[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] A Look at MQA...

[Archimago]

Now that CES2016 has come and gone and the audiophile magazines seem to
have posted a few blog posts, I thought it was time to download the 2L
MQA demo tracks and have a peek under the hood as well as spill a few
keystrokes on this whole MQA encoding scheme. Listening to the undecoded
MQA files was an interesting experience as well...

http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2016/01/measurements-mqa-observations-and-big.html

Will be fascinating where this whole MQA thing goes. I'm guessing at
best a niche product with TIDAL partnership. Unless I'm mistaken, too
many issues and asking too much for consumers to buy special MQA
decoding DACs after all the excellent choices we have out there! I feel
the idea of a closed ecosystem at this stage is a very bad thing with
little upside.



Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Wombat]

Archimago wrote:
>
> http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2016/01/measurements-mqa-observations-and-big.html

"Sorry, the page you were looking for in this blog does not exist."



Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Archimago]

Hmmm... Try again, should be fixed...



Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Julf]

Great work as usual!



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

Archimago wrote:
> .... I feel the idea of a closed ecosystem at this stage is a very bad
> thing with little upside.

Now, now Archy there is a big upside... for Meridian.

I liked your analysis but I still have one very important and, as yet
unanswered, question: does MQA work with DSD files?


I believe that my above little joke question tells us everything we need
to know about MQA, which is that it's pure snakeoil but in a new and
improved bottle. Perhaps a better question would be how good is the food
and drink at the Meridian sponsored MQA events?



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Wombat]

MQA over Tidal is what may cause most irritation.
There is no better marketing as to have the whole catalogue MQA'd and
therefore with better quality you have at home or you can buy for ALL
music ever recorded.
Already now there are unqualified reports how Tidal sounds better as
elsewhere purchased originals because of secret masters.
Imagine the superlatives you will soon read about! You need it!



Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

Wombat wrote:
> MQA over Tidal is what may cause most irritation.
> There is no better marketing as to have the whole catalogue MQA'd and
> therefore with better quality you have at home or you can buy for ALL
> music ever recorded.
> Already now there are unqualified reports how Tidal sounds better as
> elsewhere purchased originals because of secret masters.
> Imagine the superlatives you will soon read about! You need it!

For me Tidal will always be best known for Madonna humping the table at
the launch event (it's at about 1:15 of the video):

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/music-news/11505654/Jay-Z-Rihanna-Madonna-Kanye-West-attend-launch-of-Tidal-streaming-service.html



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[R1200CL]

ralphpnj wrote:
>
> I liked your analysis but I still have one very important and, as yet
> unanswered, question: does MQA work with DSD files?

It has been stated from MQA that DSD is not part of the MQA chain.

You may ask PS Audio if their DAC's will be MQA enabled some time
😀


------------------------------------------------------------------------
R1200CL's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=63832
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

R1200CL wrote:
> It has been stated from MQA that DSD is not part of the MQA chain.
>
> You may ask PS Audio if their DAC's will be MQA enabled some time
> 😀

I think that high end audio should be renamed "The Flavor of the Month
Club"

A brief history of high end (aka audiophile) DAC's:

Original 16bit/44.1kHz capable DACs replaced by 24bit/96kHz capable DACs
replaced by 32bit/384kHz capable DACs replaced by USB & 32bit/384kHz
capable DACs replaced by asynchronous USB & 32bit/384kHz capable DACs
replaced by DSD & asynchronous USB & 32bit/384kHz capable DACs now to
replaced by MQA & DSD & asynchronous USB & 32bit/384kHz capable DACs

And that's just the hardware. On the software (aka music) side we have:

CD replaced by DVD-Audio & SACD replaced by CD quality downloads
replaced by high resolution (24bit/96kHz and 24bit/192kHz) downloads
replaced by DSD downloads replaced by MQA encoded downloads

Surprised that they missed high resolution downloads with no dynamic
range compression (actually there are few of these available, the first
few Paul McCartney solo records).



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Julf]

R1200CL wrote:
> It has been stated from MQA that DSD is not part of the MQA chain.

And the whole MQA process is based on PCM files. Not compatible with
DSD. Or, rather, DSD is not really compatible with anything that
requires processing.



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

R1200CL wrote:
> It has been stated from MQA that DSD is not part of the MQA chain.
>
> You may ask PS Audio if their DAC's will be MQA enabled some time
> 😀

Julf wrote:
> And the whole MQA process is based on PCM files. Not compatible with
> DSD. Or, rather, DSD is not really compatible with anything that
> requires processing.

I guess that my sarcasm doesn't come through via text. In others words,
my original question, "does MQA work with DSD files?" was meant as a
joke.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Julf]

ralphpnj wrote:
> I guess that my sarcasm doesn't come through via text. In others words,
> my original question, "does MQA work with DSD files?" was meant as a
> joke.

That is what I assumed, but just wanted to make clear why it was not a
meaningful question. :)



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

Julf wrote:
> That is what I assumed, but just wanted to make clear why it was not a
> meaningful question. :)

No problem, the following quote..

Julf wrote:
> And the whole MQA process is based on PCM files. Not compatible with
> DSD. Or, rather, DSD is not really compatible with anything that
> requires processing.

...should really read:

"And the whole MQA process is based on *-smoke and mirrors. Not
compatible with reality.-*"



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Mnyb]

MQA is not really snake oil , it's more like placebo . It does its thing
acording spec and works sort of . It's impact is clearly measurable it
does things . The thing is if it's needed or wanted ?

The as asumption that we need >20 kHz content , is what it hinges around
.

And it's doing more harm than good applied to CD res content ?



--------------------------------------------------------------------
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office: Boom
Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
Misc use: Radio (with battery)
iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
(spares Touch, SB3, reciever ,controller )
server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Mnyb]

Mnyb wrote:
> MQA is not really snake oil , it's more like placebo . It does its thing
> acording spec and works sort of . It's impact is clearly measurable it
> does things . The thing is if it's needed or wanted ?
>
> The as asumption that we need >20 kHz content , is what it hinges around
> .
>
> And it's doing more harm than good applied to CD res content ?

That did not come out as I wanted ( English is not my first language )
.

I mean the algorithm is not fake it actually does "something" many tweak
products actually does absolutely nothing at all .
All different shades of grey :) but as usual it's marketed as the thing
that's going to save us all and elevate humanity to audiophile bliss
....



--------------------------------------------------------------------
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office: Boom
Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
Misc use: Radio (with battery)
iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
(spares Touch, SB3, reciever ,controller )
server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

Mnyb wrote:
> That did not come out as I wanted ( English is not my first language )
> .
>
> I mean the algorithm is not fake it actually does "something" many tweak
> products actually does absolutely nothing at all .
> All different shades of grey :) but as usual it's marketed as the thing
> that's going to save us all and elevate humanity to audiophile bliss
> ....

I understand what you are saying, however if MQA does not work on DSD
files then what's the point? :)



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Mnyb]

ralphpnj wrote:
> I understand what you are saying, however if MQA does not work on DSD
> files then what's the point? :)

That's an interesting point Meridian and by extension Bob Stuart has
never liked DSD they have always supported PCM and that makes sense ( I
do get your joke :) )

SACD and DSD is in essence just incompatible with all kinds of audio
processing , and just there to protect the disc by obfuscation and it
worked for decades . I'm a bit surprised by its sudden resurrection as a
download format , but there is always a next thing a new bandwagon now
where back at PCM via MQA ?



--------------------------------------------------------------------
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office: Boom
Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
Misc use: Radio (with battery)
iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
(spares Touch, SB3, reciever ,controller )
server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Archimago]

ralphpnj wrote:
> I understand what you are saying, however if MQA does not work on DSD
> files then what's the point? :)

:-)

Remember, this is Meridian! Arch enemy of SACD with their support of
DVD-A back in the day and MLP encoding. Bob Stuart will have none of
that DSD nonsense - that's for girly men!

Of course, MLP is now Dolby TrueHD and given that MLP came out around
1998, we're looking at the end of their patent term in the next couple
years (typical term of 20 years)...

As you said many time... It's about the money, and they need a new
revenue stream. Pronto!



Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[mlsstl]

Archimago wrote:
> :-)As you said many time... It's about the money, and they need a new
> revenue stream. Pronto!
Very true. It is disappointing that so much corporate effort is put into
making meaningless changes for the sole purpose of protecting patents.
As many have noted before, from a audio fidelity standpoint, the music
industry makes horridly poor use of the CD format as it is.

With the current state of most recordings, coming up with new storage
formats makes as much sense as rearranging the deck chairs on the
Titanic.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlsstl's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9598
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Julf]

mlsstl wrote:
> With the current state of most recordings, coming up with new storage
> formats makes as much sense as rearranging the deck chairs on the
> Titanic.

Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic makes perfect sense if you
can charge for them again...



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

mlsstl wrote:
> Very true. It is disappointing that so much corporate effort is put into
> making meaningless changes for the sole purpose of protecting patents.
> As many have noted before, from a audio fidelity standpoint, the music
> industry makes horridly poor use of the CD format as it is.
>
> With the current state of most recordings, coming up with new storage
> formats makes as much sense as rearranging the deck chairs on the
> Titanic.

I fully agree with you but what really disturbs me is how easily so many
audiophiles fall for this nonsense. While I do understand why the high
end audio press so willingly acts as cheerleaders for these oftentimes
worthless (from an audio standpoint) endeavors (money, money, money),
it's the fact that so many otherwise intelligent people by into these
scams over and over again. As the saying goes: one lies and the other
swears to it.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Archimago]

ralphpnj wrote:
> I fully agree with you but what really disturbs me is how easily so many
> audiophiles fall for this nonsense. While I do understand why the high
> end audio press so willingly acts as cheerleaders for these oftentimes
> worthless (from an audio standpoint) endeavors (money, money, money),
> it's the fact that so many otherwise intelligent people by into these
> scams over and over again. As the saying goes: one lies and the other
> swears to it.

Well said. It's not so much that companies will take liberties with the
truth in advertising or that there are cheerleaders willing to benefit
from the industry. Rather the lack of critical thinking is of greater
concern...

Having said that, who knows, maybe we're just jaded and battle weary
from the few "extremist subjective audiophiles" who also tend to be very
vocal on forums... and the reality is that Meridian already realizes the
gig's up when it comes to actually achieving significant penetration
with this scheme.



Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Julf]

Archimago wrote:
> Rather the lack of critical thinking is of greater concern...

And unfortunately that is in no way limited to audio :(

> Having said that, who knows, maybe we're just jaded and battle weary
> from the few "extremist subjective audiophiles" who also tend to be very
> vocal on forums... and the reality is that Meridian already realizes the
> gig's up when it comes to actually achieving significant penetration
> with this scheme.

Good point.



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[cliveb]

ralphpnj wrote:
> I fully agree with you but what really disturbs me is how easily so many
> audiophiles fall for this nonsense.
Audiophiles are a very discerning bunch. They will only fall for this
kind of thing if it comes from one of their anointed bunch of
manufacturers: Linn, Naim, Meridian, Wadia, Krell, etc. If Microsoft or
Sony had come up with MQA, audiophiles would have laughed at it.



Transporter -> ATC SCM100A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[R1200CL]

To me the possibility to stream hi-res is the main advantage with MQA.
You may say that could be done without MQA, but since it's only is going
to be offered via MQA, I'm fine with that.

I'm more skeptical to the sonic benefits of older 16 bit material that
do not exist in better master than the redbook format. I also understand
that there is at least 3 ways to implement MQA on those recordings. (as
told on Audiostream)
Then we may also apply if the A/D chip is known. So the SQ may not be
that much better. I may buy an Explorer2 to verify. (Just have to wait
until it actually can decode MQA)

Those few hi-res I've purchased from HD-Tracks did sound better than CD
to me. So I'm expecting MQA based on hi -res masters to sound better, at
least if you have good enough stereo.

There is also something called MQA Studio, which I'm not sure how differ
from normal MQA, but I guess it is related to recordings done by MQA
certified equipment and quality processing. If old recordings can be
remastered to MQA studio is also something I don't know.

So I would like to understand all the different MQA encoding options
better, and if there is planned a way to tell us which process is used.
At the moment all I know is different lights for MQA and MQA Studio.

When Tidal start with MQA sometime later this year, we may know more,
but we will not be told anything before that.

It surprises me a bit that Hifi journalists don't ask more technical
questions, like those mention. The only good thing they have been able
to discover is, if patient you will at some time get SW MQA, and MQA
must be adjusted to your DAC chip. Default DAC profiles is not allowed.
As we noticed with the Auralic mess.
Still I think these different decoder options should be clarified
better, and also if it is technical possible to implement in equipment
with room correction.

And why do we not see any interview with the recording companies?
Without their implementation MQA is DOA.
Well the did start to make TV without 4K content, so maybe MQA has the
same approach :D


------------------------------------------------------------------------
R1200CL's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=63832
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Julf]

R1200CL wrote:
> Those few hi-res I've purchased from HD-Tracks did sound better than CD
> to me.

As I have been pointing out, HDTracks is a great double-blind test. Many
of their early offerings (especially earlier on) were upsampled from
44.1 kHz material - but seems nobody really detected that by listening,
only by looking at the spectrograms.

There is also the issue of comparing apples with apples - many of the
HDTracks offerings are slightly different masterings compared to the
CDs, so hearing a difference is probably not a result of the sample
rate.

> It surprises me a bit that Hifi journalists don't ask more technical
> questions, like those mention.

That would assume that the journalists understand technology :)



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

Julf wrote:
> That would assume that the journalists understand technology :)

It's the 21st century and we call outright lairs and thieves politicians
and journalists. Sad, very sad.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Mnyb]

Julf wrote:
> As I have been pointing out, HDTracks is a great double-blind test. Many
> of their early offerings (especially earlier on) were upsampled from
> 44.1 kHz material - but seems nobody really detected that by listening,
> only by looking at the spectrograms.
>
> There is also the issue of comparing apples with apples - many of the
> HDTracks offerings are slightly different masterings compared to the
> CDs, so hearing a difference is probably not a result of the sample
> rate.
>
>
>
> That would assume that the journalists understand technology :)

I've noticed the thing with different masters for different sample rates
. You simply cant compare with the CD or CD layer .

In the cases where i have used taken HD tracks album ot Itrax downloads
and dowsampled them myself I hear no difference .

But as noticed HD tracks can sound different .
Sometimes it's because of a much better master ! That have happened .
Sometimes it's just slightly different sometimes not at all sometimes
one is simply louder than the other. It's more or less random they do
rarely present the pedigree of their source .

It is not the sample rate that makes the difference , wonder if
Archimago still has his test files from the blindtest we did a couple of
years ago ( that was fun a lot of people participated ) ?

The fun part with HD tracks is when do we know that they have a superior
master ? We don't that's the problem . Sometimes the early 90's cd can
be the best source as the typical "remaster" done >2000 have the
loudness war dynamic compression and othe silly stuff and that's what
the label pushes out .

And what version will the streaming services provide us with ? They
don't know as they don't the heavy lifting of building thier catalog
themself .



--------------------------------------------------------------------
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office: Boom
Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
Misc use: Radio (with battery)
iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
(spares Touch, SB3, reciever ,controller )
server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Wombat]

R1200CL wrote:
>
> Those few hi-res I've purchased from HD-Tracks did sound better than CD
> to me. So I'm expecting MQA based on hi -res masters to sound better, at
> least if you have good enough stereo. So if I get hi-res streaming on
> today's subscription, I do welcome MQA.
>
You are happy about MQA, you hear HD-Tracks to sound better as CD and
Tidal on your Touch sounds hetter as CD?
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f13-music-downloads-and-streaming/tidal-high-res-mqa-news-26734/index7.html#post500856

This comes over a bit emotional. Did you challenge these findings?



Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[R1200CL]

Not lately :D
And I've stopped purchase HD tracks, as I found it strange they could
sell me hi res of recordings that most likely never was recorded i more
than 16/44.1.

I have a Norah Jones that I find quite nice.
(And as said, I have very few HD-tracks).

If I could purchase Adele 25 in hi-res, I may do, but I guess it will
some time be available on Tidal.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
R1200CL's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=63832
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[browellm]

Just buy a record player. You'll get better post production and more
dynamic range on most new releases, ironically because of the
limitations of the cutting equipment.



Modwright Transporter/SBT/SBR/Boom

http://www.last.fm/user/browellm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
browellm's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14260
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[darrenyeats]

browellm wrote:
> Just buy a record player. You'll get better post production and more
> dynamic range on most new releases, ironically because of the
> limitations of the cutting equipment.
Too much truth in that.



Check it, add to it! http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/

SB Touch
------------------------------------------------------------------------
darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Wombat]

I really wonder if some 16bit noise-shaped 64kHz could really have been
something new.
I think to remember that with a samplingrate around 60kHz people like
Weiss and J.D. Johnston think even all theoretical hearing limitations
are reached.
With 64kHz samplingrate noise-shaping should be able to reach more than
130dB in the audible band.



Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

browellm wrote:
> Just buy a record player. You'll get better post production and more
> dynamic range on most new releases, ironically because of the
> limitations of the cutting equipment.

darrenyeats wrote:
> Too much truth in that.

These days it seems that only a handful of popular music recordings are
available on vinyl. Most other musical genres are only available as CDs
or digital downloads. However most other musical genres don't suffer has
much from the loudness wars. There's plenty of new jazz and classical
releases with excellent and very natural dynamic ranges.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[browellm]

ralphpnj wrote:
> These days it seems that only a handful of popular music recordings are
> available on vinyl.

Nah, everything's released on vinyl now. Honestly, check it out on
Amazon. I've bought hundreds of new releases.



Modwright Transporter/SBT/SBR/Boom

http://www.last.fm/user/browellm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
browellm's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14260
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

browellm wrote:
> Nah, everything's released on vinyl now. Honestly, check it out on
> Amazon. I've bought hundreds of new releases.

Not to pick a fight but your knowledge of jazz is rather limited. For
example the group Mostly Other People Do the Killing has no vinyl
available but plenty of CDs and downloads, the same is true for J.D.
Allen and countless others. Plus the vinyl is way more expensive and, in
the case of most jazz releases, offers no better dynamic range than the
CD. Plus I haven't yet figured out how to play vinyl on my Squeezeboxes
:)



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[browellm]

ralphpnj wrote:
> Not to pick a fight but your knowledge of jazz is rather limited. For
> example the group Mostly Other People Do the Killing has no vinyl
> available but plenty of CDs and downloads, the same is true for J.D.
> Allen and countless others. Plus the vinyl is way more expensive and, in
> the case of most jazz releases, offers no better dynamic range than the
> CD. Plus I haven't yet figured out how to play vinyl on my Squeezeboxes
> :)
>
> On the other hand, bandcamp offers many recordings on vinyl but again
> the selection for jazz on vinyl is also very limited and hit and miss.

Ah, sorry I thought you were referring to pop/rock releases because of
this line.

> These days it seems that only a handful of popular music recordings are
> available on vinyl.

You're right, I know nothing about jazz releases on vinyl :D But as you
say jazz/classical are great on digital anyway because the production
engineers aren't wrecking them.



Modwright Transporter/SBT/SBR/Boom

http://www.last.fm/user/browellm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
browellm's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14260
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

browellm wrote:
> Ah, sorry I thought you were referring to pop/rock releases because of
> this line.

Sorry for the confusion.

browellm wrote:
> You're right, I know nothing about jazz releases on vinyl :D. But as
> you say jazz/classical are great on digital anyway because the
> production engineers aren't wrecking them.

That is exactly what I was trying to say.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[StephenPG]

browellm wrote:
> Nah, everything's released on vinyl now. Honestly, check it out on
> Amazon. I've bought hundreds of new releases.

Serious classical has not been released on LP since 1990, for very good
reason.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
StephenPG's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=48249
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[arnyk]

browellm wrote:
> Nah, everything's released on vinyl now. Honestly, check it out on
> Amazon. I've bought hundreds of new releases.

Maybe you can buy 100's of new releases on vinyl over a period of years,
but the number of digital new releases on digital formats over the same
time frame are orders of magnitude (10's, 100's, 1,000's) more.

Check the stats from industry sources. RIAA for example. Compare the
number of digital releases on Amazon. Depending on your measure, vinyl
is only about 1-2% of digital.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[cliveb]

browellm wrote:
> Just buy a record player. You'll get better post production and more
> dynamic range on most new releases, ironically because of the
> limitations of the cutting equipment.
This widespread belief that vinyl has to be cut from less compromised
masters due to the limitations of the format is misplaced. There is a
growing body of evidence that most modern rock/pop LPs are cut from a
master that is derived from precisely the same hypercompressed master
used for the CD release. (For sure there are a few where a different
master was used, but they are the minority).

People use things like the DR value as "proof" that the vinyl has
greater dynamic range, but in fact that DR value is compromised by the
high-pass nature of vinyl - lose a bunch of low frequencies in the way
that *must* happen on vinyl, and the DR value automatically increases.
People have demonstrated this by taking a CD rip, high-pass filtering
it, and achieving a higher DR value. Similarly, when you look at a
zoomed in waveform ripped from vinyl, you'll see that flat-tops from the
CD are replaced with sloped waveforms, which on the face of it seems to
suggest less clipping. But in fact this is again a simple artefact of
the high-pass filtering intrinsic to vinyl. (A flat-top waveform is DC,
and vinyl by definition cannot reproduce DC).

I wish to emphasise that I'm talking about new vinyl releases. It is
certainly true that "vintage" vinyl has greater dynamic range than the
CD re-releases - especially the so-called remastered ones. Whether that
benefit in dynamic range outweighs the downsides (non-linearity, higher
distortion - especially at end-of-side, surface noise, etc) is
debateable. I happen to think vinyl can sound bloody marvellous, but
let's keep things in perspective.



Transporter -> ATC SCM100A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

cliveb wrote:
> This widespread belief that vinyl has to be cut from less compromised
> masters due to the limitations of the format is misplaced. There is a
> growing body of evidence that most modern rock/pop LPs are cut from a
> master that is derived from precisely the same hypercompressed master
> used for the CD release. (For sure there are a few where a different
> master was used, but they are the minority).
>
> People use things like the DR value as "proof" that the vinyl has
> greater dynamic range, but in fact that DR value is compromised by the
> high-pass nature of vinyl - lose a bunch of low frequencies in the way
> that *must* happen on vinyl, and the DR value automatically increases.
> People have demonstrated this by taking a CD rip, high-pass filtering
> it, and achieving a higher DR value. Similarly, when you look at a
> zoomed in waveform ripped from vinyl, you'll see that flat-tops from the
> CD are replaced with sloped waveforms, which on the face of it seems to
> suggest less clipping. But in fact this is again a simple artefact of
> the high-pass filtering intrinsic to vinyl. (A flat-top waveform is DC,
> and vinyl by definition cannot reproduce DC).
>
> I wish to emphasise that I'm talking about new vinyl releases. It is
> certainly true that "vintage" vinyl has greater dynamic range than the
> CD re-releases - especially the so-called remastered ones. Whether that
> benefit in dynamic range outweighs the downsides (non-linearity, higher
> distortion - especially at end-of-side, surface noise, etc) is
> debateable. I happen to think vinyl can sound bloody marvellous, but
> let's keep things in perspective.

Thanks Clive for this fantastic and very informative post. And you're
right, vinyl can often times quite marvelous but nothing beats listening
to one's own music collection all day and never having to clean and put
away any LPs, CDs or SACDS.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[StephenPG]

ralphpnj wrote:
> Thanks Clive for this fantastic and very informative post. And you're
> right, vinyl can often times quite marvelous but nothing beats listening
> to one's own music collection all day and never having to clean and put
> away any LPs, CDs or SACDS.

Spot. The f***. On.

P.S
Also, for the mature classical buff, who may once in a while want to
indulge in a spot of Wagner, no endless getting up to change sodding
sides or disks!

P.P.S

I've yet to hear a classical release on LP that can match it's CD twin.
They (the lp version) as well as all the additional noise, sound too
loud in the quiet parts and too quiet in the loud parts.


P.P.P.S

Finally, I have several orchestral ADD CD's that clearly show the flaws
in the studio tape machines, I.E you can hear the tape heads being
driven into compression. One of the worst is Tennstedt's Mahler 5 on
EMI-

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Symphonies-Nos-Tennstedt-Gustav-Mahler/dp/B000002S43/ref=sr_1_5?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1453827612&sr=1-5&keywords=tennstedt+mahler+5


------------------------------------------------------------------------
StephenPG's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=48249
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[darrenyeats]

cliveb wrote:
> This widespread belief that vinyl has to be cut from less compromised
> masters due to the limitations of the format is misplaced. There is a
> growing body of evidence that most modern rock/pop LPs are cut from a
> master that is derived from precisely the same hypercompressed master
> used for the CD release. (For sure there are a few where a different
> master was used, but they are the minority).
>
Ian Shepherd says the same of his own recording here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-AE9dL5FG8.

You can read my comments at the above link (now 11 months old, you'll
need to click "show more").

Ian is convinced that the vinyl can't have more dynamic range on
principal but I think it's mistaken. There are such things as dynamic
range expanders (what limited use they have is for de-compressing
compressed waveforms ... but that happens to be what we're talking
about!)

If you watch Ian's video through, you'll see the vinyl waveform
_measures_ as more dynamic (obviously Ian and yourself aren't
impressed!) but also it _looks_ obviously more dynamic and it _sounds_
more dynamic.

As I asked Ian, "So my question is, what OTHER kind of proof would we
need to accept dynamics have increased? I can't imagine any other kind
of evidence."

I did not receive a proper answer.
Darren

PS: Here you go:
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/183049-dbx_1bx_dynamic_range_expander__processor/images/238691/

[image:
http://img.canuckaudiomart.com/uploads/large/238690-dbx_1bx_dynamic_range_expander__processor.jpg]

"Expand your mind (the rest will follow)"! Such a device can only make
sense in the situation where a signal has been compressed and you are
reversing this process. I'm certain this process will be far from
perfect, but nevertheless expansion is "A Thing".

Filtering (even an all-pass filter causes this) explains 1-2dB change in
some cases yes, but not the consistent 5+ dB or more gap seen between
digital below DR5 and the equivalent vinyl. Yes, that much. Yes,
consistently.

I don't know whether it's the physical process of cutting vinyl, or some
device the vinyl cutting engineers use in advance of the cutting, but I
have no doubt that the waveform Ian measures, sees and hears as more
dynamic is in fact more dynamic, despite his refusal to accept the
possibility.



Check it, add to it! http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/

SB Touch
------------------------------------------------------------------------
darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Wombat]

That makes me remember my old Pioneer dbx tapedeck :)
It sounded good and loud but the pumping noise added got on my nerves
quickly.
Btw. greynol at Hydrogen did some and adding a rumble filter with
Audition alone raised the DR from 5 to 10, adding highs even more.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,102895.msg846950.html#msg846950
Play with the phase and the waveform changes.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,104328.msg875637.html#msg875637



Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

I'm not sure but I believe that the dynamic range compression used on so
many popular music CDs is the result of trying to push the overall
volume of the CD way, way up. Remember that dynamic range compression
was originally used on radio broadcasts to make the quiet passages
louder so that there was never anything close to silence, and silence,
aka dead air, is a major no-no in broadcasting. But when one boosts the
quiet passages one must also lower the loud passages otherwise these
loud passages get way too loud, hence the result is dynamic range
compression.

So it's not just dynamic range compression but also an overall boosting
of the volume level. One can test this by simply playing an older CD,
say from the early 1990s, and then playing a new CD, say from the last
few years, and comparing where the volume knob is set for each CD to
produce the same relative volume.

Finally I believe that there are several "masters" in use when making a
CD or an LP. There's the master tape, which is then used to make a
separate CD master and then a different LP master. Since the overall
volume of an LP can't be boosted like that of CD there is no reason to
use as much dynamic range compression on the LP master.

Please note that if anything above is not correct, then by all means
post a correction.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[d6jg]

ralphpnj wrote:
> I'm not sure but I believe that the dynamic range compression used on so
> many popular music CDs is the result of trying to push the overall
> volume of the CD way, way up. Remember that dynamic range compression
> was originally used on radio broadcasts to make the quiet passages
> louder so that there was never anything close to silence, and silence,
> aka dead air, is a major no-no in broadcasting. But when one boosts the
> quiet passages one must also lower the loud passages otherwise these
> loud passages get way too loud, hence the result is dynamic range
> compression.
>
> So it's not just dynamic range compression but also an overall boosting
> of the volume level. One can test this by simply playing an older CD,
> say from the early 1990s, and then playing a new CD, say from the last
> few years, and comparing where the volume knob is set for each CD to
> produce the same relative volume.
>
> Edit: In other words, for the CD first everything is compressed and then
> the volume level for the entire compressed recording is raised. So now
> all the music is way above the noise floor but also very near the
> highest available level.
>
> Finally I believe that there are several "masters" in use when making a
> CD or an LP. There's the master tape, which is then used to make a
> separate CD master and then a different LP master. Since the overall
> volume of an LP can't be boosted like that of CD there is no reason to
> use as much dynamic range compression on the LP master.
>
> Please note that if anything above is not correct, then by all means
> post a correction.

I agree. Overall volume was probably the driver (no pun intended),
necessitated by the propensity of yoofs to stick low quality earbud
speakers into their ears for use with mp3 players (or more likely m4a
players from a well known brand) with only a low power amp on board.

The buds you get with your standard player device are not of the highest
quality. I can't stand them - even the expensive ones which do have a
wee bit of bass are rubbish IMHO. Regular followers of the "What are you
listening to..." thread will know that I do use various iOS devices with
iPeng player but I use an inline headphone amp and a decent pair of
B&Ws.

I would also suggest those people that listen to Classical or Jazz music
are less likely to do so using an mp3 player and therefore the need to
"boost" the volume just isn't there. I am generalising but in the main
they are a more mature bunch.

On the question of masters. There are usually more than a couple. As I
understand it the process was to take the original and then copy it to a
number of secondary masters for use in the manufacturing process which
could in turn be copied for re-mastering purposes etc etc.



*Vortexbox LMS 7.8 music on QNAP TS419p via NFS* iThingys/iPeng/Tablets
*Living Room* - SB3 -> Onkyo TS606 - > Celestion Ditton F20s - Zone 2 ->
Sony TA FE 320 -> Sennheiser RS 130 & B&W P7
*Office* - RPi -> Sony TA FE320 -> Celestion F10s / SB3 -> Onkyo CRN 755
-> Wharfedale Modus Cubes
*Dining Room* -> SB Boom *Kitchen* -> UE Radio (upgraded to SB Radio)
*Bedroom (Bedside)* - SB Touch -> Topping TP21 -> AKG Headphones
*Bedroom (TV)* - Amazon Fire TV (SB Player) -> Topping TP20 ->
Wharfedale Modus Cubes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
d6jg's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=44051
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[cliveb]

ralphpnj wrote:
> Finally I believe that there are several "masters" in use when making a
> CD or an LP. There's the master tape, which is then used to make a
> separate CD master and then a different LP master. Since the overall
> volume of an LP can't be boosted like that of CD there is no reason to
> use as much dynamic range compression on the LP master
There is never any reason to use excessive dynamic range compression,
regardless of the delivery medium. In fact, if vinyl is the medium,
there is MORE reason to use it, to get the signal level as far above the
surface noise as you can.

In the rock/pop world, dynamic range compression is no longer a tool for
making things louder or eliminating dead air. It has simply become dogma
that pop music is meant to be mastered that way. There's a whole
generation of artists, producers and possibly even engineers who think
that's the right way to do it.

So the LP master is commonly derived from the already hypercompressed
"master master", because from an artistic viewpoint that is how it's
supposed to sound. Sad but true. That's also why modern remastered CDs
routinely sound worse than the original 1980s release - because the
level balance has been "corrected" to conform to modern standards.



Transporter -> ATC SCM100A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Julf]

cliveb wrote:
> So the LP master is commonly derived from the already hypercompressed
> "master master", because from an artistic viewpoint that is how it's
> supposed to sound. Sad but true. That's also why modern remastered CDs
> routinely sound worse than the original 1980s release - because the
> level balance has been "corrected" to conform to modern standards.

All too true. Seems today's musicians and producers think the reason
older music sounded great was because of use of crappy technology (as
opposed to skill and creativity).



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Julf]

darrenyeats wrote:
> "Expand your mind (the rest will follow)"! Such a device can only make
> sense in the situation where a signal has been compressed and you are
> reversing this process. I'm certain this process will be far from
> perfect, but nevertheless expansion is "A Thing".
>
> I repeat, it exists. It can come to pass.

If the music has been compressed using a known, fixed non-linear
function, it can be uncompressed by applying a non-linear function that
is the inverse of the compressing function. This is how many early
speech codecs worked in the telephone world. Unfortunately the
compressor algorithms used by studios are not fixed, but variable in
time, so "undoing" them becomes a bit of a challenge (engineer-speak for
"pretty much impossible"). In any case, you are applying
non-linearity...



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[arnyk]

darrenyeats wrote:
>
> Ian is convinced that the vinyl can't have more dynamic range on
> principal but I think it's mistaken.
>

Since they are so often conflated, we seem to need to distinguish
between the needs of the people who produce the media which are social,
and the capabilities of the media itself which are technical.

At the physical media level, audio CDs have 20-30 dB or more dynamic
range then vinyl is capable of. That is basically why vinyl was almost
totally blown off the marketplace by the CD.

>
> There are such things as dynamic range expanders (what limited use they
> have is for de-compressing compressed waveforms ... but that happens to
> be what we're talking about!)
>

Dynamic range expanders were thought to be helpful when vinyl and analog
tape were all we had. The CD eliminated their technical justification.
Notice that their consumer versions have been off the market for 20-30
years.

>
> If you watch Ian's video through, you'll see the vinyl waveform
> _measures_ as more dynamic (obviously Ian and yourself aren't
> impressed!) but also it _looks_ obviously more dynamic and it _sounds_
> more dynamic.
>

The appearance of a waveform does not necessarily indicate its dynamic
range. The sonic perceptions of biased listeners are equally
unreliable.

>
> As I asked Ian, "So my question is, what OTHER kind of proof would we
> need to accept dynamics have increased? I can't imagine any other kind
> of evidence."
>
> I did not receive a proper answer.
>

You didn't ask someone who knows, and you are using unreliable
evidence.

>
> PS: Here you go:
> http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/183049-dbx_1bx_dynamic_range_expander__processor/images/238691/
>
> [image:
> http://img.canuckaudiomart.com/uploads/large/238690-dbx_1bx_dynamic_range_expander__processor.jpg]
>
> "Expand your mind (the rest will follow)"! Such a device can only make
> sense in the situation where a signal has been compressed and you are
> reversing this process. I'm certain this process will be far from
> perfect, but nevertheless expansion is "A Thing".
>
> I repeat, it exists.
>

Incorrect. It existed (note past tense} This web page says it all:
http://dbxpro.com/en-US/products/1bx-series-iii: "Discontinued"

Secondly, it wasn't a consumer product when it existed - it and devices
like it were found to be too complex to appeal to general consumer.

>
> It can come to pass.
>

It came, it saw, and it was conquered. You've misrepresented the device
pretty thoroughly, whether intentional or not;.

DBTs have shown that a single generation of vinyl transcription is
highly audible while a single generation of even mediocre but modern
digital is sonically transparent.

Don't forget that High Fidelity = sonic accuracy and transparency.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[darrenyeats]

arnyk wrote:
> DBTs have shown that a single generation of vinyl transcription is
> highly audible while a single generation of even mediocre but modern
> digital is sonically transparent.
I'm arguing vinyl transcription reverses extreme compression, somehow,
so that would be consistent with my view.

Is there some "intangible/meta-physical compression quality" than
remains the same - even when all three of DR number, look of waveform
and the sound all indicate the vinyl is less compressed? It smacks of
denial a bit.
Darren



Check it, add to it! http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/

SB Touch
------------------------------------------------------------------------
darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Julf]

darrenyeats wrote:
> I'm arguing vinyl transcription reverses extreme compression, somehow,
> so that would be consistent with my view.

Any suggestion of what the mechanism would be? Pretty much all the
non-linearities of the vinyl path would cause *more* compression - but
as has been pointed out, the frequency response characteristics of vinyl
makes DR readings artificially higher. Look of waveform and subjective
listening evaluation tell us they sound *different*. That is all.



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[arnyk]

darrenyeats wrote:
> I'm arguing vinyl transcription reverses extreme compression, somehow,
> so that would be consistent with my view.
>
> Is there some "intangible/meta-physical compression quality" than
> remains the same - even when all three of DR number, look of waveform
> and the sound all indicate the vinyl is less compressed? It smacks of
> denial a bit.
> Darren

Dream on!


------------------------------------------------------------------------
arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[R1200CL]

The end of speculations is over. Now you can ask Bob yourself. (Almost)
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/your-chance-ask-bob-stuart-anything-about-mqa-27412/


------------------------------------------------------------------------
R1200CL's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=63832
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Wombat]

R1200CL wrote:
> The end of speculations is over. Now you can ask Bob yourself. (Almost)
> http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/your-chance-ask-bob-stuart-anything-about-mqa-27412/
I highly doubt you wil get new detailled answers. If he gives us 2 or
more decoded samples at lets say 192kHz first i guess answers to the
findings with these could make sense. I doubt this will happen...



Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Archimago]

Wombat wrote:
> I highly doubt you wil get new detailled answers. If he gives us 2 or
> more decoded samples at lets say 192kHz first i guess answers to the
> findings with these could make sense. I doubt this will happen...

Yup. I likewise will be very surprised if Stuart comes back with
anything concrete because I believe Meridian/MQA will want to maintain
the aura of "revolutionary British technology". Getting too technical
and I expect confirmation of "perceptually lossless" and discussion
about bit-depth and down-to-earth comments would tarnish this
perception.

Yes, if we can have an example of the original 192kHz/DXD source and the
decoded version (say aimed at a generic 192kHz DAC with typical linear
phase impulse response), this will be very useful. Highly unlikely...

Someone should dare Bob to do it though :-).



Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[toby10]

I'll bet if Stuart answers at all it will be only a small subset of the
submitted questions. Cherry picked questions to keep the answers
coinciding with MQA marketing. ;)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
toby10's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=12553
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Wombat]

toby10 wrote:
> I'll bet if Stuart answers at all it will be only a small subset of the
> submitted questions. Cherry picked questions to keep the answers
> coinciding with MQA marketing. ;)
I am really looking for the first analog capture with a good standard
24/96 device and its BAD standard filters.
If this capture still sounds like the MQA DAC output and different to
the stasndard PCM version you simply can forget about ALL the FUD :)



Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[sckramer]

Meridian had to know this wouldn't fly, especially with "Authenticated"
in the name-- Wonder if something bigger is going on here, i.e. an Apple
deal, and this is the tech behind a new HD iTunes & built into
iPhone7/7s



CiAudio VDC-SB - raspberry pi b+ hifiberry digi+ (BNC added, removed
TOSlink, HDMI disable) piCorePlayer (play song from RAM)
--> Use as controller/desk/reference: Touch (EDO / displayoff plugin,
linear power, removed analog coupling caps, removed TOSlink & resistor,
added spdif isolation transformer & bnc jack )
PSAudio TRIO C-100 (Cullen III, IcePower 300ASC's) - DL3 DAC (Cullen IV)
- Energy Veritas w/Mundorf/Erse Xovers - 2x MartinLogan Descent i -
Dectet - Cardas - BlackCat XV-Ultra
------------------------------------------------------------------------
sckramer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20311
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Archimago]

sckramer wrote:
> Meridian had to know this wouldn't fly, especially with "Authenticated"
> in the name-- Wonder if something bigger is going on here, i.e. an Apple
> deal, and this will be the tech behind a new HD iTunes / Beats 1 & built
> into iPhone7/7s's DAC

Well, I really hope this isn't the future for Apple!

IMO, if Steve Jobs were still around I think he'll look at this and be
unimpressed with the scheme. Of course we're dealing with Tim Cook these
days so who knows what he's up to. Considering how reluctant Apple has
been to even allow their mobile hardware to function beyond 48kHz, I'd
be amazed if they suddenly embrace MQA with all this focus on
"unfolding" their "audio origami" into 192kHz and higher.



Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

Archimago wrote:
> Well, I really hope this isn't the future for Apple!
>
> IMO, if Steve Jobs were still around I think he'll look at this and be
> unimpressed with the scheme. Of course we're dealing with Tim Cook these
> days so who knows what he's up to. Considering how reluctant Apple has
> been to even allow their mobile hardware to function beyond 48kHz, I'd
> be amazed if they suddenly embrace MQA with all this focus on
> "unfolding" their "audio origami" into 192kHz and higher.

Just think about it for a minute - MQA's proprietary technology wrapped
into Apple's closed and proprietary ecosystem equals proprietary
squared. Makes plain old DRM seem quaint.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Fizbin]

http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2016/06/an-inconvenient-truth-mqa-sounds-better/


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fizbin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=58734
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[arnyk]

Fizbin wrote:
> "An inconvenient truth: MQA sounds better!"
>
> http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2016/06/an-inconvenient-truth-mqa-sounds-better/

More specifically, they claim that MQA sounds better than 24/96 linear
PCM, which is a common reference If it in fact sounde better than the
reference, then it is obviously audibly colored, which most would agree
is a FAIL.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

arnyk wrote:
> More specifically, they claim that MQA sounds better than 24/96 linear
> PCM, which is a common reference If it in fact sounde better than the
> reference, then it is obviously audibly colored, which most would agree
> is a FAIL.

+1

"audibly colored" is another way of saying equalized and an equalized
audio file is not the way the original artists and recording engineers
intended the recording to sound. So again a FAIL.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: LMS 7.9 on dedicated windows 10 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Apesbrain]

Summarizing that article, in the reviewer's experience with the
MQA-processed files at hand:

- MQA played on an MQA-enabled DAC sounds "better" than its non-MQA
hi-res equivalent
- MQA played on a non-MQA DAC sounds "better" than its non-MQA
equivalent.

In other words, MQA has the potential to offer sound quality improvement
for everyone not just those with MQA-enabled DACs. One man's opinion
but intriguing nonetheless. He offers some technical insight in the
article as to why this would be the case. I'm looking forward to an
opportunity to test this myself with music that I know well.

Alas, I fear it will be of limited utility to me. I'll never subscribe
to Tidal and much of the music I most love -- "golden era" classical --
will likely never be released in the MQA format. Even if, at this stage
in my life I don't see myself buying all of these titles one more time.
Cool for young people coming into the market, though.

arnyk wrote:
> More specifically, they claim that MQA sounds better than 24/96 linear
> PCM, which is a common reference If it in fact sounde better than the
> reference, then it is obviously audibly colored, which most would agree
> is a FAIL.
I understand your argument but the author's explanation is that MQA --
being a "process" encompassing the entire recording/playback chain --
removes the distortions (frequency and temporal) to which we've long
become accustomed in non-MQA source material. (Compare to the Plangent
processing applied to master tape sources on some recent digital
remasters.) Again, I believe it makes sense to withhold judgement
pending personal experience with the format.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apesbrain's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=738
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Julf]

Apesbrain wrote:
> Alas, I fear it will be of limited utility to me. I'll never subscribe
> to Tidal and much of the music I most love -- "golden era" classical --
> will likely never be released in the MQA format. Even if, at this stage
> in my life I don't see myself buying all of these titles one more time.
> Cool for young people coming into the market, though.

Yeah, but young people haven't drunk the audiophile cool-aid, so their
market will be really limited unless they can "remaster" the same old
material already recycled in every possible format...



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

Apesbrain wrote:
> I understand your argument but the author's explanation is that MQA --
> being a "process" encompassing the entire recording/playback chain --
> removes the distortions (frequency and temporal) to which we've long
> become accustomed in non-MQA source material. (Compare to the Plangent
> processing applied to master tape sources on some recent digital
> remasters.) Again, I believe it makes sense to withhold judgement
> pending personal experience with the format.

Temporal blurring, as the MQA folks quaintly call some nonsense that
they made up, is, for lack of a better term, completely made up
nonsense. Maybe MQA might improve the sound an original recording made
using a MQA enable recording chain but on existing recordings MQA is no
more than some fancy equalization, unless of course, MQA is so amazing
that it even manages to rewrite the laws of electricity.

Audiophiles really need to get an understanding of the basic laws of
electricity that apply to ALL electronically reproduced audio. (Hint:
don't expect to find any useful information in any high end audio
publication.) For example: once the electrical signal leaves the
microphone it is no longer an audio signal but simply an electrical
signal and as such it is subject to the exact same laws and behaves in
the exact same way as any other electrical signal.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: LMS 7.9 on dedicated windows 10 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Fizbin]

I posted this link in the comments section of the 'inconvenient truth'
article.

http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2016/02/measurements-impressions-meridian.html

9 Hours later, the moderators have yet to approve. (Yet I see another
post that says "1 hour ago")


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fizbin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=58734
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

Fizbin wrote:
> I posted this link in the comments section of the 'inconvenient truth'
> article.
>
> http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2016/02/measurements-impressions-meridian.html
>
> 9 Hours later, the moderators have yet to approve. (Yet I see another
> post that says "1 hour ago")

Why am I not the least bit surprised.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: LMS 7.9 on dedicated windows 10 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Fizbin]

They actually ended up posting it, afterall...15 hours later.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fizbin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=58734
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Julf]

ralphpnj wrote:
> Audiophiles really need to get an understanding of the basic laws of
> electricity that apply to ALL electronically reproduced audio. (Hint:
> don't expect to find any useful information in any high end audio
> publication.) For example: once the electrical signal leaves the
> microphone it is no longer an audio signal but simply an electrical
> signal and as such it is subject to the exact same laws and behaves in
> the exact same way as any other electrical signal.

"So you think science can explain everything?" :)



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ae67]

Julf wrote:
> "So you think science can explain everything?" :)

In terms of audio and human hearing - yes!
These are well explored fields of science with no missing magical
components, even if some so-called audiophile snake oil dealers try to
make us believe.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ae67's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=29964
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[arnyk]

Julf wrote:
> "So you think science can explain everything?" :)

Does *Science* have to explain -everything- in order for any of the
explanations that it provides to be valid?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[browellm]

cliveb wrote:
> This widespread belief that vinyl has to be cut from less compromised
> masters due to the limitations of the format is misplaced. There is a
> growing body of evidence that most modern rock/pop LPs are cut from a
> master that is derived from precisely the same hypercompressed master
> used for the CD release. (For sure there are a few where a different
> master was used, but they are the minority).
>
> People use things like the DR value as "proof" that the vinyl has
> greater dynamic range, but in fact that DR value is compromised by the
> high-pass nature of vinyl - lose a bunch of low frequencies in the way
> that *must* happen on vinyl, and the DR value automatically increases.
> People have demonstrated this by taking a CD rip, high-pass filtering
> it, and achieving a higher DR value. Similarly, when you look at a
> zoomed in waveform ripped from vinyl, you'll see that flat-tops from the
> CD are replaced with sloped waveforms, which on the face of it seems to
> suggest less clipping. But in fact this is again a simple artefact of
> the high-pass filtering intrinsic to vinyl. (A flat-top waveform is DC,
> and vinyl by definition cannot reproduce DC).
>
> I wish to emphasise that I'm talking about new vinyl releases. It is
> certainly true that "vintage" vinyl has greater dynamic range than the
> CD re-releases - especially the so-called remastered ones. Whether that
> benefit in dynamic range outweighs the downsides (non-linearity, higher
> distortion - especially at end-of-side, surface noise, etc) is
> debateable. I happen to think vinyl can sound bloody marvellous, but
> let's keep things in perspective.

Hi Clive

I'm aware of the artefacts that fool the DR database into reporting
higher DR, but I can only offer my subjective impressions of owning both
the digital and vinyl versions of many pop and indie new releases and
the vinyl sounds way more dynamic. Now I appreciate this *subjective*
difference means bugger all to anyone else but me. If non-linearity,
distortion and euphonic colourations give the impression of greater
dynamic range then to me, it's all gravy. I'm not going to sit in front
of a another botched production CDrip and admire its technical
superiority through gritted teeth.



Modwright Transporter/SBT/SBR/Boom

http://www.last.fm/user/browellm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
browellm's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14260
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Mnyb]

There are other considerations mastering lp , its a v shaped grove the
needle must be physicallly able to move you cant have and dont get
perfect channel separation , so the lowest bass is usually mono , you
cant have to much treble energy either and probably a whole bunch of
other subtle considerations .

Thats where the whole profesions of mastering engineer came from .

Nowadays the CD/download does not really have to mastered like in the
old days , you have to prouce a glass master with tracks toc etc or file
metadata and conver to a suitable format , not really do any audio
processing .

But as time passed by mastering engineers have revamped thier occuption
to something else ? some spin doctor thats going to get you the great
sound you band wants :)



--------------------------------------------------------------------
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office: Boom
Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
Misc use: Radio (with battery)
iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
(spares Touch, SB3, reciever ,controller )
server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Julf]

browellm wrote:
> Hi Clive
>
> I'm aware of the artefacts that fool the DR database into reporting
> higher DR, but I can only offer my subjective impressions of owning both
> the digital and vinyl versions of many pop and indie new releases and
> the vinyl sounds way more dynamic. Now I appreciate this *subjective*
> difference means bugger all to anyone else but me. If non-linearity,
> distortion and euphonic colourations give the impression of greater
> dynamic range then to me, it's all gravy. I'm not going to sit in front
> of a another botched production CDrip and admire its technical
> superiority through gritted teeth.

There are digital effects boxes that can add all that distortion and
colouration if you want it...



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[browellm]

Julf wrote:
> There are loudspeakers

ftfy.



Modwright Transporter/SBT/SBR/Boom

http://www.last.fm/user/browellm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
browellm's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14260
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Julf]

browellm wrote:
> ftfy.

Point taken :)



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Archimago]

R1200CL wrote:
> To me the possibility to stream hi-res is the main advantage with MQA.
> You may say that could be done without MQA, but since it's only is going
> to be offered via MQA, I'm fine with that.
>
> I'm more skeptical to the sonic benefits of older 16 bit material that
> do not exist in better master than the redbook format. I also understand
> that there is at least 3 ways to implement MQA on those recordings. (as
> told on 'Audiostream'
> (http://www.audiostream.com/comment/511791#comment-511791))
> Then we may also apply if the A/D chip is known. So the SQ may not be
> that much better. I may buy an Explorer2 to verify. (Just have to wait
> until it actually can decode MQA)
>
> Those few hi-res I've purchased from HD-Tracks did sound better than CD
> to me. So I'm expecting MQA based on hi -res masters to sound better, at
> least if you have good enough stereo. So if I get hi-res streaming on
> today's subscription, I do welcome MQA.
>
> There is also something called MQA Studio, which I'm not sure how differ
> from normal MQA, but I guess it is related to recordings done by MQA
> certified equipment and quality processing. If old recordings can be
> remastered to MQA studio is also something I don't know.
>
> So I would like to understand all the different MQA encoding options
> better, and if there is planned a way to tell us which process is used.
> At the moment all I know is different lights for MQA and MQA Studio.
> This based on the Explorer2 user manual and 'datasheet'
> (https://www.meridian-audio.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Explorer2M-ds.pdf).
>
>
> When Tidal start with MQA sometime later this year, we may know more,
> but we will not be told anything before that. That is a fact. Like it or
> not.
>
> It surprises me a bit that Hifi journalists don't ask more technical
> questions, like those mention. The only good thing they have been able
> to discover is, if patient you will at some time get SW MQA, and MQA
> must be adjusted to your DAC chip. Default DAC profiles is not allowed.
> As we noticed with the Auralic mess.
> Still I think these different decoder options should be clarified
> better, and also if it is technical possible to implement in equipment
> with room correction.
>
> And why do we not see any interview with the recording companies?
> Without their implementation MQA is DOA.
>
> Well they did start to make TV without 4K content, so maybe MQA has the
> same approach :D

Many good points there - some more nuances like what "MQA Studio" means
vs. just vanilla "MQA", importance of label participation, generic DAC
settings regarding Auralic (disingenuous IMO because if you make the
minimum samplerate to 192kHz for the DAC, who cares what the filters
look like? Way outside of audible range unless you really had a terrible
incompetent DAC!).

Ultimately I think all we got here is this:
1. Meridian wows the "audiophile" with a fancy DSP supposedly to lower
impulse response graphs. This part is audible as I listened with my ABX.
Note that this could have been implemented with any incoming stream as
demonstrated with 16/44 "DAT". The reality is that this DSP could be
implemented at the studio level if they wanted...

2. The scheme happens to include this "encapsulation" packaging to sell
to Internet streamers. Of course the process limits everything to
dithered 16-bits. And of course all that information above 22/24kHz is
lossy compressed (at best subtle if you believe ultrasonics add
something).

3. We as audiophiles lose our "right" to use any DAC we choose if we
decide to accept Meridian's scheme and -control-... Ooops, I mean their
benevolent "-authentication-" with a friendly and funky lit LED to
remind you of the "privilege". :-)

I don't know how well Dolby TrueHD is doing in 2016 but I do believe it
was losing out to DTS-HD Master Audio on Blu-rays already back in 2012.



Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

Archimago wrote:
> 3. We as audiophiles/music lovers lose our "right" to use any DAC we
> choose if we decide to accept Meridian's scheme and -control-... Ooops,
> I mean their benevolent "-authentication-" with a friendly and funky lit
> LED to remind you of the "privilege". :-)

If only Meridian could change their name to Apple.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[arnyk]

Archimago wrote:
> :-)
> It's about the money, and they need a new revenue stream. Pronto!

Agreed.

It's probable that they have been living on the royalty stream from
their lossless compression software for DVD-A, and that has got to be
decreasing.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Mnyb]

How's the sales figure for bluray MLP from DVDA is dolby true HD and
that probably works fine



--------------------------------------------------------------------
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office: Boom
Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
Misc use: Radio (with battery)
iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
(spares Touch, SB3, reciever ,controller )
server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[drmatt]

I don't think it can be a bad thing to qualify individual ADCs and DACs
such as this process entails in an end-to-end manner. This format may
well be a faltering "step one" towards a very much required audio
standard that will stop the "fat sausage" mastering of digital audio and
improve quality for everyone.




------------------------------------------------------------------------
drmatt's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59498
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[ralphpnj]

drmatt wrote:
> I don't think it can be a bad thing to qualify individual ADCs and DACs
> such as this process entails in an end-to-end manner. This format may
> well be a faltering "step one" towards a very much required audio
> standard that will stop the "fat sausage" mastering of digital audio and
> improve quality for everyone.

The MQA process starts off by making an invalid assumption and then
builds up from that falsehood. An analog audio signal (which is simply a
type of electrical signal) is converted to a digital audio signal by an
ADC (analog to digital converter) and then the resulting digital audio
file is send to a DAC (digital to analog converter) where the digital
signal is converted back to an analog audio signal. The present day ADC
/ DACconversion chain already produces an analog audio signal that is
exactly the same as the original unconverted analog audio signal. So
where is all this improvement happening? Please explain.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: LMS 7.9 on dedicated windows 10 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[drmatt]

ralphpnj wrote:
> The MQA process starts off by making an invalid assumption and then
> builds up from that falsehood. An analog audio signal (which is simply a
> type of electrical signal) is converted to a digital audio signal by an
> ADC (analog to digital converter) and then the resulting digital audio
> file is send to a DAC (digital to analog converter) where the digital
> signal is converted back to an analog audio signal. The present day ADC
> / DACconversion chain already produces an analog audio signal that is
> exactly the same as the original unconverted analog audio signal. So
> where is all this improvement happening? Please explain.
I didn't design the process so I am not in a position to explain what it
does or why it does it. I am referring to the concept only of a
calibrated record and playback chain.

I am however aware that there is no ideal piece of electronics on the
planet and therefore I don't think I agree that the analogue audio
signal is perfectly retrieved in all cases. Good though most systems
are, there are differences and maybe a branded certification process is
what's required to pull the music industry into shape, regardless of the
merits of the maths this particular certification process includes.

Personally I'm of the opinion that 16/44.1 is good enough, in general. I
don't have a problem with people mastering to 24/192 if they can,
however, as the data rates are still small enough to be pretty portable
and in theory the extra bits gives you more latitude in mastering.




------------------------------------------------------------------------
drmatt's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59498
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[arnyk]

drmatt wrote:
> I don't think it can be a bad thing to qualify individual ADCs and DACs
> such as this process entails in an end-to-end manner.
>

The claim has been made that MQA covers the reproduction system
end-to-end, but that claim breaks down in reality. We have before us
are claims that streaming files from a MQA server provides the
advantages of MQA with any DAC whether MQA quslified or not. Obviously
most people who are talking about the alleged benefits of playing MQA
files don't have MQA qualified systems from end to end. For example how
czn a Steely Dan recording recorded and mixed some decades ago be
end-to-end MQA qualified?? Where is the list of MQA- qualified speakers
or room treatments?

>
> This format may well be a faltering "step one" towards a very much
> required audio standard that will stop the "fat sausage" mastering of
> digital audio and improve quality for everyone.

Fat sausage mastering is so popular because there is a perception that
it helps sell recordings. When recordings are played near the ambient
noise level (e.g. portable player in high noise environment or as
background music in an office) it makes the recording more clearly
audible. Of course it sucks the life out of recordings when played at
the levels many use when doing dedicated music listening, but that mode
of usage is not the rule.

Furthermore, since it is a superficial analysis, analyzing a recording
to see if it has the volume envelope of a fat sausage can be
meaningless. For example, the fat sausage visual effect can be removed
with equalization or even all-pass filtering, but that processing does
not change the lifeless nature of the hyper-compressed recording.

If one wishes to study the problem of hyper-compression and frequency
response mangling, I've found that digitized CDs of classic Motown
recordings provide many examples. In general the Motown label CDs of
classic Motown hits are hypercompresssed and also have some pretty
intense frequency response mangling. Some more recent versions of these
on other labels (e.g. Polygram) the same identical songs have been
remastered and in some cases remixed which generally provides a
significant audible improvements in sound quality. It should be noted
that each of the reworked recordings are hand made by skilled
experienced individuals with sophisticated equipment for dealing with
these issues and with access to masters that are not available to the
public.

Application of reason suggests that no way a globally-applied automated
process like MQA can provide comparable results.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[drmatt]

arnyk wrote:
> The claim has been made that MQA covers the reproduction system
> end-to-end, but that claim breaks down in reality.

I haven't seen it in action, just read a few online reports. It implies
that this is the goal.

> For example how can a Steely Dan recording recorded and mixed some
> decades ago be end-to-end MQA qualified?? Where is the list of MQA-
> qualified speakers or room treatments?

Obviously. I don't know, i don't work for them. They imply there will be
one.


> Fat sausage mastering is so popular because there is a perception that
> it helps sell recordings.

I am well aware of all this. Most commonly it is seen in conjunction
with heavy compression and squashed dynamic range (and sometimes
outright distortion), which could be an artistic choice but most often
is more to do with making it sound loud on the radio, and to hell with
the sound quality for those that take the time to listen properly. Very
frustrating.

> Application of reason suggests that no way a globally-applied automated
> process like MQA can provide comparable results.

Well that's right, it doesn't go anywhere near far enough. Which is why
I suggested it's part of a first step only...

Actually I'd rather see a "thx like" mastering standard with guideline
volume levels and listening levels, than this specific MQA thing as it
seems like it's marginal in effectiveness. But any attempt to introduce
a standard might push the industry towards something more complete and
effective.




------------------------------------------------------------------------
drmatt's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59498
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[arnyk]

drmatt wrote:
>
>
> > arny as Dr. Matt cut it to ribbons wrote:
> >
> > Fat sausage mastering is so popular because there is a perception that
> > it helps sell recordings.
> > > >
>
> > arny as he wrote it wrote:
> >
> > Fat sausage mastering is so popular because there is a perception that
> > it helps sell recordings. When recordings are played near the ambient
> > noise level (e.g. portable player in high noise environment or as
> > background music in an office) it makes the recording more clearly
> > audible. Of course it sucks the life out of recordings when played at
> > the levels many use when doing dedicated music listening, but that mode
> > of usage is not the rule.
> > > >
>
> > > >
> > I am well aware of all this.
> > > >
>
> Really? If so then why do you butcher my statement as shown above?
> Why limit the effects of compression to just radio, when in fact it
> can affect any form of reproduction?
>
> > > >
> > Most commonly it is seen in conjunction with heavy compression and
> > squashed dynamic range (and sometimes outright distortion), which could
> > be an artistic choice but most often is more to do with making it sound
> > loud on the radio,
> > > >
>
> Radios often have nothing to do with the desire for compression.
>
> > > >
> > and to hell with the sound quality for those that take the time to
> > listen properly. Very frustrating.
> > > >
>
> Compression improves perceived sound quality in certain common
> environments, most of which have nothing to do with radio. Furthermore
> there are radio stations that don't use compression.
>
> > > >
> > Well that's right, it doesn't go anywhere near far enough. Which is why
> > I suggested it's part of a first step only...
> > > >
>
> How is something that has no audible benefits good as part of a first
> step?
>
> As others have pointed out, MQA's developers based MQA on an alleged
> sonic problem that was in fact a fabrication of their minds, something
> that is actually not an audible problem during sound reproduction. I
> guarantee I can fix your stereo if what I purport to fix is something
> that I just dreamed up and deceived you into thinking it exists. By
> demonstrating my alleged invention only with sighted evaluations I can
> trick suggestible people (with sighted evaluations that's just about
> everybody who plays their game) into confirming the efficacy of my
> alleged invention.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Mnyb]

Its a classic marketting scheme . First you present the "problem" and
then for some reason you have the solution :)



--------------------------------------------------------------------
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office: Boom
Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
Misc use: Radio (with battery)
iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
(spares Touch, SB3, reciever ,controller )
server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[kidstypike]

Mnyb wrote:
> Its a classic marketting scheme . First you present the "problem" and
> then for some reason you have the solution :)

And the reason is .... money, some of it in nice piles, others in lovely
clanky bits of loose change. Some of it neatly counted into fat
little hundreds, delicate fivers stuffed into bulging wallets,
nice crisp clean checks, pert pieces of copper coinage thrust deep
into trouser pockets, romantic foreign money rolling against the
thigh with rough familiarity, beautiful wayward curlicued
banknotes, filigreed copper plating cheek by jowl with tumbly
rubbing gently against the terse leather of beautifully balanced
bank books!!

:p



kidstypike

LMS on Raspberry Pi 3/max2play/HiFiBerry DAC+ > AVI DM5

1 x SB3 - 1 x Boom - 1 x (Squeezebox) Radio - 2 x Touch - 2 x Raspberry
Pi/max2play/HiFiBerry
------------------------------------------------------------------------
kidstypike's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10436
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[jfo]

kidstypike wrote:
> And the reason is .... money, some of it in nice piles, others in lovely
> clanky bits of loose change. Some of it neatly counted into fat
> little hundreds, delicate fivers stuffed into bulging wallets,
> nice crisp clean checks, pert pieces of copper coinage thrust deep
> into trouser pockets, romantic foreign money rolling against the
> thigh with rough familiarity, beautiful wayward curlicued
> banknotes, filigreed copper plating cheek by jowl with tumbly
> rubbing gently against the terse leather of beautifully balanced
> bank books!!
>
> :p

ha ha....a reminder of days long ago! And then we have...

The smell of the rain-washed florin!
The lure of the lira!
The glitter and the glory of the guinea!
The romance of the ruble!
The feel of the franc!
The heel of the deutschmark!
The cold antiseptic sting of the Swiss franc!
And the sunburnt splendor of the Australian dollar!


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jfo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1135
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[kidstypike]

jfo wrote:
> ha ha....a reminder of days long ago! And then we have...
>
> The smell of the rain-washed florin!
> The lure of the lira!
> The glitter and the glory of the guinea!
> The romance of the ruble!
> The feel of the franc!
> The heel of the deutschmark!
> The cold antiseptic sting of the Swiss franc!
> And the sunburnt splendor of the Australian dollar!

;)



kidstypike

LMS on Raspberry Pi 3/max2play/HiFiBerry DAC+ > AVI DM5

1 x SB3 - 1 x Boom - 1 x (Squeezebox) Radio - 2 x Touch - 2 x Raspberry
Pi/max2play/HiFiBerry
------------------------------------------------------------------------
kidstypike's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10436
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Archimago]

jfo wrote:
> ha ha....a reminder of days long ago! And then we have...
>
> The smell of the rain-washed florin!
> The lure of the lira!
> The glitter and the glory of the guinea!
> The romance of the ruble!
> The feel of the franc!
> The heel of the deutschmark!
> The cold antiseptic sting of the Swiss franc!
> And the sunburnt splendor of the Australian dollar!

Nice one boys.

Call me tradition... I just want my GOLD. :-)



Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[arnyk]

Mnyb wrote:
> Its a classic marketting scheme . First you present the "problem" and
> then for some reason you have the solution :)


Exactly. In the case of MQA we see the misdeed being done at their web
site:

http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/how-it-works

"Conventional audio formats discard parts of the sound to keep file size
down, but part of this lost detail is the subtle timing information that
allows us to build a realistic 3D soundscape in our minds.

"Without it, music becomes flattened. And our ears know it isn’t
real.

"With MQA, we go all the way back to the original master recording and
capture the missing timing detail. We then use advanced digital
processing to deliver it in a form that’s small enough to download
or stream.

False claims:

> Conventional audio formats discard parts of the sound to keep file size
> down.

In fact the information that is discarded is information outside of the
dynamic range and bandwidth known to be required for a recording that is
indistinguishable from the analog signal direct from the recording
microphones.

> ...part of this lost detail is the subtle timing information that allows
> us to build a realistic 3D soundscape in our minds"

The so-called subtle timing information that MQA preserves or creates
out of whole cloth is known to be inaudible. Its loss does not cause
music to be flattened because its presence or absence is known to be
inaudible.

A means for creating more realistic 3D soundstages has been known and
widely used for several decades. It's known as multichannel audio.

> With MQA, we go all the way back to the original master recording and
> capture the missing timing detail."

MQA can't go back to original master recordings and capture information
that is not there in the first place. If they synthesize is, then it is
well, synthetic which is not the same as being more realistic.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[Archimago]

Arny, thanks for the discussion on thresholds and the presentation. Good
stuff!

drmatt: "Actually I'd rather see a "thx like" mastering standard with
guideline volume levels and listening levels, than this specific MQA
thing as it seems like it's marginal in effectiveness. But any attempt
to introduce a standard might push the industry towards something more
complete and effective."

Yeah, I think something like this applied as a "standard" for which
high-resolution recordings can be certified as such might be
beneficial... Hard to imagine this happening though given how far down
Wonderland the consumer associations and how meaningless the "Hi-Res
Audio" logo and definition has become. The "branding" is already damaged
and continues to be nothing more than hype, playing on impressionable
audiophile insecurities who desire "big numbers" like 192kHz, 24-bits,
DSD128+... Folks like Neil Young and Bob Stuart are not helping the
situation.


As for MQA, I think it's pretty clear that it's DOA. With negatives
coming out of Schiit and PS Audio, and the obvious ridiculousness of
TAS's articles, the hype ain't working. This is good IMO. Unlike DSD
which is dying by virtue of just not delivering despite its time in the
sun, if audiophiles can stand up and call BS on stuff like MQA, then
*maybe* the industry can start to recognize that they better innovate
and that audiophiles are moving out of being audiophools. The same old
hype isn't going to work. Hopefully this also correlates with a more
mature audiophile hobby with more objective folks seeking understanding
rather than testimony and faith promulgated by the "mainstream
audiophile press".

Looking ahead, I'd be very curious if TIDAL actually ever delivers on
the MQA streaming audio. I would not be surprised if it never comes out
and just gets "delayed" -ad infinitum-. If I were Jay-Z, I'd be nervous
about pouring more money into the pit to deliver a product that few
would be able to access or care about... Nevermind that well encoded
high bitrate MP3 already sounds indistinguishable from lossless FLAC.



Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[drmatt]

Archimago wrote:
> drmatt: "Actually I'd rather see a "thx like" mastering standard ..."
>
> Yeah, I think something like this applied as a "standard" for which
> high-resolution recordings can be certified as such might be
> beneficial... Hard to imagine this happening though given how far down
> Wonderland the consumer associations and how meaningless the "Hi-Res
> Audio" logo and definition has become. The "branding" is already damaged
> and continues to be nothing more than hype, playing on impressionable
> audiophile insecurities who desire "big numbers" like 192kHz, 24-bits,
> DSD128+... Folks like Neil Young and Bob Stuart are not helping the
> situation.
>
> As for MQA, I think it's pretty clear that it's DOA. With negatives
> coming out of Schiit and PS Audio, and the obvious ridiculousness of
> TAS's articles, the hype ain't working. This is good IMO. Unlike DSD
> which is dying by virtue of just not delivering despite its time in the
> sun, if audiophiles can stand up and call BS on stuff like MQA.......

Yes it sounds like MQA is already dying on its feet. No matter, perhaps
the inertia or desire for a standard can be used to produce a better
one...

In the old days we'd have got the BBC to do it.. but that's been
neutered and can't produce its own obituary.




------------------------------------------------------------------------
drmatt's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59498
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[cdmackay]

drmatt wrote:
> Yes it sounds like MQA is already dying on its feet. No matter, perhaps
> the inertia or desire for a standard can be used to produce a better
> one...
>
> In the old days we'd have got the BBC to do it.. but that's been
> neutered and can't produce its own obituary.

I dunno. It sounds like you are saying: "there's a desire to sort things
out, and create useful standards, and that's good. The result was MQA,
which isn't good, but still, the intention was good". Is that what
you're saying?

I fear that the intention was nothing of the sort. I believe the
intention was nothing more than an attempt to hood-wink people into
spending money on something they don't need, to solve a problem that
doesn't exist, using a mixture of pseudo-science, unscientific tests,
and corrupt mass-media. I don't believe there was any good intention
behind it.

I would be happy if you were right, though.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
cdmackay's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=24816
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[arnyk]

drmatt wrote:
> I don't think it can be a bad thing to qualify individual ADCs and DACs
> such as this process entails in an end-to-end manner.

Qualifying DACs can be a bad idea if it is part of a scheme that has no
reliably perceptible benefits and raises the cost of DACs. Well, its
bad to those of us who spend real money on real hardware and aren't like
trust fund babies.

One of the things that needs to be understood is what kind of
performance differences does it take to deliver an audible difference,
let alone an audible benefit.

For example, a recent AES paper (I cited in a recent post) found the
following:

20559

The interpretation of this is that dynamic range improvements above 85
dB have not been found to be audible with any music under any
circumstance, and improvements above 70 dB are not audible in most
cases.

Similarly, improvements that effect response above 18-20 KHz have not
been found to be audible with any music under any circumstance, and
improvements above 13-14 kHz are not audible in most cases.

In both the cases of dynamic range and frequency response, a good clean
CD-quality system exceeds or meets the most stringent requirements. MQA
does not have reliably perceptible benefits. Obviously, we have pleny of
evidence that it does show a benefit in sighted evaluations, but that
should be taken as yet another valid condemnation of sighted evaluations
for critical decisions like these.


+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Filename: individual high res audio.jpg |
|Download: http://forums.slimdevices.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=20559|
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------------------------------------------------
arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070

[drmatt]

So. If you'll stop assuming you know what I mean when you clearly don't
you'll read the bit about what I'd like to see (the thx-y bit) and less
about MQA. I don't give too shakes of a monkey's dong about MQA itself
to be honest, just would like to see the industry get behind /something/
or anything that helps move away from the wild west of mastering in the
mainstream. If MQA is a waste of space at least it shows a willingness
to look for standards. Even if as it stands it's pointless.

As for the crap about fat sausages I can't believe I'm seeing this
conversation in a so called audiophile forum. I don't see any point in
elaborating on what was just a passing example of something that is
often symptomatic of bad technique and was totally not the point...




------------------------------------------------------------------------
drmatt's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59498
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070