In Reply to: RE: MQA questions posted by tubby2 on January 17, 2016 at 10:19:05:
The problem is that there is no standard for playback filtering. This means that there is no way to guarantee that the listener gets the same signal as was sent to the monitoring amplifiers in the mastering studio and approved by the producer(s) and artist(s). This problem is not solved by knowing what A/D is used to produce the master. What matters is the DAC that was used to play this master and have the producers and artists sign off on it. Furthermore, most new recordings are actually tracked and mixed at high sampling rates where filtering is not such an issue. There may be multiple ADC's or (or software converters) in the signal path. The mastering engineer may deliberately chose or adjust the conversions to get the sound he wants.
Trade show demos are not suitable for evaluating new formats. They are nothing but a marketing side-show. The claim that MQA can improve the sound of existing digital recordings requires independent evaluation of the process under controlled conditions using music source files chosen by the testers. If is very easy to "rig" a demo, especially if there are multiple users and the operation of "group think".
If MQA were open and came with a complete specification and source code for encoders and decoders, then it would be possible to evaluate this system fairly. This is not what was done or appears to be done. A good model of this process would be the FLAC CODEC.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: MQA questions - Tony Lauck 11:46:49 01/17/16 (16)
- RE: MQA questions - Michael Lavorgna 11:58:28 01/17/16 (15)
- RE: "Calling me a shill, is not fine." -- Where? (nt) - goldenthal 14:58:47 01/17/16 (1)
- Down below here... - genungo 05:20:14 01/18/16 (0)
- RE: MQA questions - Tony Lauck 12:16:28 01/17/16 (12)
- RE: MQA questions - Michael Lavorgna 12:21:01 01/17/16 (11)
- RE: MQA questions, opening quotation -- Again, where? (nt) - goldenthal 15:01:14 01/17/16 (0)
- RE: MQA questions - Tony Lauck 12:42:53 01/17/16 (9)
- RE: MQA questions - Michael Lavorgna 12:51:25 01/17/16 (8)
- RE: MQA questions - ahendler 13:28:10 01/17/16 (7)
- RE: MQA questions - Michael Lavorgna 13:37:36 01/17/16 (6)
- RE: MQA questions - ahendler 13:49:15 01/17/16 (5)
- RE: MQA questions - Michael Lavorgna 14:31:36 01/17/16 (4)
- RE: MQA questions - Tony Lauck 13:48:30 01/18/16 (0)
- MQA is NOT a hoax... - Ivan303 14:53:17 01/17/16 (2)
- RE: MQA is NOT a hoax... - ahendler 15:15:20 01/17/16 (1)
- I have no idea... - Ivan303 16:46:07 01/17/16 (0)