Jump to content
Computer Audiophile

crenca

  • Content count

    2,438
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About crenca

  • Rank
    Junior Objectivist

Recent Profile Visitors

5,770 profile views
  1. crenca

    An Open Letter to "MQA Partners"

    I don't believe I've heard of "casual phase" before. Has anyone else? Is Jim making this up?
  2. crenca

    MQA is Vaporware

    I don't do Apple so I don't know about iTunes. With my usual genres of Jazz and Classical I can find a download usually, occasionally resorting to having to order a CD online. With Electronica I have to resort to ordering a CD more often (which is counter intuitive to me at least), often from more obscure places as well. Usually for a reasonable price yes, but I might be less price sensitive than some. Like I said I have only been blocked a handful of times because I could not find the CD or 16/44 or higher download as I won't buy mp3. My collection is surely smaller than many (most?) of the folks around here, but I am still actively buying at I don't know, couple of hundred dollars a month...
  3. crenca

    MQA is Vaporware

    I think I see where you are coming from. Where we differ is our evaluation of where consumers are vis-a-vis DRM. While consumers can not "explain" it to you, or spell DRM, like pornagraphy they know it when the see it. DRM is always in some form or fashion an inconvenience and expense (by design - that is what it is for) and so again, consumers can't use the right words but they know it on some level. That is why they almost always reject it. As far as mp3, I can recall only a handful of times I have went to make a purchase and could not at locate at least a 16/44. All of them involved Electronica which I have only gotten into in the last couple of years. I suppose I am with you on this, in that I won't worry about it until mp3 gains a certain market threshold 😎
  4. crenca

    MQA is Vaporware

    Hum, not sure where you are going with this. Yes, formats are the underlying basis of "accessibility and availability". That is one of the primary reasons they are important. When you see companies wrestle with formats in an effort to control (your IE vs Netscape) example, what is happening is a format war of sorts - at least format/standards are the technical weapons in a market war. Consumers (civilians) get caught in the crossfire true, but I suppose I go back to the original point in that consumers tend toward (very strongly in fact) their interests in open standards, and that closed standards only "win" when an outside force (in the case of DVD/Blue ray, the Congress of the USA) intervenes. In other words, DRM was and is rejected by the market/consumers and not embraced as you allege. Not sure what mp3 is or was a threat to "access" of 16/44 or higher. mp3 is a modification in a different way to PCM than MQA, and while it is (or was - patent expired if I am not mistaken) its purpose, as a standard and a digital implementation was not to supplant PCM as an "end to end" standard. MQA express goal is to replace PCM. You keep coming back to a "until a certain threshold no worries" and it is a truism on a certain level, but mansr's point is that MQA is a digital DRM solution/implementation in a way that these other things you are pointing are not. Despite explicit denials of all the MQA players (Bob S, the trade publication promotion machine, etc.), this is true as it even says so right in the NDA...
  5. crenca

    MQA is Vaporware

    It's interesting what you say about "context". Here is the orignal statement that mansr posted: "The parties to this Agreement wish to discuss and exchange information in the general area of streaming or downloading, encoding, re-coding or decoding of high-resolution music, rights management, encoding and quality authentication." So you have this list (I count 4) of technical, digital MQA capabilities as a software product, and in the middle of this list (of 4) is something called "rights management" (#3). So in the context you assume that they are referring to another issue entirely separate from the context of the list itself? It's not as if "rights management" is something incroguent like say "ice cream" - it fits rationally into the context of the sentence/list. Not trying to put the screws to you Jud, I am just trying to understand how a lawyers mind works 😋
  6. crenca

    MQA is Vaporware

    Your confusing the products themselves with the underlying standards they rest on. With IE, Microsoft once tried to enforce its own standard (a hacked up, proprietary form of HTML - the standard), they failed utterly. IE/MS Edge today rests on the current flavor HTML. With Office, Microsoft has been more successful with implementing its own sort-of-standard (what version of hacked up xml are we on today?), but even here they have been forced by the market to stay relevant. I don't use Office, I use Apache Open Office even though 99% of my business partners, family and friends use MS Office and our documents are intercompatible because MS Office recognizes (has to - the market so far demands it) standards. Apple might be a better example for your argument/angle - it's ecosystem is quite closed which is the primary reason I don't allow it in my house (and back when I had influence in IT I worked very hard to keep it out of the whatever corp/government ecosystem I worked in). Yet, folks from other ecosystems (MS, Android, Linux, etc.) can intercommunicate with Apple just fine as they are forced to use HTML, etc. because the market demands it. A DAC is a DAC (i.e. a product), and the underlying software standard (i.e. PCM/DSD) is the standard they all rest on...
  7. crenca

    MQA is Vaporware

    Well, it's not really this simple. With DVD/Blu-ray, the DRM is enforced not through the encoding itself, but through an external mechanism that had to be legislated. Consumers never "choose" it. With Windows and iPhones and the like, DRM is thoroughly intertwined fer sur, but these are not base level "standards" in the same way an encoding is. Most people think of an OS as a standard, and it is in some sense, but it also rests on other standards. Whenever Microsoft has tried too hard to enforce its own base standards (examples include IE & Office) the market or the government (or both) have rejected it. Actually, @John_Atkinsoninsight that MQA is more analogous to TCP/IP is probably the best way to think about this. What would it mean for one company or a collection to come along and control TCP/IP? Net Neutrality is about this very thing, and in a way that is on the edge of the standard (i.e. its more of a tweak at the switching level - TCP/IP itself is not fundamentally changed, rather it is throttled/shaped by an evaluation based on the source, destination, and type of traffic).
  8. crenca

    iFi audio Ships Pro iDSD DAC/Streamer

    This is part of the debate around DSD as I understand it (and thus I could be wrong): the significance of this noise, where and how the the noise (and thus the design of the filter) effects "transient/supersonic audio performance", etc. Personally, for me I lean towards mansr here that letting the noise through is worse than any theoretical transient performance which near as I can tell, is based on the very unproven and speculative idea(s) about ultrasonic "speed" affecting the waveform and thus lower audible frequencies that we are all interested in. On the other hand, the noise is low in level - though approaching 80 dbfs down is usually otherwise notable...
  9. crenca

    MQA is Vaporware

    Yes. When applied to a standard, which in digital is the ground on which the rest of the market rests, it is particularly insidious (monopolistic).
  10. crenca

    MQA is Vaporware

    In short, a software design that allows an unrestricted (and usually "free") level of access/functionality, and another "premium" level of functionality (usually at a cost, sometimes just an agreement of restricted rights on the part of the end user). This design is inherent (and not a mere external agreement) and managed digitally by the software itself. In a typical situation, copy protection is not part of the implementation - on the contrary copying is usually encouraged.
  11. crenca

    MQA is Vaporware

    It must be said (again and again and again) that DRM is not limited to "copy protection measures". In practice there are other ways (that are just as important) to "manage", by digital means, the rights of consumers. The "freemium" model that MQA is by design is a good example. As to the truth of this being something that "does not matter" unless breaks through an unidentified market share, well that is one way to look at it. When the nature of MQA as DRM is denied by the creators and their promotion machine, I think it does matter even before this point...
  12. crenca

    MQA is Vaporware

    Yes, but not through the encoding means - a grove in the case of LP and software through the case of CD's. So how is rights management "on" an LP or CD? There are all sorts of right's management legal issues "around", but the LP's and CD's themselves are agnostic about the issue - they contain no inherent management of rights other than their physicality (a consumer has to possess them legally, etc.). MQA offers something over and above this - an inherent, designed in "Digital" rights management.
  13. crenca

    MQA is Vaporware

    Hum, Ok. So what would a digital encoding/format provider have to offer in a discussion about delivery of said content, as in: " in the general area of streaming or downloading, encoding, re-coding or decoding of high-resolution music.........encoding and quality authentication." in the area of rights management, unless the subject is itself Digital rights management (of whatever form)?
  14. crenca

    MQA is Vaporware

    Jud, honestly your response does not make sense. Why would a format or software encoding create "new versions or recording" in of itself? If they were truly "new versions", what would the format or software encoding have to do with the rights unless the format or software encoding itself was part of the rights management, in MQA's case via the "freemium" model of Digital Rights Management, which of course rests on the IP/closed/proprietary nature of the software MQA itself?
  15. crenca

    MQA is Vaporware

    Good points. I should have been more precise - are they making strong statements about say the math behind digital, or the general EE principals around this or that phenomena. I did not mean to say they have nothing to offer as far as a generalized "subjective" review, or comment on larger "meta" issues, etc. As far as my background, my wife (who is a physician) currently own and run a medical practice. I had a 20 year career in IT before that - thus the reason I can recognize and speak to the digital, software, IP, DRM and like issues around MQA.
×