Apple, in rolling out OS 11, may be the beginning of the end for MQA

asiufy · Sep 16, 2017

MQA Truth said:
Very simple question. Why has MQA not provided full albums in MQA and non MQA, offline for public demos at dealers at shows.

It defies explanation. But we know they have done everything in their power to prevent direct comparisons.

All distracts from the major issue, that the whole thing is a charade.

The files are out there. Since the main source of MQA consumption is Tidal, there's no reason for them to provide files anymore, if the same stuff can be streamed out of a $20/month Tidal account... That said, I've seen industry people demonstrating with MQA and non-MQA files of commercial recordings, like Steely Dan, etc.
At the Wilson Audio factory, we were played that exact same comparison, using files (not Tidal) through a Mytek $2000 MQA DAC.There were 2 or 3 tracks, but the one I remember clearly was the Steely Dan. Remarkable difference.
As I said, while I agree they didn't allow AxBs before, and that was dumb, there's nothing of the kind going on right now. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your hatred for Bob Stuart.

Steve Williams · Sep 16, 2017

asiufy said:
The files are out there. Since the main source of MQA consumption is Tidal, there's no reason for them to provide files anymore, if the same stuff can be streamed out of a $20/month Tidal account... That said, I've seen industry people demonstrating with MQA and non-MQA files of commercial recordings, like Steely Dan, etc.
At the Wilson Audio factory, we were played that exact same comparison, using files (not Tidal) through a Mytek $2000 MQA DAC.There were 2 or 3 tracks, but the one I remember clearly was the Steely Dan. Remarkable difference.
As I said, while I agree they didn't allow AxBs before, and that was dumb, there's nothing of the kind going on right now. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your hatred for Bob Stuart.

as I have said in an earlier post in a different MQA thread, I have no pony in the game. I have heard MQA on only one occasion at last year's show in Newport. I was the only one in the room and had a private demo. I knew many of the songs played and they did sound very good. However I lost all interest in MQA when I asked the man conducting the demo to play the same files in RBCD whereupon he refused and stated that it wasn't't allowed by Meridian. I thanked him very much for the demo and left the room and have had no desire since then to revisit MQA. I'm simply not interested even if things have changed. The very fact that he said to me what he did made me feel that "something is rotten in the state of Denmark" and I lost all interest no matter how good it might be

Mike Lavigne · Sep 16, 2017

asiufy said:
The files are out there. Since the main source of MQA consumption is Tidal, there's no reason for them to provide files anymore, if the same stuff can be streamed out of a $20/month Tidal account... That said, I've seen industry people demonstrating with MQA and non-MQA files of commercial recordings, like Steely Dan, etc.
At the Wilson Audio factory, we were played that exact same comparison, using files (not Tidal) through a Mytek $2000 MQA DAC.There were 2 or 3 tracks, but the one I remember clearly was the Steely Dan. Remarkable difference.
As I said, while I agree they didn't allow AxBs before, and that was dumb, there's nothing of the kind going on right now. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your hatred for Bob Stuart.

at the MSB room at the LA Show, the MSB rep Vince, was playing MQA and non-MQA files off his laptop. my money is on MSB not needing to do any smoke and mirrors. not enough to gain for them. were they duped? unlikely. MQA is not a purchase motivator for their buyers of their top level dacs. it's nice to see it included. but it's besides the point.

Tidal is maybe 5% of my digital listening on my MSB Select II. I'm big into high rez, both PCM and dsd (17 terabytes of files). which is better than MQA.

MQA Truth · Sep 16, 2017

asiufy said:
The files are out there. Since the main source of MQA consumption is Tidal, there's no reason for them to provide files anymore, if the same stuff can be streamed out of a $20/month Tidal account... That said, I've seen industry people demonstrating with MQA and non-MQA files of commercial recordings, like Steely Dan, etc.
At the Wilson Audio factory, we were played that exact same comparison, using files (not Tidal) through a Mytek $2000 MQA DAC.There were 2 or 3 tracks, but the one I remember clearly was the Steely Dan. Remarkable difference.
As I said, while I agree they didn't allow AxBs before, and that was dumb, there's nothing of the kind going on right now. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your hatred for Bob Stuart.

This is the problem. 2 or 3 tracks is not good enough. And Steely Dan sourced from where? From the numerous CD masterings?
The SACD? The DVD-A?

I don't hate Bob Stuart, he never got a dime from me, or tried to steal and patent my designs, like he did to John Curl.

If you think MQA is the future, why don't you become a Meridian dealer?

microstrip · Sep 16, 2017

MQA Truth said:
(...) Was ANY commercially released material used to compare MQA? If this was like any of the other demonstrations, the answer is NO. (...)

Please remember one thing..there is ONE place and one place only to consume MQA, and that is Tidal, for $20 a month. (...)

microstrip said:
It was correctly pointed out by WBF members that we can download the same files in MQA and other formats from several sites. This could allow direct comparison and would supply facts to this thread.

MQA Truth said:
Care to provide an album count? 99.9% of MQA is on Tidal. That is a fact. (...)

I was just answering your direct question, not debating MQA statistics. My only interest in MQA is on current sound quality evaluation, not forum gossip or personnel feelings. It is an interesting subject for audiophiles - surely a narrow music market slice - just for what it can deliver now. IMHO the worst enemy of MQA is the very fast evolution of digital audio - when it was presented in 2014 it had some interest, perhaps not so much nowadays. Anyway, the deciders will be the big streaming companies, who should have reliable data and predictions on audio bandwidth of consumers, not the audio forums participants.

MQA Truth · Sep 16, 2017

Steve Williams said:
as I have said in an earlier post in a different MQA thread, I have no pony in the game. I have heard MQA on only one occasion at last year's show in Newport. I was the only one in the room and had a private demo. I knew many of the songs played and they did sound very good. However I lost all interest in MQA when I asked the man conducting the demo to play the same files in RBCD whereupon he refused and stated that it wasn't't allowed by Meridian. I thanked him very much for the demo and left the room and have had no desire since then to revisit MQA. I'm simply not interested even if things have changed. The very fact that he said to me what he did made me feel that "something is rotten in the state of Denmark" and I lost all interest no matter how good it might be

What makes this more damning, is that MQA is not supposed to be compared to Redbook, but to the mastered high resolution file it was created from.
MQA claims to encode from 24 bit studio master files, and that is what you are supposed to bump it up against.

Steve Williams · Sep 16, 2017

MQA Truth said:
What makes this more damning, is that MQA is not supposed to be compared to Redbook, but to the mastered high resolution file it was created from.
MQA claims to encode from 24 bit studio master files, and that is what you are supposed to bump it up against.

well that was merely my ignorance nothing else

MQA Truth · Sep 16, 2017

Steve Williams said:
well that was merely my ignorance nothing else

the fact you sniffed out MQA has a big hoax clearly means you are in no way ignorant.

let this be clear..MQA was never supposed to be a replacement for Redbook, but for HIREZ PCM.

asiufy · Sep 16, 2017

MQA Truth said:
If you think MQA is the future, why don't you become a Meridian dealer?

Again, where did I say MQA is the future? I don't remember ever saying that... Don't let your hatred get in the way of facts, man...

And for the record, not impressed by Meridian hardware/products.

Frankly, what bothers me is that you seem to imply a lot of knowledge about me and my business, but you fall flat every single time. If you looked past your hatred, you'd see most of my brands do NOT support MQA, and one of them actually flat out calls it a scam (Linn), and the other actually had a falling out with them after being one of the early adopters (Auralic).

Still, as I said, I listen and present all sides of the tech/story, and let people decide on their own.

caesar · Sep 16, 2017

MQA Truth,

What is your objective? Don't get me wrong, I like intellectual diversity, versus the superficial diversity we find valued in society by the elites (Hispanic, woman, black, asian, gay, etc.). I don't mind your posting at all, but what are you trying to achieve? Many record labels have already converted their files to be MQA ready, and they are being streamed as we speak. The war is over, and nothing personal, but you sound like Baghdad Bob.

Or is there something else you are after?

rbbert · Sep 16, 2017

MQA Truth said:
So you would pay one man, Bob Stuart, to decide how all your digital albums should sound?

Out of all the drivel being posted here, this is something I think is important and deserves more attention. It should be clear (and should have been long before MQA was ever announced) that a knowledgable and talented audio engineer can make almost any recording sound better (at least when the goal is playback on a home audio system). It is certainly possible, maybe even likely, that Meridian's engineers are simply doing this, and then encoding the result and calling it Master Quality Authenticated. Nothing wrong with the first part of this (the mastering or remastering), only the exclusivity and proprietariness of the second part.

DaveyF · Sep 16, 2017

rbbert said:
Out of all the drivel being posted here, this is something I think is important and deserves more attention. It should be clear (and should have been long before MQA was ever announced) that a knowledgable and talented audio engineer can make almost any recording sound better (at least when the goal is playback on a home audio system). It is certainly possible, maybe even likely, that Meridian's engineers are simply doing this, and then encoding the result and calling it Master Quality Authenticated. Nothing wrong with the first part of this (the mastering or remastering), only the exclusivity and proprietariness of the second part.

+1

Although if you are standing in Bob Stuart's shoes, nothing wrong with the second part either.

DaveyF · Sep 16, 2017

MQA Truth said:
So you would pay one man, Bob Stuart, to decide how all your digital albums should sound?

Of course not. But I still have a choice, and will always have a choice, as to whether I am acquiring an MQA file or not. I seriously doubt that Bob Stuart could gain control over all the distribution of digital music content!! He might have that as a lofty goal, but come on let's get serious.

microstrip · Sep 16, 2017

rbbert said:
Out of all the drivel being posted here, this is something I think is important and deserves more attention. It should be clear (and should have been long before MQA was ever announced) that a knowledgable and talented audio engineer can make almost any recording sound better (at least when the goal is playback on a home audio system). It is certainly possible, maybe even likely, that Meridian's engineers are simply doing this, and then encoding the result and calling it Master Quality Authenticated. Nothing wrong with the first part of this (the mastering or remastering), only the exclusivity and proprietariness of the second part.

This argument (re-mastering) was clearly ruled out in Stereophile review of MQA. Besides, do you think that professional audio engineers, such as Peter McGrath and many other professionals would not notice it?

rbbert · Sep 16, 2017

microstrip said:
This argument (re-mastering) was clearly ruled out in Stereophile review of MQA. Besides, do you think that professional audio engineers, such as Peter McGrath and many other professionals would not notice it?

Only ruled out in terms of EQ and volume, but there are many other DSP plug-ins available, and in fact MQA is DSP remastering, the only real question is what are the specifics? In fact, over at gearslutz.com many professional engineers have been speculating about the answer to that question for quite some time.

DaveyF · Sep 16, 2017

rbbert said:
Only ruled out in terms of EQ and volume, but there are many other DSP plug-ins available, and in fact MQA is DSP remastering, the only real question is what are the specifics? In fact, over at gearslutz.com many professional engineers have been speculating about the answer to that question for quite some time.

Is MQA really DSP remastering, or is it only upsampling in disguise. That seems to be the real question.

metaphacts · Sep 16, 2017

MQA Truth said:
..

Ask why no native high resolution recordings, of which McGrath has many, were not used.

Peter often plays native hi res recordings that have been MQA encoded. Not sure where you are getting your information.

853guy · Sep 16, 2017

rbbert said:
MQA Truth said:

So you would pay one man, Bob Stuart, to decide how all your digital albums should sound?

Click to expand...

Out of all the drivel being posted here, this is something I think is important and deserves more attention. It should be clear (and should have been long before MQA was ever announced) that a knowledgable and talented audio engineer can make almost any recording sound better (at least when the goal is playback on a home audio system). It is certainly possible, maybe even likely, that Meridian's engineers are simply doing this, and then encoding the result and calling it Master Quality Authenticated. Nothing wrong with the first part of this (the mastering or remastering), only the exclusivity and proprietariness of the second part.

Very nice, gentlemen, I concur.

rbbert said:
microstrip said:

This argument (re-mastering) was clearly ruled out in Stereophile review of MQA. Besides, do you think that professional audio engineers, such as Peter McGrath and many other professionals would not notice it?

Click to expand...

Only ruled out in terms of EQ and volume, but there are many other DSP plug-ins available, and in fact MQA is DSP remastering, the only real question is what are the specifics? In fact, over at gearslutz.com many professional engineers have been speculating about the answer to that question for quite some time.

Parallel compression (i.e. a mix of wet (compressed) and dry (non-compressed) signal) can actually be fairly transparent in terms of making an audible difference discernible in an A/B test, without fundamentally altering either overall volume or spectral content. I'm not saying that's what MQA is, but I haven't read anything that says it isn't.(1)

This, from someone who takes perverse delight in noting during the same year of the greatest number of streams ever (250.7 billion songs), vinyl sales rose by 25.9%.

Best,

853guy

(1) Adjusting the M/S balance, judicious use of multi-band compression and/or adding a layer of reverb in a very low wet/dry ratio also won't alter overall volume or spectral content, but will alter the sound.

awsmone · Sep 16, 2017

Getting back to the headline of this thread

The Apple support for FLAC is/would be important as FLAC compression is superior to MQA

This is because MQA enfolds the upper frequencies into the LSB , as "noise", this cannot be compressed

If only one download standard is desirable from a data storage point of view, then universal coverage for FLAC would appear to be an issue for MQAs future....this was the number one aim of the patent

I must say, that with so many dsp/ filter options available now to "work" on SQ as desired , why is MQA one filter , so special ?, to me it's not really relevant, I can demonstrate the SQ changes of filtering options to anyone, no surprise there

The big question, is whether you want your hirez files bottled up in a closed system, which is counter current to what we have now

Hi Rez masters in dsd and above and dxd etc, which we can manipulate with a variety of dsp options currently in our servers and DAC without any licensing or extra software or firmware or "bespoke" hardware

Why does Meridian need to take over the show, because they demonstrated dsp makes a difference ?...

It's seems that the real driving force might be the closed system with compression:-

Warner have been systematically converting files to MQA ABOUT 3000 by June 2017 and staff are trained to do conversion

Sony and Universal so far have not to my knowledge .....

microstrip · Sep 16, 2017

DaveyF said:
Is MQA really DSP remastering, or is it only upsampling in disguise. That seems to be the real question.

Can you explain us what is technically "upsampling in disguise"?

Apple, in rolling out OS 11, may be the beginning of the end for MQA

Industry Expert/VIP Donor

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Banned

VIP/Donor

Banned

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator

Banned

Industry Expert/VIP Donor

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Industry Expert

Active Member

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Similar threads