MQA is Vaporware

[Indydan]

26 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

 

I don't know what kind of troll your are. A mad one I suppose. 

What is your urge to be all over this thread ? can you help yourself ? or is it too late for that ?

 

If you "like" his posts in this thread, check out this thread he started. 

 

 

 

[witchdoctor]

36 minutes ago, Charente said:

 

 

After considering the costs of moving house to accommodate MQA streaming, a new DAC and likely increasing costs (little doubt) of MQA streaming I have nothing more to add.

It sounds like streaming isn't going to work with that internet connection. You can download some MQA tracks to compare with DSD and PCM, all from the same master at the 2L testbench for free. 

http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html

[PeterSt]

1 minute ago, witchdoctor said:

You can download some MQA tracks to compare with DSD and PCM, all from the same master at the 2L testbench for free.

 

Yes. And then run it through a cheap ADC and a 14 or whatever channel processor with about as many active speakers and that all for less than $10K. Especially because MQA is the source (which some call MP3 after all) this works out superbly. MQA cures all.

 

This is how we read the witchdoctor.

Does the witchdoctor get this ? or does he maybe think that PeterSt is exaggerating of some sort and to some kind of degree ?

Be serious man. Then you're taken serious.

 

Now continue this hilarious ferry tale. Start talking to yourself more. 

[PeterSt]

PS: You are reading BS from the about one pro-MQA guy left in this thread, PeterV being banned. So it is not even that.

[esldude]

2 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

 

You are into “immersive” multichannel but don’t grok a convolution kernel ??? — not everything is politics and marketing. 

 

Bruno Putzey’s or anyone else’s technical arguments stand on their own. As I said math is math. Understand?

I think it is pretty clear that he intends not to understand.  He hasn't cleared up how he hears all the beauty of MQA by going through an extra AD/DA stage at lower sample rates with conventional filters.  

[christopher3393]

32 minutes ago, esldude said:

I think it is pretty clear that he intends not to understand.  He hasn't cleared up how he hears all the beauty of MQA by going through an extra AD/DA stage at lower sample rates with conventional filters.  

 

He has published research on immersive sound, has done research with people like Sean Olive, attends international AES conferences, where he presents research and moderates panels. He is a researcher in the field. I would be curious as to how some of his research is funded and if there might be some conflict of interests regarding some of what he promotes. This is not an accusation, just a concern. He did  promote on at least 2 threads a recent immersive audio event at AES in which he was a presenter, but he won't acknowledge this. I find his posting behavior somewhat baffling for a pro. 

 

If I'm crossing a line here,  let me know. But this seems like one of those situations where hidden identity is being abused.

 

[witchdoctor]

When you think about it what makes MQA even more amazing is that all of these premier audio brands got in as early adopters. Imagine what it's like to walk into Harman International or Krell and say "Hey, you guys are doing it all wrong, let me show you my new invention that you MUST put in your new products". They would laugh 99.9% of the companies approaching them right out the door. Even if they gave you an opportunity the level of due diligence they would do before licensing it would be almost insurmountable. Yet all of these premier brands raised their hands and said you know what? This MQA ROCKS and we want to be a part of it. That's how we roll, oh yeah!!
 

[The Computer Audiophile]

21 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

When you think about it what makes MQA even more amazing is that all of these premier audio brands got in as early adopters. Imagine what it's like to walk into Harman International or Krell and say "Hey, you guys are doing it all wrong, let me show you my new invention that you MUST put in your new products". They would laugh 99.9% of the companies approaching them right out the door. Even if they gave you an opportunity the level of due diligence they would do before licensing it would be almost insurmountable. Yet all of these premier brands raised their hands and said you know what? This MQA ROCKS and we want to be a part of it. That's how we roll, oh yeah!!
 

You have no idea how companies work in this industry. That includes Harmon, Krell, and any of the other brands. 

[mansr]

47 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

He has published research on immersive sound, has done research with people like Sean Olive, attends international AES conferences, where he presents research and moderates panels. He is a researcher in the field. I would be curious as to how some of his research is funded and if there might be some conflict of interests regarding some of what he promotes. This is not an accusation, just a concern. He did  promote on at least 2 threads a recent immersive audio event at AES in which he was a presenter, but he won't acknowledge this. I find his posting behavior somewhat baffling for a pro. 

 

If I'm crossing a line here,  let me know. But this seems like one of those situations where hidden identity is being abused.

Failure to disclose industry affiliations is against the CA rules. Combined with his disruptive behaviour, I think it's time @The Computer Audiophile intervened.

[Mordikai]

56 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

He has published research on immersive sound, has done research with people like Sean Olive, attends international AES conferences, where he presents research and moderates panels. He is a researcher in the field. I would be curious as to how some of his research is funded and if there might be some conflict of interests regarding some of what he promotes. This is not an accusation, just a concern. He did  promote on at least 2 threads a recent immersive audio event at AES in which he was a presenter, but he won't acknowledge this. I find his posting behavior somewhat baffling for a pro. 

 

If I'm crossing a line here,  let me know. But this seems like one of those situations where hidden identity is being abused.

 

Really? He does not sound like a pro.

[mav52]

59 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

He has published research on immersive sound, has done research with people like Sean Olive, attends international AES conferences, where he presents research and moderates panels. He is a researcher in the field. I would be curious as to how some of his research is funded and if there might be some conflict of interests regarding some of what he promotes. This is not an accusation, just a concern. He did  promote on at least 2 threads a recent immersive audio event at AES in which he was a presenter, but he won't acknowledge this. I find his posting behavior somewhat baffling for a pro. 

 

If I'm crossing a line here,  let me know. But this seems like one of those situations where hidden identity is being abused.

 

Where is his paper ?  link please

[mansr]

3 minutes ago, Mordikai said:

Really? He does not sound like a pro.

He sounds like a professional shill.

[crenca]

I was thinking about this paragraph by Bruno:

 

"A second question, which I didn't even get to ask, was about the impulse response of MQA's decimation and upsampling chain as it is shown in the slide presentation. MQA's take on those filters famously allows for aliasing, so how does one even define "the" impulse response of that signal chain when its actual shape depends on when exactly it happens relative to the sampling clock (it's not time invariant). I mentioned this to my friend Bob Katz who countered "but what if there isn't any aliasing" (meaning what if no signal is present in the region that folds down). Well yes, that's the saving grace. The signal filters the kernel rather than vice versa and the shape of the transition band doesn't matter if it is in a region where there is no signal. 
These folk are trying to have their cake and eat it. Either aliasing doesn't matter because there is no signal in the transition band and then the precise shape of the transition band doesn't matter either (ie the ring tails have no conceivable manifestation) or the absence of ring tails is critical because there is signal in that region and then the aliasing will result in audible components that fly in the face of MQA's transparency claims."

 

And how it relates to the "crown jewels" aspect of MQA (which I believe is a central aspect to the industry as Robert H admits).  My guess:  Bob IS selling a "have their cake and eat it" because he has come up with a way to be able to claim that the labels are selling you "Hi Res" but as has been observed here, there is no meaningful signal in the "region that folds down".  In other words, MQA relies on their being "no conceivable manifestation" of aliasing artifacts because it has removed the signal that would lead to them by design.  How far off am I?

[christopher3393]

23 minutes ago, mav52 said:

Where is his paper ?  link please

 

Take your pick: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sungyoung_Kim2

[mav52]

2 minutes ago, christopher3393 said:

 

Take your pick: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sungyoung_Kim2

so you are saying the witchdoctor is Sungyoung Kim ?

[Mordikai]

26 minutes ago, mansr said:

He sounds like a professional shill.

I may be naive but is this really a big problem? How often does this happen?

[witchdoctor]

Let me think, what should I do about MQA?

You have the most esteemed brands in audio with the best engineers money can buy doing meticulous due diligence on a product they are evaluating called MQA which they then license to enhance their brand and meet the demand of the most discerning audiophiles in the world on the one hand.

On the other hand you have some hobbyists (I'm being polite) who have decided MQA is not for them, which is of course 100% fine.

Hmmm, let me think about this, which group should I roll with? I'll get back to you

[christopher3393]

Just now, mav52 said:

so you are saying the witchdoctor is Sungyoung Kim ?

 

Don't know if it is apprriate to come out and say it.

[christopher3393]

2 minutes ago, mav52 said:

so you are saying the witchdoctor is Sungyoung Kim ?

 

I'll wait for Chris C. to weigh in. I may have crossed a line.

[jabbr]

1 hour ago, christopher3393 said:

He has published research on immersive sound, has done research with people like Sean Olive, attends international AES conferences, where he presents research and moderates panels. He is a researcher in the field. I would be curious as to how some of his research is funded and if there might be some conflict of interests regarding some of what he promotes.

 

There’s a lot of crappy research. There’s also a lot of so-called research which is funded by companies that have strong biases.

 

For example the NFL had research panels that trashed the concept of CTE. Tobacco companies had “scientists” who trashed the idea that tobacco was harmful etc.

 

All I can go by is what he posts. If you are a professional in the field of immersive audio and don’t understand what a convolution is, you get no respect from me. What Putzey said is factually correct ( I posted long ago about this) regardless of what his biases are.

 

Or perhaps he does know and is trashing Putzey as biased,  when he in fact is the one biased. In any case the credibility is lost on me. Full stop.

 

[Shadders]

23 minutes ago, mav52 said:

so you are saying the witchdoctor is Sungyoung Kim ?

Hi,

I find this hard to believe. We all like a joke, but this forum represents a discussion in that persons profession. I have never seen such behaviour from a professional in their field of work.

Regards,

Shadders.

[FredericV]

1 hour ago, witchdoctor said:

Let me think, what should I do about MQA?

You have the most esteemed brands in audio with the best engineers money can buy doing meticulous due diligence on a product they are evaluating called MQA which they then license to enhance their brand and meet the demand of the most discerning audiophiles in the world on the one hand.

On the other hand you have some hobbyists (I'm being polite) who have decided MQA is not for them, which is of course 100% fine.

Hmmm, let me think about this, which group should I roll with? I'll get back to you

I know several designers at brands who do MQA:

- one does not believe in it, but wants to implement it, not to lose business if MQA would become a success
- another does not believe in MQA either, but their CEO believes in it, but only for streaming

One of them even tells me: our latest dac is much better than the previous model, but not because of MQA.

So a lot of the MQA implementors are doing it all for the wrong reasons. They do it not to miss the train, for the fear of going out of business, .... not because of any actual SQ improvement or because they believe in it. In Munich 2017 the above reasons where also the talk of the week. I also talked to Xivero's CEO, very enlightening.

One neighbour in Munich did not even care about SQ, but they offer OEM boards to big companies and MQA is just a checkbox on their feature list. They sell their own linux platform and OEM embedded boards and they don't care about SQ.

[witchdoctor]

15 minutes ago, FredericV said:

I know several designers at brands who do MQA:

- one does not believe in it, but wants to implement it, not to lose business if MQA would become a success
- another does not believe in MQA either, but their CEO believes in it, but only for streaming

One of them even tells me: our latest dac is much better than the previous model, but not because of MQA.

So a lot of the MQA implementors are doing it all for the wrong reasons. They do it not to miss the train, for the fear of going out of business, .... not because of any actual SQ improvement or because they believe in it. In Munich 2017 the above reasons where also the talk of the week. I also talked to Xivero's CEO, very enlightening.

One neighbour in Munich did not even care about SQ, but they offer OEM boards to big companies and MQA is just a checkbox on their feature list. They sell their own linux platform and OEM embedded boards and they don't care about SQ.

Do you ever go to Galaxy Studios in Mol Belgium? If so tell Wilfried the witchdoctor loves auro 3D and to stop by my immersive thread here on CA. They are mixing in 9.1 for music and 14.1 for movies a lot over there.

 

https://www.galaxystudios.com/

[FredericV]

7 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

Do you ever go to Galaxy Studios in Mol Belgium? If so tell Wilfried the witchdoctor loves auro 3D and to stop by my immersive thread here on CA. They are mixing in 9.1 for music and 14.1 for movies a lot over there.

 

https://www.galaxystudios.com/

What has this to do with the MQA topic? Why change the subject?

Yes I know Galaxy Studio's and their Auro 3D format adopted by Barco, but it did not succeed very well. The tech demo some years ago was OK. Even talked to official Auro representatives on local shows with Auro demo's. This was some years ago, now the Barco guy used an Anthem 11.2 processor which I also own, and I know the Barco agent personally. No word from Auro on the biggest home cinema event in my country.

So Auro 3D is a flop. Wonder what Wilfried says about MQA.

[christopher3393]

2 hours ago, mav52 said:

so you are saying the witchdoctor is Sungyoung Kim ?

 

Yes.