Jump to content
IGNORED

John Atkinson: Yes, MQA IS Elegant...


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Not entirely true...

 

Hansen became much more neutral about DSD as a recording medium..yes he was not happy about DRM'd SACDs, but began to realize the appeal of DSD..very analog, slightly softer transients...altthough he still preferred 24/192 PCM himself.

 

IN FACT, he published his own DSD/PCM comparison with the Ayre ADC-

 

Unfortunately, the link no longer works, but here is a link from this forum.

 

You find it interesting that if I remember correctly, it was basically a 50/50 split on preference. I personally

preferred the DSD files.

 

 

 

 

Yep, this is the Charles Hansen I remember :) :

 

"Recently the introduction of computers into home audio playback systems has made possible an unforeseen occurrence — the reintroduction of DSD, the modulation scheme used in Sony’s failed format of SACD from the turn of the century.

 

"At the end of the 1990s as the CD patents were expiring, so was a huge revenue stream for Sony and Philips, developers of the Compact Disc format. Anxious to replace the CD with another exclusive format that would also generate licensing income, Sony and Philips tried again with the Super Audio Compact Disc or SACD. In the meantime, none of he other hardware manufacturers were having any of it. They all saw the explosive growth of DVD as the wave of the future and wanted to base any new format on DVD. Thus began one of the most bizarre chapters in the history of audio formats."

 

BTW, IIRC the comparison files weren't level matched, and/or there may have been other differences, as there was a great deal of criticism in the thread about the validity of the comparisons.

 

 

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
1 hour ago, FredericV said:

 

I can clearly hear the difference between standard minimum phase upsampling, and minimum phase upsampling where the post-ringing is reduced to one cycle + aliasing. So this test is very stupid:
 


The reason why is very simple: MQA's aliasing is correlated to the music signal, while in the above simulation, we compare uncorrelated noise with an attenuated music signal. There are even youtube video's where you can see this correlated aliasing in action.

Hans Beekhuyzen is another MQA influencer who use the same simplified "fake" tests where he fails to disclose how he created his listening samples, like in the time smear video. When someone then asks the more technical questions, he answers his channel is not scientific but for lay persons.

 

why are we surprised when Stereophile employs one of the kings of pseudo science, Fremer? there has never been a fantastical claim by manufacturers he did not parrot. Cable with internal vacuums anybody>?

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

If you read my article (which isn't specifically about MQA but about A/D conversion in general), you should note that the filter I mention that is free from ringing is the Ayre QA-9's antialiasing filter at 2Fs and 4Fs rates in the its "Listen" setting. Yes, the QA-9's Listen filter allows for image energy to fold back below Nyquist but both Charley Hansen and Bob Stuart have pointed put that at 2Fs and 4Fs rates, there is very little musical energy to be aliased.

 

Ayre's reconstruction filters in its D/A converters are minimum-phase types that ring, either for a short time (Listen) or longer (Measure). The Ayre D/A filter that doesn't ring is an experimental type that Charley Hansen sent me during the discussions we had on this subject before he passed away and that I refer to in the article; it is not available to owners of Ayre D/A processors. So as very few commercial recordings have been made with the Ayre QA-9's Listen filter, it would appear that if removing so-called "temporal bur" is indeed something that improves sound quality for the reasons I explain in the article,  the MQA process is one of the few commercially available end-to end solutions that would do that. If...

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

 

How irenic.  What say you internet forum members, you who are "nasty", ignorant, and troublesome according trade publications such as Stereophile?  Is JA two facing it here?

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

If you read my article (which isn't specifically about MQA but about A/D conversion in general), you should note that the filter I mention that is free from ringing is the Ayre QA-9's antialiasing filter at 2Fs and 4Fs rates in the its "Listen" setting. Yes, the QA-9's Listen filter allows for image energy to fold back below Nyquist but both Charley Hansen and Bob Stuart have pointed put that at 2Fs and 4Fs rates, there is very little musical energy to be aliased.

 

Ayre's reconstruction filters in its D/A converters are minimum-phase types that ring, either for a short time (Listen) or longer (Measure). The Ayre D/A filter that doesn't ring is an experimental type that Charley Hansen sent me during the discussions we had on this subject before he passed away and that I refer to in the article; it is not available to owners of Ayre D/A processors. So as very few commercial recordings have been made with the Ayre QA-9's Listen filter, it would appear that if removing so-called "temporal bur" is indeed something that improves sound quality for the reasons I explain in the article,  the MQA process is one of the few commercially available end-to end solutions that would do that. If...

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

 

Thanks John.  I'm confused about the mention of a non-ringing filter as both something available in the QA-9, and something not available to Ayre owners, and would appreciate if you could clear that up.

 

Putting that to one side, I'm interested in the extent to which an individual's liking for such filters (including mine previously, and it might be again; currently I'm preferring steeper filters than I used in the past) might result from enjoyment of a little added distortion subjectively perceived as warmth, versus less ringing.

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
10 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

For the record, I have never referred to people who post to forums like this as "'nasty', ignorant, and troublesome." However, I do think, judging from many of the comments in this thread, that people often don't actually read what I wrote before commenting. So it goes.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

As an "Editor" you can attempt to wash your hands of what is in your publication all you want, and no doubt you will convince some...will it be enough?

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Jud said:

 

Putting that to one side, I'm interested in the extent to which an individual's liking for such filters (including mine previously, and it might be again; currently I'm preferring steeper filters than I used in the past) might result from enjoyment of a little added distortion subjectively perceived as warmth, versus less ringing.

 

 

Huummm, I wonder if there is an established and accepted methodology for forming a testable hypothesis and testing such a question?......Nah, too many false positives  ?

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
1 minute ago, crenca said:

 

 

Huummm, I wonder if there is an established and accepted methodology for forming a testable hypothesis and testing such a question?......Nah, too many false positives  ?

 

Happy to read any published peer reviewed work you're aware of.

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
28 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

If you read my article (which isn't specifically about MQA but about A/D conversion in general),

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

Interesting then that MQA appears 7 times in the first paragraph, and is used a an example of 'good practice' throughout the article. Having Bob Stuart provide his 'comments' as a coda pretty much makes it 'all about MQA'

 

 

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, Jud said:

Thanks John. 

You're welcome.

 

Quote

I'm confused about the mention of a non-ringing filter as both something available in the QA-9, and something not available to Ayre owners, and would appreciate if you could clear that up.

 

The QA-9 is a now-discontinued A/D converter that used a moving-average filter (12 samples at a time IIRC) at its 2Fs and 4FS rates. My article shows that while the QA-9's Measure anti-aliasing filter is a (short) minimum-phase type, the Listen filter produces a impulse response, examined in the digital domain, with no ringing before or after. The Ayre D/A converters don't have such a filter; while Charley Hansen and his team created a complementary reconstruction filter to that in the QA-9, this is not available to owners of Ayre DACs. Charley sent this experimental filter to me to test; his doing so was the genesis of my article.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

For the record, I have never referred to people who post to forums like this as "'nasty', ignorant, and troublesome." However, I do think, judging from many of the comments in this thread, that people often don't actually read what I wrote before commenting. So it goes.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

 

Perhaps he was referring to this post, by "jeffhenning"

 

"...in fact, usually, very little knowledge is what is exhibited by people who are dilettante A-holes with strong opinions about audio that disagree with you, John.

MQA is rather brilliant. While I understand why it’s not being universally adopted, most people who aren’t engineers who have strong opinions about it don’t even understand basic audio recording and engineering.

Give them the credence they deserve (none)."


 

Link to comment
40 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

If you read my article (which isn't specifically about MQA but about A/D conversion in general), you should note that the filter I mention that is free from ringing is the Ayre QA-9's antialiasing filter at 2Fs and 4Fs rates in the its "Listen" setting. Yes, the QA-9's Listen filter allows for image energy to fold back below Nyquist but both Charley Hansen and Bob Stuart have pointed put that at 2Fs and 4Fs rates, there is very little musical energy to be aliased.

 

Ayre's reconstruction filters in its D/A converters are minimum-phase types that ring, either for a short time (Listen) or longer (Measure). The Ayre D/A filter that doesn't ring is an experimental type that Charley Hansen sent me during the discussions we had on this subject before he passed away and that I refer to in the article; it is not available to owners of Ayre D/A processors. So as very few commercial recordings have been made with the Ayre QA-9's Listen filter, it would appear that if removing so-called "temporal bur" is indeed something that improves sound quality for the reasons I explain in the article,  the MQA process is one of the few commercially available end-to end solutions that would do that. If...

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

..except, there is no "if", virtually all non industry linked listeners feel not only does it NOT improve the sound, but it makes it worse.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

You're welcome.

 

 

The QA-9 is a now-discontinued A/D converter that used a moving-average filter (12 samples at a time IIRC) at its 2Fs and 4FS rates. My article shows that while the  Measure anti-aliasing filter is a (short) minimum-phase type, the Listen filter produces a impulse response, examined in the digital domain, with no ringing before or after. The Ayre D/A converters don't have such a filter; while Charley Hansen and his team created a complementary reconstruction filter to that in the QA-9, this is not available to owners of Ayre DACs.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

With all due respect to Ayre, the fact their ADC did not sell, proves it provided a solution the industry did not need, or was not willing to pay for. And that applies 10,000 x more to MQA.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Perhaps he was referring to this post, by "jeffhenning"

 

"...in fact, usually, very little knowledge is what is exhibited by people who are dilettante A-holes with strong opinions about audio that disagree with you, John.

 

You do understand that I am not "jeffhenning"?

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

Link to comment
52 minutes ago, crenca said:

I really don't even want to click on Stereophile anymore at all.  How is JA twisting Hanson's position exactly?  I wonder if JA is taking the opportunity (the man is dead after all) to get in the last word...

 

Twisting might too strong a word. But your point stands: JA is indeed taking using Hansen to get the last word on MQA.

 

 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, austinpop said:

Not everyone here on CA is rabidly anti-MQA. I remain agnostic, but have to say that I have not had an AHA experience with an MQA recording. I do find the MQA Core decoding of Tidal Masters in Roon to be a quite decent step up from the Redbook equivalents in some cases, and this can be enjoyed on any DAC.

 

Careful.  In pretty much every case I can recall, when I liked an MQA version better, it was a different mastering, i.e., MQA wasn't the only thing changed.  There were many cases where I liked MQA less than the RedBook or hi res version.  I felt there may have been some high frequency distortion in the MQA files, which is what has led to my curiosity concerning whether a liking for MQA comes from less ringing, or more aliasing/imaging and consequent higher THD. 

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
22 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

If you read my article (which isn't specifically about MQA but about A/D conversion in general), you should note that the filter I mention that is free from ringing is

...

t if removing so-called "temporal bur" is indeed something that improves sound quality for the reasons I explain in the article,  the MQA process is one of the few commercially available end-to end solutions that would do that. If...

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

I have re-and re -read tyour article John and I still can;t see the point. Everyone knows you can have a filter (or non-filter) with no temporal blur (if that exists) and that is by having a sample and hold circuit or some other form of weak or non-filter. So what?

I do think it's a good idea to try to use a transient that is not a dirac to model time domain behaviour , but I remain somewhat confused as to why you felt that the ones you used may have approximated to any real transient. I'm not sure that just having a downward sloping frequency/ amplitude plot is enough. Of course real transients don't come out of absolute silence. But if you can't show ringing with a real transient then maybe that's a clue.

You are not a sound quality measurement device

Link to comment
23 hours ago, John_Atkinson said:

So as very few commercial recordings have been made with the Ayre QA-9's Listen filter, it would appear that if removing so-called "temporal bur" is indeed something that improves sound quality for the reasons I explain in the article,  the MQA process is one of the few commercially available end-to end solutions that would do that. If...

Hi,

What this implies is that, to remove the "temporal blur" (dispersion is the correct engineering term for this) you need an end to end solution.

 

Therefore, ALL processing by MQA on existing recordings is pointless and may mess up the recording. That is, MQA can NEVER be backwards compatible with existing recordings.

 

Regards,

Shadders.

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...