs.net founder Brad Serling hosts a weekly radio show on SiriusXM Jam On featuring the week in live music, cherry picked from the nugs.net catalog. The “nugs.netLive Stash” airs on MTV Live showcasing concert footage from previous nugs.tv broadcasts.

MQA Press Contacts
lisa@mqa.co.uk
sarah@mqa.co.uk

Press Site for MQA
URL: www.mqa.co.uk/press

[audio.bill]

Michael Lavorgna's thoughts on MQA: https://www.audiostream.com/content/...t-mqa-unfolded

[wklie]

I find the tone in this article interesting (saying this as a compliment).

I speculate this may be influenced by some heated arguments in CA forum in January and February.

[Mike]

Here was my take on MQA. I still believe this is the right view of MQA. Doing 5 second switching back and forth is wrong.

My take on MQA


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Devg]

Here was my take on MQA. I still believe this is the right view of MQA. Doing 5 second switching back and forth is wrong.

My take on MQA


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great explanation. Thanks!

What is your MQA source ? Tidal ?

[Mike]

Great explanation. Thanks!

What is your MQA source ? Tidal ?

Yes, Tidal.

[still-one]

Michael Lavorgna's thoughts on MQA: https://www.audiostream.com/content/...t-mqa-unfolded

Pretty much hits the nail on the head.

[CPP]

I find the tone in this article interesting (saying this as a compliment).

I speculate this may be influenced by some heated arguments in CA forum in January and February.

Yep they raked over him pretty good.

[audio.bill]

Some impressions from Stereophile on MQA demo playback comparisons: https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-laas

[Mike Lavigne]

just spent over 2 hours sampling MQA Masters through Tidal on the MQA equipped MSB Select II.

previous reports about this through the Select II were very positive.

my perception is provisionally quite mixed. I liked the MQA of Neil Young's Harvest a lot, which is where I started. I have a master tape of this one and a very good pressing, and it's a favorite of mine. I was impressed by this MQA master. most of these are 24-192, although the 'Stairway to Heaven' was 24-96 (likely contractual). the more I listened there is a 'processed' aspect to the sound that I started to pick up on like it's been run through a loudness contour and then had it's mids and bass boosted. but I did not stop to grab any regular files to compare. the net effect might be very positive, or it might be something that does not work on a system like mine where it's all laid bare.

I liked the list of music, and so made a play list and just set back and listened.

recalling my 5 hours with redbook yesterday, I'd say that was overall more impressive. but this is just a data point so far. I will revisit this later and do some deeper investigating. most of what I played was analog tape based, and that could be the issue. maybe native digital files might fare better......but I might not have listened to even one.

my intension here is not to throw cold water on MQA. but only that since the previous feedback was in contrast to my session I thought I should bring it up.

at the LA Show I had 2 positive demos of MQA; one in the Wilson room with Peter McGrath off a file on a Meridian dac, and another one from Vince in the MSB room on the Select II from a file. so I need to get deeper into this and discover what is doing what.

[Kuoppis]

the more I listened there is a 'processed' aspect to the sound that I started to pick up on like it's been run through a loudness contour and then had it's mids and bass boosted.

Very interesting comments Mike.

I find that sound processing has a little bit of a mince meat effect on music: you can hack it apart and put it together again, but you'll never get the steak back.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[sharkmouth]

Very interesting comments Mike.

I find that sound processing has a little bit of a mince meat effect on music: you can hack it apart and put it together again, but you'll never get the steak back.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Amen. Do it right the first time & don't feck with it!

[radioactive]

I couldn't agree more with you Mike. I had very similar experiences with MQA from the very first time I heard it. Some music sounded great; others were uninspiring. I've written about it but I think the variance in MQA I've experienced is caused by multiple matters. One is the source material used; it is as if the best sounding version of an album wasn't used as a source for conversion. There may also be inconsistencies in the conversion Engineer. Some albums get a personal touch; while I suspect that other's are done in batches. Consider how many thousands of albums Warner reportedly converted in the little time they had. My supposition is that they put all the albums mastered/digitized with the same "XYZ ADC" in a pile and ran them through a batch conversion. This would imply there is a Quality Control aspect at play. Finally, I can't help but wonder if MQA is better suited for some brands of ADC's than others in combination with specific source material. Some types of music don't impress me much when unfolded where other's do. Just as an example, I found drums to greatly benefit from MQA -- just listen to the drum "intro" in Phil Collins' "In The Air Tonight" on his MQA remastered "Face Value" at 03:40 into the song and compare that with any other non-MQA version.

Finally, I find MQA to be something that can be best appreciated when the song is the right song and all the right criteria align and when played back over a highly-resolving system. I don't get the statements like "it's going to bring HiFi to the masses". Or that it's going to improve crappy streaming services' quality to a much better baseline. It's still a niche product and it appears to be getting all the attention from the audiophiles, not the masses with new Android-based phones (which oddly don't have indigenous MQA decoding - still) So some of the initial premises of MQA are no longer being touted or seem relevant.

[Unworthy]

Application, application, application. Screw the guys with phones and earbuds, push this technology through for the people who actually care!

[CPP]

Application, application, application. Screw the guys with phones and earbuds, push this technology through for the people who actually care!

That would be great but listeners like some of us who would purchase a MQA DAC or just want to spend $19.99 for the first half of MQA via Tidal to get to the Masters section, well the masses with the smart phones and ear buds out number us and I really don't think the large masses are going to shell out the cash or buy a MQA device to listen to MQA. One part of the Sprint deal was to get Tidal into their subscribers hands at a huge discount. "" We're providing our customers and anyone who signs up for Sprint a complimentary six-month trial of TIDAL HiFi so they can experience all the unique and exclusive content TIDAL has to offer.” "Once the trial is complete, customers can choose to keep the Tidal HiFi access for $19.99 a month, downgrade to Tidal Premium for $9.99 a month, or unsubscribe from the service." Time will tell what their subscribers will do.

The technology is there for those manufacturers that want to have their devices certified, gaining content that supports those Sprint subscribers well that's the BIG PICTURE for all of us. The technology I want to see, is a solid MQA software solution that will support all DACS.

Right now I'm waiting on LUMIN to complete their certification's so my D1 can handle a full unfold.

[rbbert]

Amen. Do it right the first time & don't feck with it!

This is a problem, though, all too often it's not done right the first time. If MQA does improve the sound of some of these (relatively) poorly mastered albums, that's not necessarily a bad thing. If similar processing is applied to a well-recorded and well-mastered album, that might not be so good. This might be part of the explanation for the many mixed opinions posted.

[Mike]

You can't make silk purse out of a sowers ear. If the "Master" is sh!t on a stick, you get sh!t on a stick.

I've talked to Bob Katz extensively - for hours. Early A2D converters didn't allow compression or loudness beyond red, but they were limited to 16/44.1 and ACTUALLY measured WORSE (like 14/38).

Then we have the era of the loudness wars and compression abuse, coupled with garbage A2D converters.

What we MAY see MQA undoing is with some of the loudness/compression abuse because that is often done in Mastering and MQA does NOT allow for a post production mastering stage. What they determine as the final product at the engineering stage is what we SHOULD get at the DAC stage.

If you compare an Analog Productions vinyl pressing where Chad & Co, have gone back to the master tapes, worked with Bernie Grunman & Co. and you compare that to a processed digital version of 1980, 1990, 2000, whatever of the same recording, you would be digitally disgusted.

The saving grace is that we are FINALLY seeing good - damn good - A2D converters in studios from the likes of Merging Technologies and a petition against the loudness wars. So, there is hope. Where does MQA fit into this mix? If you believe in their filters, then adding back the missing spatial cues will help.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[radioactive]

The Sprint Trial for 6 months was a mistake which only lasted for 2-3 days because anyone anywhere could get the free 6 months (https://community.roonlabs.com/t/tid...nt-promo/20794) Further, Sprint was only pushing Tidal, not MQA to customers. All those mobile users won't be able to benefit from MQA because as of today, 6/21/2017 there are zero (0) MQA enabled phones available for purchase -- and by that I mean zero that have a full MQA hardware decoder or even a software "partial unfold". We all know the Tidal app can do a "partial unfolding", but there's no MQA partial unfolding on phones -- there's not even a "Masters" section on the tidal app for phones (iphones or iPads even!). I also don't think Sprint wanted 50,000 new users suddenly streaming Tidal Hifi -- one reason they pulled the plug on the 6 month deal. Who would want such an explosive amount of growth in bandwidth usage of their network? Who knows, maybe they had a plan to pull it off, but we'll never know now will we?

As much as I may like MQA (at times), we're going on 3 years since it was first announced on Dec 4th, 2014 (http://www.hificritic.com/blog/-meri...d-audio-format). And all we have is Tidal as the mainstream provider of MQA encoded content to primarily homes, PC's and Network Streamers and two playback devices that are "mobile playback devices" -- the Onkyo DP-X1 and Pioneer XDP-100R which are far from being phones. So what happened to MQA being a better solution to streaming for all the "bandwidth constrained mobile phone users"? Everyone now listening to MQA is connected to a hi-speed network, either via wifi or directly wired. Sure, there are other providers than Tidal, but they're not what I'd call mainstream. And how many of them are there? And then we have the paltry limited number of DAC's which is still under 15 or so. Some aren't really DAC's in the true sense, they rely on your PC/Streamer to take share the load and do the first unfold (jury's still out as to the performance so I'm not sure they can be called MQA DAC's in the true sense of Bob Stuart's intent).

I keep hearing all the 'Billy Mays' of MQA saying "but just wait, there's more! Something incredible is coming out and it's all going to be awesome" (or that it's going to go mainstream) in terms of MQA finally getting significant adoption. That hook no longer snares this fish. Sorry, but I predict a slow, ugly death for MQA -- it will be like a bad strain of staph that just won't go away.I wish I'm wrong, I like MQA, but I also don't see the kind of adoption or traction that seemingly would make it mainstream.

That would be great but listeners like some of us who would purchase a MQA DAC or just want to spend $19.99 for the first half of MQA via Tidal to get to the Masters section, well the masses with the smart phones and ear buds out number us and I really don't think the large masses are going to shell out the cash or buy a MQA device to listen to MQA. One part of the Sprint deal was to get Tidal into their subscribers hands at a huge discount. "" We're providing our customers and anyone who signs up for Sprint a complimentary six-month trial of TIDAL HiFi so they can experience all the unique and exclusive content TIDAL has to offer.” "Once the trial is complete, customers can choose to keep the Tidal HiFi access for $19.99 a month, downgrade to Tidal Premium for $9.99 a month, or unsubscribe from the service." Time will tell what their subscribers will do.

The technology is there for those manufacturers that want to have their devices certified, gaining content that supports those Sprint subscribers well that's the BIG PICTURE for all of us. The technology I want to see, is a solid MQA software solution that will support all DACS.

Right now I'm waiting on LUMIN to complete their certification's so my D1 can handle a full unfold.

[CPP]

The Sprint Trial for 6 months was a mistake which only lasted for 2-3 days because anyone anywhere could get the free 6 months (https://community.roonlabs.com/t/tid...nt-promo/20794) Further, Sprint was only pushing Tidal, not MQA to customers. All those mobile users won't be able to benefit from MQA because as of today, 6/21/2017 there are zero (0) MQA enabled phones available for purchase -- and by that I mean zero that have a full MQA hardware decoder or even a software "partial unfold". We all know the Tidal app can do a "partial unfolding", but there's no MQA partial unfolding on phones -- there's not even a "Masters" section on the tidal app for phones (iphones or iPads even!). I also don't think Sprint wanted 50,000 new users suddenly streaming Tidal Hifi -- one reason they pulled the plug on the 6 month deal. Who would want such an explosive amount of growth in bandwidth usage of their network? Who knows, maybe they had a plan to pull it off, but we'll never know now will we?

As much as I may like MQA (at times), we're going on 3 years since it was first announced on Dec 4th, 2014 (http://www.hificritic.com/blog/-meri...d-audio-format). And all we have is Tidal as the mainstream provider of MQA encoded content to primarily homes, PC's and Network Streamers and two playback devices that are "mobile playback devices" -- the Onkyo DP-X1 and Pioneer XDP-100R which are far from being phones. So what happened to MQA being a better solution to streaming for all the "bandwidth constrained mobile phone users"? Everyone now listening to MQA is connected to a hi-speed network, either via wifi or directly wired. Sure, there are other providers than Tidal, but they're not what I'd call mainstream. And how many of them are there? And then we have the paltry limited number of DAC's which is still under 15 or so. Some aren't really DAC's in the true sense, they rely on your PC/Streamer to take share the load and do the first unfold (jury's still out as to the performance so I'm not sure they can be called MQA DAC's in the true sense of Bob Stuart's intent).

I keep hearing all the 'Billy Mays' of MQA saying "but just wait, there's more! Something incredible is coming out and it's all going to be awesome" (or that it's going to go mainstream) in terms of MQA finally getting significant adoption. That hook no longer snares this fish. Sorry, but I predict a slow, ugly death for MQA -- it will be like a bad strain of staph that just won't go away.I wish I'm wrong, I like MQA, but I also don't see the kind of adoption or traction that seemingly would make it mainstream.

I really don't think Sprint even cared about MQA, its trying to get customers to sign up for cell service and give away a "freebie" service for 6 months. but people forget to read the fine print. I feel its was a big money throw away, something this company does a lot of. And Billy Mays, LOL, but wait, if you order in the next 15 minutes we will throw in another 2 months of extra data minutes.

[rbbert]

...Where does MQA fit into this mix? If you believe in their filters, then adding back the missing spatial cues will help.

I thought I had read that MQA (or Meridian's engineers) are making these adjustments for each recording by ear? If that is so, then how does this differ from other DSP an engineer might use?

[Mike]

I thought I had read that MQA (or Meridian's engineers) are making these adjustments for each recording by ear? If that is so, then how does this differ from other DSP an engineer might use?

Hmmm...that's interesting. They told me they applied proprietary "filters" they developed to fix the inherent missing spatial cues from digital recordings.

Who the hell knows? Half this MQA stuff remains a mystery.

Like I've said over and over again, if you're flipping back and forth between the redbook and MQA versions - you will be more confused than anything. But if you listen over a long period to just MQA, you may find a mental easing in the listening experience. I did.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CPP]

Hmmm...that's interesting. They told me they applied proprietary "filters" they developed to fix the inherent missing spatial cues from digital recordings.

Who the hell knows? Half this MQA stuff remains a mystery.

Like I've said over and over again, if you're flipping back and forth between the redbook and MQA versions - you will be more confused than anything. But if you listen over a long period to just MQA, you may find a mental easing in the listening experience. I did.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mental easing could very well be, mindful meditation or as they say in psycho land, Counterfactual thinking that's how I feel right now after my round of golf.

[Mike]

Mental easing could very well be, mindful meditation or as they say in psycho land, Counterfactual thinking that's how I feel right now after my round of golf.

Ha! Did you set a new course record?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CPP]

Ha! Did you set a new course record?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LOLOLOL, I had a great game going until the 5th. then the 8th, 14th, 17th then big old slap ya in your face 18. I had developed a nice duck hook out of the blue by the time I got to 12 if that tells ya anything. Oh ps, hot humid and my dew point was off the charts.

[Al M.]

As much as I may like MQA (at times), we're going on 3 years since it was first announced on Dec 4th, 2014 (http://www.hificritic.com/blog/-meri...d-audio-format). And all we have is Tidal as the mainstream provider of MQA encoded content to primarily homes, PC's and Network Streamers and two playback devices that are "mobile playback devices" -- the Onkyo DP-X1 and Pioneer XDP-100R which are far from being phones. So what happened to MQA being a better solution to streaming for all the "bandwidth constrained mobile phone users"? Everyone now listening to MQA is connected to a hi-speed network, either via wifi or directly wired. Sure, there are other providers than Tidal, but they're not what I'd call mainstream. And how many of them are there? And then we have the paltry limited number of DAC's which is still under 15 or so. Some aren't really DAC's in the true sense, they rely on your PC/Streamer to take share the load and do the first unfold (jury's still out as to the performance so I'm not sure they can be called MQA DAC's in the true sense of Bob Stuart's intent).


I keep hearing all the 'Billy Mays' of MQA saying "but just wait, there's more! Something incredible is coming out and it's all going to be awesome" (or that it's going to go mainstream) in terms of MQA finally getting significant adoption. That hook no longer snares this fish. Sorry, but I predict a slow, ugly death for MQA -- it will be like a bad strain of staph that just won't go away.I wish I'm wrong, I like MQA, but I also don't see the kind of adoption or traction that seemingly would make it mainstream.

Yup, same story as ever. This 'special' formats go nowhere. I knew that SACD basically was also dead on arrival (there's now probably on this format less than 0.1 % of all the music available on CD), and I am glad that I never got tempted. I don't own an SACD player/transport, and I don't own a single SACD. One of the best decisions in my audiophile life, not having wasted time, money and energy on that format.

***

Here is Mike Moffat (one of the great digital pioneers, of Theta Digital fame, now at Schiit Audio) on these issues:

"But the High-End magazines - they are going bugphuck. What is the public to think?? Just ask the questions below, but I get ahead of myself. The magazines pander to a hungry readership, eagerly anticipating tech wowsies in an industry which has known 5 major changes of tech in 110 years: Edison cylinders to 78 RPM flat discs, then to 33RPM long playing mono then stereo records, then to CDs, and finally to virtual music either streamed or living on user owned media. All of the significant tech news of 110 years of consumer audio in one sentence. Damned boring.

"Where those magazines and their readers miss the boat completely is the lie that consumer audio is a tech driven industry. Don't get me wrong - tech driven superior sound is fun. In reality, audio is all about economics. That's the rub: there is not enough money in the consumer audio market to support two different mainstream media formats or configurations. Never has been. Again, see the questions. The entry level end, from where our users bubble up, care about one thing: bang for the buck. It all begins with 2-3 buck ds dac chips which deliver quite a bit for for cheap in phones, etc. At all levels from the bottom to the top, that which delivers the most for the buck in the current format mentioned above wins. The outliers such as HDCD and MQA, even if sonically superior, have always lost."

[...]

"Here is what we are doing at Schiit. We are sending out a press release to indicate why we will not build any MQA decoding device for the foreseeable future. If we are wrong about the future of MQA and significant portions of the available and future audio catalog are offered – we will then be forced to look at in the same terms as Bluetooth Audio, MP3 and other lossy formats. For the moment, it is very safe to assume that Schiit will never be in the biz of attempting the futile task of polishing audio turds." (End quote)

From:
https://www.head-fi.org/f/threads/wh...#post-12607158

***

Also, from the book "Schiit Happened", p. 312 ('Mike' here is again Mike Moffat, from a conversation with Jason Stoddard, the other co-founder of Schiit Audio):

“Stop worrying [about DSD],” Mike said. “Where did reel to reel go? Nowhere. Wheredid quadraphonic go? Nowhere. Where did Elcassette go? Nowhere.Where did DAT go? Nowhere. Where did minidisk go? Nowhere. Wheredid HDCD go? Nowhere. Where did SACD go? Pretty much nowhere.I expect DSD will pretty much go the same exact place.”

“But what if it doesn’t?”

Mike groaned. “These special formats all end up the same place, because there’s no software for them. When there are more DSD downloads available than SACDs, let me know. Then I’ll start worrying.”

[rbbert]

Although SACD's keep being released, around 15-20 new classical SACD's every month, and Audio Fidelity and MFSL for jazz/pop/rock several more... That isn't a lot, but they are pretty much all "keepers", unlike most of the stuff that comes out on CD every week.

[radioactive]

That's easily fixed, just aim to the right further If you're lucky, you'll get an extra long roll when it lands too haha.

LOLOLOL, I had a great game going until the 5th. then the 8th, 14th, 17th then big old slap ya in your face 18. I had developed a nice duck hook out of the blue by the time I got to 12 if that tells ya anything. Oh ps, hot humid and my dew point was off the charts.

[radioactive]

It's nice to read that some experts are taking a stance on MQA and explaining why they are for or against in simple terms. I would however argue that there have been other big changes in audio thanks to technology. It has improved the performance of our gear enabling us to better design systems and make very fine measurements using technology previously unavailable. Some examples include improvements in speaker cabinet resonances, heat dissipation, use of SMD's and room calibration. In the case of the latter, technology has enabled us to create improvements that range from automatic types used in pre/pros such as of Audyssey, ARC, etc. to room calibration/correction systems built into subwoofers. It also enabled us to do more vigorous manual measurements which can be fed into systems that calculate exactly where and what kind of room treatments are needed. I'm indifferent about adding the creation of Blu-ray since it's an iterative improvement on SACD/DVD's density, but there are bluray audio discs. These are a few additional examples of technical advances in audio, there are lots more, but they're not as revolutionary as the "5 major changes" quoted. They do make for better sounding systems though.

I'm a believer in DSD. I've found it to be the best sounding digital format out there and it's my preferred format.

The problem with analog formats is the following: 1) Ease of use -- you can't swap from artist to artist or song to song easily. 2) High maintenance -- both playback device and media. 3) They all have artifacts that are annoying -- every reel to reel has some level of hiss or blurb where the tape isn't perfect, every album eventually gets a scratch or nick and no stylus is perfect [just look at the turntables with multiple arms that enable you to have multiple styli/styluses]. And finally, 4) Every analog format slowly degrades the playback material with every playback. With tape (R2R), friction across the tape heads wears the tape (thus the ubiquity of splice kits from tears and such during its prime), it magnetizes the head and can also wear the head down if you use it a lot. Also, every album play wears the groove and the stylus until eventually you lose the fidelity of the album when compared to the original. Analog is mechanical and degrades due to friction. All that and it's bulky to store. At its best, it sounds great, but analog is not something that's easily used for daily long term playback sessions.

Digital isn't perfect, but DSD is as good as it gets IMO.

Yup, same story as ever. This 'special' formats go nowhere. I knew that SACD basically was also dead on arrival (there's now probably on this format less than 0.1 % of all the music available on CD), and I am glad that I never got tempted. I don't own an SACD player/transport, and I don't own a single SACD. One of the best decisions in my audiophile life, not having wasted time, money and energy on that format.

***

Here is Mike Moffat (one of the great digital pioneers, of Theta Digital fame, now at Schiit Audio) on these issues:

"But the High-End magazines - they are going bugphuck. What is the public to think?? Just ask the questions below, but I get ahead of myself. The magazines pander to a hungry readership, eagerly anticipating tech wowsies in an industry which has known 5 major changes of tech in 110 years: Edison cylinders to 78 RPM flat discs, then to 33RPM long playing mono then stereo records, then to CDs, and finally to virtual music either streamed or living on user owned media. All of the significant tech news of 110 years of consumer audio in one sentence. Damned boring.

"Where those magazines and their readers miss the boat completely is the lie that consumer audio is a tech driven industry. Don't get me wrong - tech driven superior sound is fun. In reality, audio is all about economics. That's the rub: there is not enough money in the consumer audio market to support two different mainstream media formats or configurations. Never has been. Again, see the questions. The entry level end, from where our users bubble up, care about one thing: bang for the buck. It all begins with 2-3 buck ds dac chips which deliver quite a bit for for cheap in phones, etc. At all levels from the bottom to the top, that which delivers the most for the buck in the current format mentioned above wins. The outliers such as HDCD and MQA, even if sonically superior, have always lost."

[...]

"Here is what we are doing at Schiit. We are sending out a press release to indicate why we will not build any MQA decoding device for the foreseeable future. If we are wrong about the future of MQA and significant portions of the available and future audio catalog are offered – we will then be forced to look at in the same terms as Bluetooth Audio, MP3 and other lossy formats. For the moment, it is very safe to assume that Schiit will never be in the biz of attempting the futile task of polishing audio turds." (End quote)

From:
https://www.head-fi.org/f/threads/wh...#post-12607158

***

Also, from the book "Schiit Happened", p. 312 ('Mike' here is again Mike Moffat, from a conversation with Jason Stoddard, the other co-founder of Schiit Audio):

“Stop worrying [about DSD],” Mike said. “Where did reel to reel go? Nowhere. Wheredid quadraphonic go? Nowhere. Where did Elcassette go? Nowhere.Where did DAT go? Nowhere. Where did minidisk go? Nowhere. Wheredid HDCD go? Nowhere. Where did SACD go? Pretty much nowhere.I expect DSD will pretty much go the same exact place.”

“But what if it doesn’t?”

Mike groaned. “These special formats all end up the same place, because there’s no software for them. When there are more DSD downloads available than SACDs, let me know. Then I’ll start worrying.”

[CPP]

Oh, some more MQA smack down, from Srajan Ebaen from 6 moons, on the DAR site. http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/20...-missing-link/

[AJ Soundfield]

It's still the same. MQA adds anharmonic HF aliasing distortion "folded" back into the audio band due to the "lazy" filter. Some audiophiles are going to love this type of distortion, others not. There is nothing "authentic" about it, but some will prefer, others not. YMMV.
As long as MQA is just an option for the fringe, like all that came before it (HDCD>) all is well. If it becomes the sole way that some music is encoded...and that seems to be the intent, then that is bad news for those who don't prefer the added distortion.

[CPP]

It's still the same. MQA adds anharmonic HF aliasing distortion "folded" back into the audio band due to the "lazy" filter. Some audiophiles are going to love this type of distortion, others not. There is nothing "authentic" about it, but some will prefer, others not. YMMV.
As long as MQA is just an option for the fringe, like all that came before it (HDCD>) all is well. If it becomes the sole way that some music is encoded...and that seems to be the intent, then that is bad news for those who don't prefer the added distortion.

So true AJ, I just hope in the end MQA is not the end all of audio recording like you say encoded. Hope in years to come, there are options (formats) for the listener to chose what they prefer.

[still-one]

I was a bit surprised by these statement from the Pied Piper of Vinyl (aka Michael Fremer) in his review of the Brinkmann Audio Nyquist D?A Processor in Stereophile's August issue.

"Those who claim they can't hear the difference between CD resolution files and high Rez MQA files either haven't bothered to listen , or don't want to admit their claims of "CD sound is perfect" mare just plain wrong."

and "hearing (MQA) files streamed through the Nyquist via Tidal was and ear opener. Had this been CD sound in 1983, I'd still be a LP guy-but I'd also be all in with digital. "

[CPP]

I was a bit surprised by these statement from the Pied Piper of Vinyl (aka Michael Fremer) in his review of the Brinkmann Audio Nyquist D?A Processor in Stereophile's August issue.

"Those who claim they can't hear the difference between CD resolution files and high Rez MQA files either haven't bothered to listen , or don't want to admit their claims of "CD sound is perfect" mare just plain wrong."

and "hearing (MQA) files streamed through the Nyquist via Tidal was and ear opener. Had this been CD sound in 1983, I'd still be a LP guy-but I'd also be all in with digital. "

I wonder if JA made Mr vinyl change his tune on MQA , LOL

[Mike]

I wonder if JA made Mr vinyl change his tune on MQA , LOL

He's been a supporter since he first heard it. I talked to him privately early on when we all first heard it at CES 2 1/2 years ago.

[CPP]

He's been a supporter since he first heard it. I talked to him privately early on when we all first heard it at CES 2 1/2 years ago.

Now that's pretty cool.

[Kuoppis]

Oh, some more MQA smack down, from Srajan Ebaen from 6 moons, on the DAR site. http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/20...-missing-link/

Not sure why anyone would be surprised finding out MQA is a marketing story. It's just files re-recorded through a filter. The reason why a special DAC is needed for playback is purely commercial, to re-sell the existing catalogue - again.

Mr Lewinson's new company (Daniel Hertz) has its own system for that, except you can define the settings yourself, how you want the new "original" to sound.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Mike]

Not sure why anyone would be surprised finding out MQA is a marketing story. It's just files re-recorded through a filter. The reason why a special DAC is needed for playback is purely commercial, to re-sell the existing catalogue - again.

Mr Lewinson's new company (Daniel Hertz) has its own system for that, except you can define the settings yourself, how you want the new "original" to sound.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Do you have a link?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kuoppis]

Do you have a link?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://danielhertz.com/index.php?op...red&Itemid=118

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[AJ Soundfield]

an algorithm that fills in the steps of the PCM waveform with original musical information, to obtain a more enjoyable analog-like listening experience from standard digital audio formats.

Oh boy...

[Kuoppis]

Oh boy...

I think you nailed it .


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Nikhil]

Oh, some more MQA smack down, from Srajan Ebaen from 6 moons, on the DAR site. http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/20...-missing-link/

A large part of the information quoted in that article by "Frederic Vanden Poel, designer of the 432 Evo music server of Belgian brand Klinktbeter" has been lifted straight out of a discussion from CA (and possibly elsewhere). That discussion was started by a CA member "soxr" whom we all assume to be Rob S the developer the SOX engine.

[Al M.]

Oh boy...

Yup, I am curious about the "steps" of the PCM waveform, among others.

[Mike]

http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/20...agen-ps-audio/

[still-one]

http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/20...agen-ps-audio/

Some interesting comments.

[Mike]

http://www.soundonsound.com/techniqu...-audio-quality

[Unworthy]

I really liked that article. I didn't follow much of the technical elements but I think the author did a great job of boiling it down. Can someone confirm the comment that much of this technology is due to recent developments in mathematics and technology that is being used in precision electronics?

[Nikhil]

I really liked that article. I didn't follow much of the technical elements but I think the author did a great job of boiling it down. Can someone confirm the comment that much of this technology is due to recent developments in mathematics and technology that is being used in precision electronics?

That article is ghost written by MQA. All the technical speak pertains to the area of digital filters and dates back to the early 80s. Wadia was among the first to use filters to address the issue of "smearing" as it's now called by MQA. In 2017 the "math" is easily implemented by software.

MQA's claims are specious.

What they can claim as their own is the "recipe" for the filter that creates the MQA sound signature.
Meridien sponsored Peter Craven's research on apodizing filters which was published in 2004.
The sound is relaxed and pleasing to many who like MQA because of it.