MQA is a scam if there ever was one. Bob Stuart got very mad at me when I asked an obvious question at one of his presentations at a previous AES. At that point I realised the emperor was naked.
Jan
Jan
I actually heard an hour talk by Bob Stuart on MQA. It was rather dry, but there were plenty of charts and graphs that should impress any electronic engineer. Put simply, it just expands the effective bandwith above 20KHz in order to change the shape of the analog audio waveform within the normal human listening range. It is obvious to me why it can be a potential improvement.
Really, I thought it was just a way of lining Bob's pockets.
The advantage for those of us who don't follow state of the art is people upgrading perfectly good DACs to get MQA certified ones should mean cheap upgrades for us 🙂
The advantage for those of us who don't follow state of the art is people upgrading perfectly good DACs to get MQA certified ones should mean cheap upgrades for us 🙂
Can you produce and actual commercial recording of real music that is remotely close to pushing a 24 bit noise floor? I've tried the experiment 16/44.1 track of nothing but TPDF dither (no noise shaping) with the volume control set where most CD's are as loud as I want to listen, it's not even close to being audible.
Sounds like an effects box to me. "Change the shape" what happened to accuracy? I tell you that THX stuff is great especially for the virtual reality gamers, you never know when the enemy is sneaking up on you.
Admit it John, quality audio is dead various simulacra are getting all the funding.
Counterpoint, especially the use of the word lossless, which is simply a lie.
https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/application_notes/163302855-is-mqa-doa
Last edited:
Well Scott, your head is in a different place than mine. I found the LA show exciting, and there was plenty in interest in audio.
what amazes me is the sound quality Roy DuNann was getting in 1957 with Ampex 350/351 tape decks. Decided it was time to introduce wife to some Jazz, so put on 'Art pepper meets the Rhythm section'. I know it's hackneyed re-issue fare now, but I've had my copy since 1988. Progress? Not sure there has been much, at least for 5 musicians playing live.
At that same presentation there was a guy who had performed a meta-study on many studies about the audibility of hi res audio.
A metastudy looks at a lot of studies which in themselves did not proof audibility one way or another, and try to find some common findings so as to eek out some credible results.
After a lot of charts (yeah you can impress a lot of people with charts John) the conclusion was that with well-trained listeners, there was a 60% chance of hi res audibility.
I think our State Lottery has better odds than that. ;-)
Jan
+1. 1957 it all changed some fine recordings and black musicians started to be considered worth using the best equipment on. I've often thought it must be simpler to record than reproduce (transmit than receive, talk than listen)
Last edited:
No, the best 24-bit A/Ds are maybe good for 18-20 bits. At least they hit the noise floor by then. But there may be a few bits buried under the noise floor wherever that is, just as there are some bits under the noise with dithered 16-bit.
The reason I think that is is because that's what it sounds like to me. It sounds like there are more bits of signal providing more subtle details with a 24-bit recording, at least those made on the better performing converters. I could be wrong, but it seems like the simplest and best explanation to me.
Aside: I know we are never going to settle anything about hearing 24-bit vs 16-bit until if and when new research comes out that refutes the old research. Until then, there may not be much point in continuing to talk about it.
Last edited:
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test | The BMJ
Long story short, meta analyses of poorly powered studies (audio studies fall in this bin) are going to have 0-100% range of possibility. 😉
Two of the best recordings ever as Black musicans accessed better recording equipment in the early 1960s.
No multitrack, no vocal harmonizer, you better be able to sing and play.
Muddy Waters: Folk Singer. ( great as a 45 RPM 2 disk vinyl release or 24/192 download )
https://youtu.be/0ivCfzcoEJI
Junior Wells : Hoodoo Man Blues
https://youtu.be/V4WwIJ1RLeQ
No multitrack, no vocal harmonizer, you better be able to sing and play.
Muddy Waters: Folk Singer. ( great as a 45 RPM 2 disk vinyl release or 24/192 download )
https://youtu.be/0ivCfzcoEJI
Junior Wells : Hoodoo Man Blues
https://youtu.be/V4WwIJ1RLeQ
Last edited:
So far I'm still stuck working out what is in a music signal that cannot be described in 16 bits with dither for replay. Not hearing it, just what is there that needs the bits.
I can't even hear to 20kHz, so I guess this "MQA" thing won't be doing me any good.😀
- Status
- Not open for further replies.