Stereophile and the Absolute Sound hardly mentioned MQA in the April issues

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by Thouston, Mar 15, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jh901

    jh901 Forum Resident

    Location:
    PARRISH FL USA
    Painting with a fairly broad brush. Additionally, you are doing so for people you don't know.

    It's easy to jump all over MQA, associate it with any audiophile product, and then rant against all audiophiles.

    The truth is that MQA is dismissed or otherwise ignored fairly widely. Those who are inclined to support are often audiophiles. Those who are against it are often audiophiles.
     
  2. missan

    missan Forum Resident

    Location:
    Stockholm
    What You wrote has little to do with what I wrote.
    What I'm basically saying is: things are what they are, for reasons.
    How can we think for a second that MQA is understood, when most don't understand digital.
    I'm defending audiophiles in this context.
     
  3. jh901

    jh901 Forum Resident

    Location:
    PARRISH FL USA
    They will go for what they think they can believe, from their points of view.

    There are certainly those in the audiophile community who leap at the latest and greatest in digital, which includes the likes of MQA. Sure. Generally, I'm going to presume that audiophiles are rational skeptics. They make mistakes in judgement sometimes. Of course. Open minded audiophiles will not seek validation at any cost. Learn. Move on.

    Steve Nugent's latest DAC, for example, has no MQA compatibility. In fact, he is ditching USB, for which he put in much work previously, for Ethernet. This guy is an audiophile. Doing what he loves. Those who wish to leverage MQA to further an "audiophile hate agenda" are going to have to bury their heads in the sand.
     
  4. wgriel

    wgriel Forum Resident

    Location:
    bc, canada
    I think it’s fair to say that aside from some astute hardware manufacturers, audiophiles are the only ones expressing skepticism about MQA.

    The audiophile press certainly has been nothing but a cheerleader up to now, though perhaps that’s changing.
     
  5. Brother_Rael

    Brother_Rael Senior Member

    MQA might be the latest in digital, the greatest lies elsewhere however...
     
    rbbert likes this.
  6. Carl Swanson

    Carl Swanson Senior Member

    What do they know?
     
  7. avanti1960

    avanti1960 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Chicago metro, USA
    Isn't part of the appeal of MQA maximizing fidelity while maintaining bandwidth / portability?
    Wouldn't it be near the top (if not at the top) for high fidelity service based streaming?
    Being the ultimate in fidelity regardless of bandwidth / file size isn't what it's about, although some might want it to be.
     
  8. Cosmo-D

    Cosmo-D Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Canada
    If you read this article: MQA: A Review of controversies, concerns, and cautions it is questionable whether it is doing that at all. The files don't appear to be that much smaller than FLAC, and there are problems with their claims of fidelity. I haven't seen a proof that is "better" than any other format, and it requires special hardware/software to playback.
     
    rbbert and ggjjr like this.
  9. avanti1960

    avanti1960 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Chicago metro, USA
    what about bandwidth? streams quite well and is the best streaming source I have ever heard.
     
  10. Cosmo-D

    Cosmo-D Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Canada
    I have no technical education, but I still base my judgements in technical knowledge. I can't understand all the nuances, but if sufficiently "dumbed down" I believe I can understand it to point where I can make reasonably informed judgements. With regards to what they "think they can believe" I more inclined to believe those that use technical explanations that are widely agreed upon than those make no appeal to technical arguments.
     
  11. Cosmo-D

    Cosmo-D Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Canada
    You talk about audiophiles being rational skeptics, but this guy is ditching USB audio for a bunch of reasons that aren't rational at all.

    From article:

    I am fairly certain this is irrelevant. You are still going to need some kind of software to connect to it and send the audio via ethernet are you not? I have no idea how you stream audio from a computer program via ethernet, but I imagine it takes some kind of specialized software. Can I hook this thing up to my router? I only have 1 ethernet port on my desktop and that would be running to the router for an internet connection. This doesn't seem to simplify anything.

    I am pretty none of things mentioned here affect sound quality at all. If the router power supply and it's grounding affected the quality of signal significantly it would **** up the operations of it's basic functions. The big selling point of digital is that it isn't subject to degradation by cables and stuff like that like an analog signal would be.

    I don't even know how to address this. This just isn't possible. If it were that would mean that USB interface is somehow changing the bits that come in and out of it. In which you wouldn't be able to get an exact copy of a file via USB.

    I don't know who this guy is, but if you know how to design a DAC then you should be aware of how digital signals/computers work. I therefore believe everything he says is deceitful.
     
  12. missan

    missan Forum Resident

    Location:
    Stockholm
    We are most likely most of us doing the best we can. There can of course be many technical arguments from many sides, so sometimes it´s not so easy to make an own informed opinion. Often though I think we can see who to trust.
     
  13. Cosmo-D

    Cosmo-D Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Canada
    I don't use streaming sources, so I don't know. Can you find out the bitrates and file size? I assume it uses a variable bit rate like FLAC and other stuff so that might be tricky.
     
  14. jh901

    jh901 Forum Resident

    Location:
    PARRISH FL USA

    Ok.
     
  15. rbbert

    rbbert Forum Resident

    Location:
    Reno, NV, USA
    The only consumers expressing enthusiasm for MQA are some audiophiles. The only consumers expressing dislike for MQA are some other audiophiles. Manufacturers are likewise split. The recorded music industry is the second most notable proponent of MQA (after MQA, the company, itself). The last sentence there points to the origin of much of the current controversy.
     
    Kyhl and wgriel like this.
  16. Claude Benshaul

    Claude Benshaul Forum Resident

    I think, and since it's my own personal opinion everybody else may decide that I'm wrong, that the press coverage of MQA is the result of steady decline and erosion in the audio journalism. It's pretty much the same as what happened with Byte magazine that slowly dissolved into irrelevance and left us with C-Net.

    As such the MQA press coverage isn't the only symptom of this decline or even the worst. It's just the one that generate more emotional responses but it isn't much different from a lot of mumbo jumbo and other totem magic that can be found in plenty in these publications.
     
    Bubbamike likes this.
  17. missan

    missan Forum Resident

    Location:
    Stockholm
    I agree.
     
  18. Cosmo-D

    Cosmo-D Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Canada
    I'm not an electrical engineer, but I still know what numbers mean? Additionally, I can apply basic knowledge. If I can copy and read a file off of USB hard drive, without having to buy a $300 audiophile USB cable, then I am pretty sure you can use USB to stream music perfectly.

    So I'm not an engineer, and I couldn't design a DAC, but I possess at least minimal reasoning ability as well as they ability to apply knowledge. You don't need to be a scientist to know that whoever designed that DAC makes claims that are inconsistent with reality. If USB worked the way he thinks it works, you wouldn't be able to watch a movie off an external hard drive without errors and crashing because the ****ty power supply on the hard drive coupled with non-audiophile cable would result in corruption of the data stream. Since my cache of pornography plays back just fine, I am inclined to believe that USB works just fine.

    You don't need to be auto mechanic to base your car purchasing decisions on things like torque, horsepower, curb weight, fuel efficiency, et cetera, so why would I have to be an electrical engineer to use technical specifications to determine my audio purchases?

    When I say I don't have a technical background, that is because I've been to school and I know what technical background looks like. However, that doesn't mean I am not capable of grasping at least the essential attributes and most basic understanding of how technology works. Additionally I can use this knowledge, along with logic, to make judgements like "the designer of that DAC is full of ****".
     
    missan likes this.
  19. missan

    missan Forum Resident

    Location:
    Stockholm
    I don´t think it´s a stretch to say that if you are pro MQA, you are against consumers.
     
  20. jh901

    jh901 Forum Resident

    Location:
    PARRISH FL USA
    BIO Link

    I could probably put you in touch with Steve. I've never spoken with him and I know his products only by reputation. Anyhow, send a private message with your name, phone number, and email.

    Isn't a shame that a few of you are so bitter that nearly any product made by audiophiles for audiophiles is declared trash and that the engineer is a fraud. I was merely presenting readers of this thread with any example of a newly released DAC which ignored MQA and now here we are. Well done.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine