Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads|
In Reply to: RE: a great explanation of how MQA works from Meridian posted by ahendler on January 10, 2017 at 14:05:30
Not quite. If you replay Bob Stuart talking again you will see that region C is only noise. The difference between using Tidal MQA decoding and using an MQA equipped DAC concerns the ultimate version of MQA "deblurring" which is, as I have written before, where the DAC characteristics need to be "known" by MQA for the full MQA Master process.
BTW I am surprised that you didn't put the link into the URL field in the "Post a Message" box rather than make us copy and "paste and go".
Yes but he says that region c is important. Also the deblurring concept
is a strange one. Think about it. Warner brothers has encoded supposedly 30,000 albums with Mqa. These are albums from all over the place How do the possible know the original equipment used to record these albums.
Also about the link. I have posted thousands of times on the asylum. Sometimes I do and sometimes I don't. Was very busy and forgot. Is it really so difficult to copy and paste a link?
Not on OS-X and a mouse.
Highlight (select) text containing the link and right click to 'open link in new tab'.
OK, about one second and one click more?
Regarding the "deblurring " concept, the original idea that made it practical is that the variety of ADCs used in studios is rather limited thus making a set of correction algorithms viable. The idea was that the record company would know which was used and be able to provide this information when encoding.
However, given the limited number of alternatives for ADCs in the pro field, a program has subsequently been devised that examines the characteristics of a given recording and which can identify (or deduce) which ADC was used and then apply the appropriate correction.
Unfortunately a similar limited number of alternatives does not exist in the world of consumer DACs.
Sorry about my intemperate reference to the URL field but having to copy and paste does annoy me even if it is a simple process.
Were the details of this ever disclosed? I found it hard to accept this particular claim.
There's a large number of digital recorders currently available in the pro market using a variety of ADC chips and a variety of DSPs. And the products get replaced fairly regularly. So if you were able to count the number of anti-aliasing filters used over the history of commercial digital recording, it would be huge. And most of them wouldn't be available to whoever is writing this program.
Also, a large number of recordings, particularly rock and pop recordings produced during the last 30 years, are recorded in multiple locations with different converters used for different tracks. Then they were all mixed. How would you handle that?
Finally, for ADCs that are operating at 88.2 KHz or above (most commonly 96 KHz), the cutoff of the anti-aliasing filter is above the music. The filter is filtering uncorrelated noise, so about all you can tell by analyzing the converter's output is what the cutoff frequency is, based on where the noise drops off. But then the vast majority of converters are all going to look the same.
Why isn't the focus of comments on the excellent explanation of how MQA works. Instead opening a link. Really??
I appreciate the comments on deblurring. I do know that some of the old favorites sound really good . Fleetwood mac roumers sound as good as I have ever heard it and some of the Carly Simon albums are wonderful
No but it is easier not to if the level of motivation is not high.
Post a Followup:
Post a Message!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: