MQA is Vaporware

[John_Atkinson]

18 hours ago, FredericV said:

He now calls us Shannonistas.

 

The term "strict Shannonista" was used in a letter published in the October issue of Stereophile (p.13).

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[Sonicularity]

36 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

The term "strict Shannonista" was used in a letter published in the October issue of Stereophile (p.13).

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

I'll take your word for it.   A fervent supporter of MQA uses a term published in a magazine that appears to irrationally support and align itself as pro-MQA.  How would this be surprising? 

[christopher3393]

1 hour ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

The term "strict Shannonista" was used in a letter published in the October issue of Stereophile (p.13).

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

Do you find the term elegant?  

[Ralf11]

better than Wienerites

[Brinkman Ship]

20 hours ago, FredericV said:

It appears LeeS does not learn anything from the information posted here. He keeps ignoring all of the research as posted here, and keeps repeating the same lies over and over again.

This post from Doug Schneider is public:
 

 

 

So "MQA is not really compressed"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_Quality_Authenticated

"Master Quality Authenticated (MQA) is an audio codec using lossy compression "

He now calls us Shannonistas.
 

Little boy Lee is the Trump of audio..facts are meaningless, experts don't know anything, and irrational statements are the norm.

[John_Atkinson]

1 hour ago, Sonicularity said:

I'll take your word for it.   A fervent supporter of MQA uses a term published in a magazine that appears to irrationally support and align itself as pro-MQA.  How would this be surprising?

 

Your cynicism is disappointing. I have published letters that are both pro and con MQA in Stereophile.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

[mansr]

3 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

Your cynicism is disappointing. I have published letters that are both pro and con MQA in Stereophile.

Wow.

[FredericV]

On 9/13/2018 at 1:30 PM, Hifi Bob said:

And yet MQA remains firmly stuck in the Betamax-zone.

It seems that only in Japan is there a smattering of interest.

 

 

It's far worse. You actually need to restrict MQA to google's entertainment category, as MQA matches search results non-related to this lossy DRM format:

 

MQA also resolves to:
 

Medical Quality Assurance
Mining Qualifications Authority
Malaysian Qualifications Agency, a statutory body in Malaysia
Mauritius Qualifications Authority, a government organisation
Missouri Quality Award, run by the Excellence in Missouri Foundation
Marchio di Qualità Ambientale (Environmental Quality Brand), a project in the Parco Nazionale delle Cinque Terre, Italy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MQA

Compare for example 432 Hz with MQA:

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today 5-y&geo=US&q=mqa,432 Hz
 

now if you remove all the false positives, MQA is so much smaller than my own area of interest:

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?cat=3&date=today 5-y&geo=US&q=mqa,432 Hz

 

 

Or with the betamax example:

including false positives:
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today 5-y&geo=US&q=mqa,betamax

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?cat=3&date=today 5-y&geo=US&q=mqa,betamax

 

 

MQA almost flatlines.

[Sal1950]

On 9/15/2018 at 7:31 PM, FredericV said:

It appears LeeS does not learn anything from the information posted here. He keeps ignoring all of the research as posted here, and keeps repeating the same lies over and over again.

This post from Doug Schneider is public:

Another 2 thumbs up to Mark Waldrep for being the first to call BS to that Schneider post.

[Sal1950]

On 9/16/2018 at 4:17 PM, John_Atkinson said:

 

Your cynicism is disappointing. I have published letters that are both pro and con MQA in Stereophile.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

Few and far between.

Shame on you John, Stereophile is selling out to the powers of commerce and may forever put the nails in the coffin for lossless master file distribution. For lord knows how many years audiophiles and music lovers prayed to have access to a media that would bring them a perfect copy of the original master tape. No matter what you think MQA sounds like, it is a facsimile of the master,  a lossy bastardized file that is now no where's near a bit perfect mirror of the microphones feed.

I've been a subscriber since the days of Gordon's ownership and no ads publishing. I believe he is now rolling in his grave at the anti-consumer and pro-commerce position Stereophile has taken on MQA

Shame On You

 

[John_Atkinson]

8 hours ago, Sal1950 said:

No matter what you think MQA sounds like, it is a facsimile of the master,  a lossy bastardized file that is now no where's near a bit perfect mirror of the microphones feed.

 

Putting to one side your emotional language, I made this point in the very first article I wrote on MQA: that it offers a benefit to the record companies in that, as with the LP, they are no longer selling a clone of the master.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

[Brinkman Ship]

2 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

Putting to one side your emotional language, I made this point in the very first article I wrote on MQA: that it offers a benefit to the record companies in that, as with the LP, they are no longer selling a clone of the master.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

So finally we have it...you fully acknowledge that MQA files are NOT identical to the master, and are lossy.

 

Hallelujah. You have been do evasive maneuvers for 3 + years, the gig is up.

 

You have continued to claim that MQA'd albums sound BETTER than the masters. You can't have it both ways.

 

Which leads to the conclusion that many of us have suspected all along. You are irrelevant, and your credibility

went down the toilet.

[kumakuma]

MQA only lost 7.1 million pounds in 2017

[John_Atkinson]

40 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

You fully acknowledge that MQA files are NOT identical to the master

 

I have said that from the very first time I wrote about MQA, in December 2014. They are derived from the master, of course.

 

40 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

 

and are lossy. 

 

Above 44.1kHz or 48kHz, yes, as has been described in Stereophile. I haven't written otherwise.

 

40 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

You have continued to claim that MQA'd albums sound BETTER than the masters.

 

That is correct. Others may disagree but why would anyone take issue with my having my own opinion? Unless you subscribe to the groupthink that seems endemic on this website.

 

Did I understand from another thread that you are visiting RMAF? I will be giving a presentation on Friday afternoon October 5, which will include a Q&A session at the end. You are welcome to ask me questions about MQA or any other topic.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

[kumakuma]

3 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

Unless you subscribe to the groupthink that seems endemic on this website.

 

Perhaps about MQA. Certainly not on other subjects.

 

 

[Brinkman Ship]

16 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

I have said that from the very first time I wrote about MQA, in December 2014. They are derived from the master, of course.

 

 

Above 44.1kHz or 48kHz, yes, as has been described in Stereophile. I haven't written otherwise.

 

 

That is correct. Others may disagree but why would anyone take issue with my having my own opinion? Unless you subscribe to the groupthink that seems endemic on this website.

 

Did I understand from another thread that you are visiting RMAF? I will be giving a presentation on Friday afternoon October 5, which will include a Q&A session at the end. You are welcome to ask me questions about MQA or any other topic.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

44.1 K or otherwise, bits are thrown out, so it is lossy at ANY SAMPLE RATE. Again more evasiveness,.

 

The fact you think distorted, post processed version of master files sound "better" is great, because everyone here can clearly for their opinion about your judgement and listening skills. You have been swimming upstream for several years now. MQA in the last 24 months has posted an official loss of 20 millions dollars. The market has spoken despite your best shilling efforts.

 

Groupthink? Unlike the majority here I listen to LPs, CDs, Hirez, and even tape. And love them all.

 

And the fact you allow someone like MIchael Fremer to write pure rubbish as below, shows how out of touch you are.

 

"As for MQA's ability to "fold" and "unfold" very large files for streaming and playback, hearing 24/96 and 24/192 files streamed through the Nyquist via Tidal was an ear-opener. Had this been CD sound in 1983, I'd still be an LP guy—but I'd also be all in with digital."
https://www.stereophile.com/content/brinkmann-audio-nyquist-da-processor-page-2#jLhDX4J4LcdghJcP.99

 

No, you misunderstood, I have no plans to attend RMAF, you are thinking of the author of this thread. But thanks for the invite.

 

 

[John_Atkinson]

1 hour ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Groupthink? Unlike the majority here I listen to LPs, CDs, Hirez, and even tape. And love them all.

 

I was referring to the fact that any time someone posts a positive comment on the sound of MQA files to CA, people like you swarm like a host of white blood cells to repel the intruder. You seem incapable of comprehending that your opinions on MQA may not be shared by others. Like I said, groupthink,

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[Brinkman Ship]

6 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

I was referring to the fact that any time someone posts a positive comment on the sound of MQA files to CA, people like you swarm like a host of white blood cells to repel the intruder. You seem incapable of comprehending that your opinions on MQA may not be shared by others. Like I said, groupthink,

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

and you continue to play victim with “just an opinion”...avoiding addressing any of the facts.. 

 

you made a misleading and incorrect statement above..MQA is lossy at all sample rates...but you ignore the correction. You are never wrong are you? Self righteous, yes.

[daverich4]

9 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

. You are never wrong are you? Self righteous, yes.

 

Pot calling the kettle black....

[Brinkman Ship]

2 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

 

Pot calling the kettle black....

i don’t mislead people and ignore facts established by people more qualified and neutral than me.

[John_Atkinson]

16 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

you made a misleading and incorrect statement above..MQA is lossy at all sample rates...but you ignore the correction.

 

With all due respect, you failed to understand what I wrote. MQA-encoded files only have 2 sample rates, 44.1kHz or 48kHz. I was referring to what happened spectrally when those files are unfolded.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[Shadders]

45 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

With all due respect, you failed to understand what I wrote. MQA-encoded files only have 2 sample rates, 44.1kHz or 48kHz. I was referring to what happened spectrally when those files are unfolded.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

Hi,

I thought that an MQA encoded 44.1kHz audio file which i assume is 16bits, allows only 12bits to 13bits for the LPCM audio. So in effect you are reducing the potential DR by approx 12dB ?

 

In addition, does it meet the red book criteria for audio CD's ?

 

Effectively, any MQA CD sold, if you do not have an MQA decoder (DAC, or other), you are being short changed.

 

Regards,

Shadders.

[Ralf11]

2 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

... swarm like a host of white blood cells to repel the intruder.

 

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

 

The analogy to the immune system fighting an infection is a good one!

[Archimago]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

 

 

The analogy to the immune system fighting an infection is a good one!

 

Yeah, I agree. That is an interesting analogy with some relevance.

 

While MQA is an easy example of an infectious attempt at controlling the production and playback chain (not unlike a viral agent co-opting host cells) that needs to be isolated and remediated, it's just one example in audiophilia where other pathological memes result in the questionable health of the hobby. As seen by the scientifically minded and most mainstream tech hobbyists of course...

[Brinkman Ship]

4 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

With all due respect, you failed to understand what I wrote. MQA-encoded files only have 2 sample rates, 44.1kHz or 48kHz. I was referring to what happened spectrally when those files are unfolded.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

I understood perfectly, but those two sample rates throw out bits...which then goes under the definition

of lossy. Not to mention the aliasing that Archimago's AND your boss, Paul Miller's measurements proved.