Jump to content
Rt66indierock

MQA is Vaporware

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

As he has already said - I think he is just spamming this thread.

You see how the malcontents just attack anyone with a different opinion? This is why nobody wants to post what they like about MQA. Give it a rest, like I said it's $10 extra a month and if you don't want to spend don't, I am not trying to convince you otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Rugby said:

Sorry, but multi-channel for music is about as dinosaur and super-niche as you can get.  For video, sure.  Not the same thing.

 

Coming from the computer/console gaming generation, it is clear to me why studios want MQA; it is all about the ability to have exclusive content deals.  We are used to buying different hardware to have access to different content.  They just want to extend that to audio.   LG (which has MQA in its phones) makes a deal with Beyonce that her new MQA album will only do the highest unfold on the LG phone, either as a permanent exclusive or a timed exclusive.  The record company gets to charge LG for the exclusive, LG gets to use the exclusive to drive phone sales.  That is how MQA is going to be used.

 

 

Multi channei audio is NOT immersive FYI, common mistake NP.

 

http://www.bigpicturebigsound.com/What-s-Up-with-3D-Immersive-Sound.shtml

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CC

 

Thank you, it wasn't entirely clear to me what in a sea of causes and effects you were directing that comment at.  In the last 10 minutes alone there have been (???) 25 posts all impacting the direction of conversation slightly.  Small contextual clues fall off quickly in that type of environment and even turning back a page or two could miss it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PeterSt said:
2 hours ago, Jud said:

It was the one on the upper left I heard the MQA version of and wasn’t pleased with.

 

Yes Jud, clear. I will try it in a few hours and let you know what I think of it.

 

Hi Jud,

 

Well, I don't want to embarrass myself and most certainly not you, but I regard this in the league of "superb" or something like that. Of course here weights in that I don't think I ever played that album in my life, but this is typically what I am saying for somewhat longer by now : there actually isn't much what can disturb (me) about MQA. In comparison with the "genuine redbook" (whatever that might be) my opinion may change.

 

Btw, this one is finally an example of an MQA master/album which is not "not much compressed". So it compresses more as all I see pass by, and possibly it is this what disturbs you (extra). I think it is fine and the (hard plucked) bass guitar excels in an extraordinary way. But then this may be always the case with The Cars.

 

For others - and saying because I see the phenomenon pass by suddenly regularly in this thread - this is with an R2R DAC. (NOS/Filterless, my own filters applied in-software).

 

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

Yes, I appreciate that. It is a legitimate concern, although highly unlikely to occur, imo. My concern is that your posting is directly related to your professional interests and status. It is not simply a hobbyist perspective. You have a professional investment in what you advocate and a career that could be impacted by it.This raises some questions about your objectivity.

 

So I think your transparency is in the best interests of this forum, and quite possibly in your own best interest as well. Perhaps you would consider disclosing something of your professional background, training, affiliations and interests without revealing the details.

Sorry if I wanted to do that I would use a dating site, not CA. 

 

Hey Chris there is an idea for you, start a Tindr for audiophiles LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, witchdoctor said:

Sorry if I wanted to do that I would use a dating site, not CA. 

 

If you wanted to be honest about any conflicts of interest?  I’m guessing (and hoping) not, but I’m confused about what you’re saying here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/19/2017 at 4:45 AM, Fokus said:

 

Do these things ring a bell?

 

square root

Boltzmann

T

R

bandwidth

 

There is no theoretical  limit imposed by this formula.  That's because the value R can be made as low as desired.  Of course there will be a practical limit, since there is another formula for required power, E^2/R, which will show that 10x as much power will have to be consumed by the DAC if it is to produce a 10 dB better S/N ratio.

 

Whether these S/N ratios are relevant or not is a separate issue.  If thermal noise is the concern, then most likely the differences will be washed out by the amplifier noise, which could be in the DAC output buffer, an outboard preamp, or an outboard power amp.)

 

When designing an ADC the problem can be pushed off to the design of the microphone preamplifier.  However, ultimately the source of power must come from the motion of air molecules and there will be a limited amount of power.  Hence the tradeoff between large diaphragm microphones (lower noise, but uneven polar response) vs. small diaphragm microphones (higher noise, but more even polar response).  Of course recording engineers can put the microphones closer to the source and get better S/N ratios, but there will be additional tradeoffs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, crenca said:

 

As he has already said - I think he is just spamming this thread.

 

He's had threads shut down elsewhere, so he's moved over to CA...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

If you wanted to be honest about any conflicts of interest?  I’m guessing (and hoping) not, but I’m confused about what you’re saying here.

I have no professional affiliation with MQA or Tidal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

I have no professional affiliation with MQA or Tidal.

You forgot to include immersive audio in your list of non-affiliations.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, mcgillroy said:

Hey Witchdoctor, in the interest of a informed discussion plz compile a list with false claims made about MQA here on the thread. 

 

We'll take it from there.

 

Who is we?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, witchdoctor said:

+1

 

I’ll take that as a declaration of non-affiliation and trust you’d mention if that’s not correct.

 

Onward...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

×