Digital Drive

Upsamplers, DACs, jitter, shakes and analogue withdrawals, this is it.

Return to Digital Drive

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Revisiting MQA & DAC bit-depth in general with Charles Hansen

73.229.163.4
Posted on July 18, 2024 at 07:08:03
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 47271
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
 I was searching the archives for MQA and bit-depth in general as it applies to DACs. Here's what Charles Hansen (RIP) of Ayre had to say about it back in 2017. He posted a clear and concise summary.

Isn't MQA getting a reboot and trying to make a comeback under different ownership? I haven't kept up, not that I ever plan to embrace the smoke and mirrors technology.



 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: Revisiting MQA & DAC bit-depth in general with Charles Hansen, posted on July 18, 2024 at 11:43:53
musetap
Audiophile

Posts: 32258
Location: San Francisco
Joined: July 8, 2003
Contributor
  Since: January 28, 2004
 Really miss Charles Hanson's contributions at Audio Asylum.

Intelligent, knowledgeable, human - he was a gem. RIP indeed.

As for MQA I'll ask for the ____ time. WHAT is it?

And yes, that is a rhetorical question...

"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination"-Michael McClure



 

A product in search of an actual need. -nt, posted on July 18, 2024 at 16:16:16
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 38789
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002

 

RE: Revisiting MQA & DAC bit-depth in general with Charles Hansen, posted on July 18, 2024 at 22:02:19
Postal Grunt
Audiophile

Posts: 3452
Location: Northeastern Kansas, USA
Joined: January 18, 2001
 Lenbrook was recently said to be the owner of MQA.

 

Isn't MQA getting a reboot and trying to make a comeback under different ownership? , posted on July 21, 2024 at 13:21:00
Roseval
Audiophile

Posts: 1859
Joined: March 31, 2008
 Indeed


The Well Tempered Computer

 

That was an interesting read. Thanks, posted on July 21, 2024 at 20:05:25
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 47271
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
Two wrongs don't make a right. Or will two hasbeens make a comeback?

MQA was looking for a problem that didn't exist especially from the perspective of streaming at reduced bandwidth. Pretty much everyone these days has sufficient internet bandwidth to not need MQA compression. Just stream true lossless CD quality, 24/96, or 24/192 w/o any MQA smoke and mirrors.

But this part might be interesting:

"The box-fresh platform will be available across a variety of mediums. In addition to its bespoke mobile applications, Lenbrook plans for the streaming service to be incorporated into "many of the world's leading high-end audio ecosystems, apps, and brands", although no concrete names have been provided just yet.

According to HDTracks co-founder David Chesky: "We have wanted to launch an HDTracks streaming service for some time. In Lenbrook we have a partner with global reach to help us launch a service ensuring quality and consumer choice. Fans will get to choose their format - either PCM/FLAC or MQA - in a service that will ensure high-resolution audio streaming whether you are in your home or on-the-go."

I am speculating that HDTracks was probably on life support since hi-rez streaming services like Tidal and Qobuz took over. When I subscribed to these services I put a halt to my pricey HDTracks downloads. One album download would cost more than an entire month of hi-res streaming from a vast catalog. If HDTracks + Lenbrook will integrate with Roon (as do Qobuz and Tidal), I might consider them. Otherwise they're too late to the party for me.


 

I beg to differ, but in the real world my differing does not make any difference, posted on July 24, 2024 at 07:27:27
John Marks
Manufacturer

Posts: 7985
Location: Peoples' Democratic Republic of R.I.
Joined: April 23, 2000
 IMHO, MQA's "Origami" function was the answer to a question nobody who mattered was asking.

HOWEVER, MQA's sub-function of single-ended "De-Blurring" of CDs or digital files was valuable. Except for some reason, as far as I know, MQA refused to do what everybody else in the recording and mastering end of professional audio would have done, which would be to offer the De-Blurring as a stand-alone software "Plug-In" for DAW programs.

Plug-Ins start at $10, $29 is a popular price, and $49 seems to be the top end. Because for not much more than $49 you can get an entire DAW package. (I use Hairersoft's Amadeus Pro II--under $100 and so good that John Atkinson also uses it.)

So, harvesting a huge number of $50 transactions was just not in MQA's Business Model.

john

 

I'm with mastering engineer Brian Lucey, posted on July 24, 2024 at 07:42:18
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 38789
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002
 who calls it a "corporate money grab" and observes that the process alters the original tonal balance. Not to mention it is a 17 bit lossy format.

Good luck convincining anyone it "fixes" anything!

 

The irony being that MQA really left "a lot of money on the table"..., posted on July 24, 2024 at 08:07:02
John Marks
Manufacturer

Posts: 7985
Location: Peoples' Democratic Republic of R.I.
Joined: April 23, 2000
 The irony being that MQA really left "a lot of money on the table" when they refused to make it easy to buy a stand-along function that as far as I know is generally regarded as a net positive.

john

 

Neil Young also observes, posted on July 25, 2024 at 09:58:40
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 38789
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002
 that the Master *claim* is completely bogus!


 

Page processed in 0.037 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]