Jump to content
IGNORED

MQA is Vaporware


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi FredericV,

Thanks for confirming. Not working it out, i assume the accuracy of the 72dB attenuation of the 12bits which will be the lower order bits, has less impact on the overall (less THD) than the use of 0.01% accurate resistors ?.

Thanks and regards,

Shadders.


It's more complex than it looks:

http://www.the-ear.net/review-hardware/metrum-acoustics-pavane-digital-analogue-converter-dac

They use this splitting to work around the problem you are explaining:

"But why manipulate the data stream? Well, whatever R2R converter is used, problems always arise with the LSB part, because the signal is smaller and at a lower level irregularities occur, non-linearity arises and digital noise becomes part of the analogue signal. "

Designer of the 432 EVO music server and Linux specialist

Discoverer of the independent open source sox based mqa playback method with optional one cycle postringing.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, FredericV said:


It's more complex than it looks:

http://www.the-ear.net/review-hardware/metrum-acoustics-pavane-digital-analogue-converter-dac

They use this splitting to work around the problem you are explaining:

"But why manipulate the data stream? Well, whatever R2R converter is used, problems always arise with the LSB part, because the signal is smaller and at a lower level irregularities occur, non-linearity arises and digital noise becomes part of the analogue signal. "

Hi FredericV,

Thanks again. I wonder if the THD generated by a simple 24bit R2R ladder is audible ?, more than any non linearity caused by the dual 12bit R2R DAC summation?

Regards,

Shadders.

Link to comment
Just now, Shadders said:

Hi FredericV,

Thanks again. I wonder if the THD generated by a simple 24bit R2R ladder is audible ?, more than any non linearity caused by the dual 12bit R2R DAC summation?

Regards,

Shadders.

 

I'm not a dac designer, so I would have to ask Cees from Metrum.
But I heard tube dacs with R2R (Aries Cerat) as we partnered with them in Munich 2017. It sounded fantastic.

I believe there are more ways to Rome

In this ultra high-end price segment, almost nobody cares about MQA.

Designer of the 432 EVO music server and Linux specialist

Discoverer of the independent open source sox based mqa playback method with optional one cycle postringing.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, fung0 said:

 

This is very well put. Attempts to make this debate about sound quality are mis-conceived.

 

Even the most glowing reports place any possible sonic advantage of MQA at no better than 'extremely subtle' - while the many less-positive reports (not to mention essentially all detailed technical analysis) indicate no better than placebo levels of improvement, at best, and at least subtle levels of sonic degradation, at worst. Even by the most charitable reading of available evidence, MQA is clearly not a significant step forward in audio quality compared to FLAC/PCM or DXD. And very possibly a slight step backward.

 

Against that, we have the format's numerous, overt and absolutely undeniable practical drawbacks. It's lossy, it's proprietary, it's expensive (at every point in the distribution process), and it introduces mild DRM (with a significant chance of truly onerous DRM in future) into a distribution system that is at last almost entirely free of it. To counterbalance these negatives, MQA would need some sizable positives... and, very clearly, there are none to be had. (Other than the thrill of buying yet another shiny new DAC.)

 

The onus is very much on the pro-MQA camp - and especially MQA Ltd. - to provide a strong justification for such a highly disruptive new format. This they have utterly failed to do. When pressed, they repeatedly fall back on lauding the vague, highly subjective and all-but-inaudible 'coloration' of MQA encoded music. That sort of argument is enough to sell one DAC over another, but not even remotely sufficient to sell a whole new industry-wide audio format.

 

Summing up everything stated so far in this thread (and I have read it all): it's fail, fail, fail for MQA. And yes, that's absolutely taking into account all glowingly subjective reports from people who just love MQA. Folks: you're free to love whatever you love - but you'll have to pardon the rest of the world if it asks a better reason to reshape itself than according with your emotions.

 

Hear hear!!!

Link to comment
19 hours ago, firedog said:

The video comparison witchdoctor makes is a bad analogy for one simple reason: most people see the benefits of hi-res video and screens immediately, (not necessarily 4k) but most don't hear the advantage of hi-res audio because it is subtle - and on highly volume compressed music (most today) and hip hop type music, it doesn't really make a positive difference.

 

The better my system has gotten, the more I've realized that well recorded Redbook sounds fine, and I'm happy with it. Some Redbook recordings sound better than a lot of hi-res ones. I'd still prefer a well done hi-res recording, but it isn't an absolute necessity for me to feel I'm listening to something very good. 

 

Yes, some old recordings like those of RCA are good and 90% of my music collection is from ripping CDs.  If the recording is good, It does not matter that they are converted to 16/44 or 24/88 or 96 provided someone in the process did not mess up with the EQ etc. 

MetalNuts

Link to comment
On 10/17/2017 at 8:14 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

I don't believe 4k video was something consumers asked for or need. I'm not sure it's actually that good for anyone other than those with giant screens who sit close, and the people selling goods. 

 

Lossless 1080p, which isn't sent into homes via streaming, satellite, or cable, would be better. When people see how good an over the air HD video looks compared to lossy 4k, they may think twice about 4k. The same can be said for great 44.1 versus high resolution and MQA.

 

MQA will go over like 3-D and the 240hz gimmicks TV manufacturers tried SO hard to push for years, doing their best to convince us that movies were better if they looked like soap operas. Now they are back to focusing on what counts, resolution and image quality (*cough* uncompressed *cough*).

Link to comment
4 hours ago, FredericV said:


Our industry is a difficult one. The younger generation doesn't really care about high quality. They just want instant audio in an acceptable quality. The current gen of audiophiles is almost at it's end. We have maybe 10 to 20y left. Look at CES: this year it was a flop, several years ago it was overcrowded.

 

I have reservation in your opinion that younger generation doesn't really care about high quality.  The younger will become what we are with the passage of time. 

 

Most of the younger generation carry the music with them wherever they go (not like the elders who already have their own house and living room to place the HIFI equipment and like to sit there quietly and comfortably listening music).  In our younger days, we used walkman, discman and we have no place of our own and no money to buy the equipment that we have today.  

 

In my place, despite the youngsters do not yet have their own place to pile up their HIFI equipment,  most of them are using very expensive headphones, earphones which to a certain degree indicated that they demand quality.  When the time comes, they will just like us on the path to audiophile. 

 

So cheer up!

MetalNuts

Link to comment
6 hours ago, mcgillroy said:

 

So you basically saying that parts of the industry view MQA as a chance to grow the high-end market?

 

Growth beyond the usual upgrade cycles hardware-manufactures depend on? 

 

In any case an important point.

 

But given the fact that we are talking about an massively overcrowded market with long term shrinking demand where the only money made is either said upgrades or ultra-overprized statement items, vendors putting their eggs in a basket with a rent-seeking entity like MQA is pretty naive. Or desperate.

 

Any growth that might occur if more people demand high-rez will give MQA more leverage to sap away at your profits. On top of which MQA can force its own upgrade cycles for the next new feature, betterment, DRM-enchainment one up.

 

Beyond that why should the market grow? As with mobile the new domestic-music-playback market opened up by smart-speakers + streaming will be won by convenience not by quality. 

 

That's not what I'm saying, but some could see MQA as the opportunity you describe. 

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
5 hours ago, wushuliu said:

MQA will go over like 3-D and the 240hz gimmicks

 

I am not so sure about that yet. But we'll see.

The 3-D luckily went away (hey, we have several TV's here just capable of that and we never even tried it once).

240hz ... I don't know about that one either. Once a gamer discovers that and sees it is useful ... I think the rig next to me (of such a gamer :S) does 90fps and that is with the best Q games. As soon as he surpasses 144fps he will want one (I suppose it works like that).

 

Btw, I think we know each other in person. :)

 

 

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Fokus said:

 

Old tricks. Joining the DACs is problematic. 140dB SNR, much less 155 dB, is not feasible with such an architecture, in our universe, at room temperature, and with normal output levels. If Metrum claim this, they are being creative with the truth and their measurements.


They use an FPGA and forward correction to do this. This creative argument has also been said about MSB, one Dutch designer who is well respected told me the measurements of MSB are impossible. The select DAC claimed to do something like 26.5 ENOB, which is very close to Metrum's -155 dB SNR. I don't have the lab gear to verify these measurements.

 

Quote

 

 

Also an old trick. And guess what: there is no free lunch. This comes with its own set of problems.

 

 

Again that's why he uses an FPGA.
 

Quote

 

Perfectly wrong, you mean. If you think this, you don't even understand digital audio. Sorry.


Without the corrections that he applies, you are probably right. But I have seen the impulse responses. He posted them on a Dutch FB group. He also told in that FB group (Streaming Audio) Bob Stuart was very impressed with the measurements.

Let's not make this an MSB or Metrum bashing topic. I heard MSB at one of our resellers and was very impressed (this has been the best system I've heard for several years), also heard it at their HQ and was not impressed. Maybe the combination with Tidal & Thrax is not my taste, or his acoustics were not as good as my own reseller. The system that worked well had the wisdom L75, which are very tall line array ribbon speakers. This system had the analog dac, and every wall of his demo room was treated.

 

image.thumb.jpeg.fa1d5cb6bc9ecc04484091927c5f592a.jpeg

 

 

 

Quote

 

The leaky renderer filters are totally incapable of suppressing accumulated (i.e. production chain) post-ringing. I think you still do not understand MQA.

 

Indeed, that's why I write " They try to shorten the tail after the transient " in the article in my signature. I'm not claiming they are very successful in what they do.

 

Designer of the 432 EVO music server and Linux specialist

Discoverer of the independent open source sox based mqa playback method with optional one cycle postringing.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Fokus said:

Old tricks. Joining the DACs is problematic. 140dB SNR, much less 155 dB, is not feasible with such an architecture, in our universe, at room temperature, and with normal output levels. If Metrum claim this, they are being creative with the truth and their measurements.

My thoughts exactly. With a split architecture like that, the two halves still need to be matched with the same precision. Otherwise there will be a non-linearity at the transition point. It also does nothing to address thermal noise.

 

2 hours ago, FredericV said:

They use an FPGA and forward correction to do this.

You can't correct for thermal noise. Mismatched resistors can possibly be compensated for by turning the resulting non-linearity into noise, much like dither does with quantisation noise. This will of course raise the noise floor a little. Moreover, this approach would require expensive per-unit calibration, and this would need to be repeated regularly just like for lab equipment.

 

There is, however, a much simpler solution. It's called sigma-delta modulation.

Link to comment
8 hours ago, witchdoctor said:

This thread is an echo chamber of a handful of malcontents, The ship has sailed guys, MQA is the future of hirez, get over it already. If you don't like MQA and want better SQ buy more vinyl OK? 

Ha!

 

But really, is there a future in hirez?

 

It seems that MQA is merely a dinghy that is springing leaks and the captain is going to have to make a decision to continue or return to port!:D

Jim

Link to comment
4 hours ago, FredericV said:


They use an FPGA and forward correction to do this. This creative argument has also been said about MSB, one Dutch designer who is well respected told me the measurements of MSB are impossible. The select DAC claimed to do something like 26.5 ENOB, which is very close to Metrum's -155 dB SNR. I don't have the lab gear to verify these measurements.

 

 

And neither do they as they seem to be based on a mis-reading of an FFT. Its common to find even fairly experienced engineers reading the FFT spat out by their AP and pointing to where the 'grass' is and saying that's their noise floor. They're blissfully unaware that the figure they get depends on the bin width in their FFT. 26.5 ENOBs sounds quite feasible if the bandwidth under consideration is narrower than 2Hz. Ditto for Metrum's claimed '-155dB' SNR.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, witchdoctor said:

This thread is an echo chamber of a handful of malcontents, The ship has sailed guys, MQA is the future of hirez, get over it already. If you don't like MQA and want better SQ buy more vinyl OK? 

 

If the ship really has sailed as you say, MQA would not have cancelled their presentation at RMAF.  And there are DACs out there of sufficient quality that make the "need" for hirez moot.  Listen to well mastered Redbook on a high quality R2R DAC to see what I mean.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, witchdoctor said:

This thread is an echo chamber of a handful of malcontents, The ship has sailed guys, MQA is the future of hirez, get over it already. If you don't like MQA and want better SQ buy more vinyl OK? 

 

Go tell that to the Mastering Engineers over at Gearslutz. They probably really happy to get some solid info from you

 

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/mastering-forum/1171365-mqa-discussion-denver-rmaf.html

 

;)

 

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Thought I already said it in my post :~)

 

Edit: They see MQA as a vehicle to sell again to the same customer base who buys something at every change in tech.

 

And/or to a new group of "kids" not burdened by the "traditional", entitled audiophile paradigms.

mQa is dead!

Link to comment
5 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

I am not so sure about that yet. But we'll see.

The 3-D luckily went away (hey, we have several TV's here just capable of that and we never even tried it once).

240hz ... I don't know about that one either. Once a gamer discovers that and sees it is useful ... I think the rig next to me (of such a gamer :S) does 90fps and that is with the best Q games. As soon as he surpasses 144fps he will want one (I suppose it works like that).

 

Btw, I think we know each other in person. :)

 

 

 

240Hz is wonderful.  It makes a big difference to me in providing the “illusion of reality” when I watch movie scenes involving people in motion, or sports.  I noticed it immediately in the store displays when it first came out.  Bought a TV that has it and couldn’t be happier.

 

3D: Generally agreed, though I did watch the Masters golf tournament broadcast in 3D, and it helped immeasurably in understanding the lay of the greens and knowing how putts would break.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, Fokus said:

 

The leaky renderer filters are totally incapable of suppressing accumulated (i.e. production chain) post-ringing. I think you still do not understand MQA.

 

Would it be the case that the response will ring only as long as the filter is applied?  The reason I ask is that I’m under the impression (correct or incorrect?) that these renderer filters are quite short.

 

Edit: Oh, *suppressing*.  So the point isn’t the ringing produced by the renderer filter, it’s the (lack of) effect on the ringing already “baked into” the signal.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...