MQA Discussion

AJ Soundfield said:
Unless it's the same as the illegal signal?
Click to expand...

Did you even read that before posting?

Nevertheless, I guess you a referring to the Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem. While your articulation is a bit wacko, this is still the only half-ways interesting statement in your 469 postings so far.

It is true, MQA breaks with the Nyquist rate rule.

But without breaking the rules there would be no science. There would be no cars, no moon landings, no quantum computing.

Btw, Harry Nyquist wrote his paper in 1928 - close to 100 years ago - and proved the theorem in 1948. The work was related to telegraph signals (the last large scale system was shut down in 2013). Don’t you think a thing or two might have happened since then?

Welcome to the 21st century.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Kuoppis said:
Kuoppis said:
Call me a convert. Eyes see, ears hear.
d9103512cc0f1449a3c84fb61f9bf0ef.jpg


a7cf5a0d960d269a1a2bfddbbc72dd07.jpg



Footnote 2: Strictly speaking, the signal we use to test DAC impulse responses is "illegal," in that it violates the Nyquist/Shannon requirement for the signal to be band-limited to half the sample rate.—John Atkinson
Click to expand...
Did you even read that before posting?
Click to expand...
The projection thing is getting worse....:lol:
 
AJ Soundfield said:
Except of course I did...and discussed in detail on other sites :)
You're projecting again.

Now, care to explain what happens to "unfolded" 40k signals at those loudspeaker terminals? Or how you manage to hear illegal signals you saw?
Click to expand...

Sure, sure, talk is cheap. Here you are also posting a lots and there is not one meaningful statement among them. Reading and understanding are two different things.

And we are discussing MQA encoding, remember? Not loudspeaker terminals.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
tube-vds said:
this is the patent:

https://depatisnet.dpma.de/DepatisNet/depatisnet?action=pdf&docid=WO002013186561A2
Click to expand...

So A.J., this the patent, you have discussed it on many sites and have you not - you said.

a) what does it say
b) how does it break with the convention
c) what is your scientific objection and why

Remember, this is about MQA encoding, not loudspeaker terminals or frequency output at the loudspeaker. Encoding.

What do you say?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Kuoppis said:
And what you are trying to say is (if there is a point of course)...?
Click to expand...
That rather than continually exposing your technical illiteracy and resorting to grade school yard taunts, instead stick to "MQA sounds better to you" because it does, or you drank the koolaid, or whatever.
Nothing to argue about simply liking it because you believe it sound better, rather than making arguments that make you look sillier each time.
 
Kuoppis said:
All fair enough, but analog LS output and digital encoding are two completely different pairs of shoes.

And we are discussing MQA encoding, remember? Not loudspeaker terminals.
Click to expand...
Right, what happens to MQA at your loudspeaker terminals? Your belief that MQA gets to your brain without output from the loudspeaker is false, even if you can't understand this.
 
A.J., I re-post this to give you another opportunity to respond. Do you actually have a substantiated view?

Please respond, I would be genuinely interested:

tube-vds said:
this is the patent:

https://depatisnet.dpma.de/DepatisNet/depatisnet?action=pdf&docid=WO002013186561A2
Click to expand...

So A.J., this the patent, you have discussed it on many sites and have you not - you said.

a) what does it say
b) how does it break with the convention
c) what is your scientific objection and why

Remember, this is about MQA encoding, not loudspeaker terminals or frequency output at the loudspeaker. Encoding.

What do you say?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
As this might take a while, I am listening to some nice MQA in the meantime:

b45fadb1074b6064e5f9c198c5ded037.jpg


Superb!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Kuoppis said:
Are just a bigmouth full of crap and opinions without knowledge, or do you actually have a substantiated view?

Please respond, I would be genuinely interested:
Click to expand...
Ahh, bipolar. Sorry, didn't catch before. My condolences.

Kuoppis said:
a) what does it say
Click to expand...
http://www.audioshark.org/showthread.php?t=9651&page=130&p=226760&viewfull=1#post226760
It says you need a better phone or better reading skills.;)

Kuoppis said:
Remember, this is about MQA encoding, not loudspeaker terminals or frequency output at the loudspeaker. Encoding.
Click to expand...
No, I don't remember, so please remind us all how your Brinkmann beams MQA files directly to your brain, bypassing the speakers and your ear filters. Thanks!!
 
You know A.J., I do mean this in the best of ways, but you have just exposed your lack of substance:

- the only things you can come up with is buzz-words and one-liners
- you make claims you cannot substantiate and try to hide behind borrowed tech views
- when asked for clarification you try to divert attention to side tracks
- when given the opportunity to demonstrate your knowledge, you fail miserably

I am sorry to say, but neither as a passionate audiophile, nor as a technically knowledgeable person are you able to make your case.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Well, at least you kept my mom out of it this time. Congrats with the newfound maturity. :)

Btw, ever going to explain how MQA bypasses your speaker/ear filtering?
 
AJ Soundfield said:
Well, at least you kept my mom out of it this time. Congrats with the newfound maturity. :)

Btw, ever going to explain how MQA bypasses your speaker/ear filtering?
Click to expand...

tube-vds said:
this is the patent:

https://depatisnet.dpma.de/DepatisNet/depatisnet?action=pdf&docid=WO002013186561A2
Click to expand...

So A.J., this the patent, you have discussed it on many sites and have you not - you said.

a) what does it say
b) how does it break with the convention
c) what is your scientific objection and why

Remember, this is about MQA encoding, not loudspeaker terminals or frequency output at the loudspeaker. Encoding.

What do you say?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top