McIntosh says no way to MQA.......BRAVO!!!

maxward

Great thread! John Darko (Darko.Audio) reported today that Exogal is dropping support for MQA.

afterburnt

Does anyone remember "PDQ"? it was the "PF Flyers" of "Bosco"

Thorton

kharp1 wrote: »

So, let me cut through the dank, septic muck that has developed,as a result of the aforementioned bloviating, and see if I can get some clarity. MQA is a lossy format that adds noise, and is proprietary and requires special hardware, and that somehow is supposed to be good? I'm not that desperate to crawl through the desert and drink sand when I find no water.

Lol. Great post. I'll try it out eventually but I'm in no hurry. Seems like added cost with minimal benefit.....if any.

Thorton

[/quote]
I think my ears deserve more credit than just the Butler. How about McCormack/Parasound/B&K amps, Joule pre's, xyz cables, speakers.....anything I pretty much suggest for people to give a whirl with, they seem to like.

….and when ears I trust around here tell me to try something, I listen and give it much more weight. When others ears I trust suggest things for newer members to pair up gear with, they should put some weight behind it also.

Which is one reason when listening to suggestions, you have to form some idea of what those people like in their preferences. My group of ears I trust may not align with say some younger members circle of ears they trust. That's ok...how the world works....and how we move forward in audio.
[/quote]

Your ears are OK by my books. Many suggestions you’ve given to me that I’ve tried are spot-on. Keep on, Keepin-on.

mhardy6647

afterburnt wrote: »

Does anyone remember "PDQ"? it was the "PF Flyers" of "Bosco"

This is the PDQ I remember.

https://youtu.be/ZQVehnkc68M

Viking64

halen

If memory serves right. After each beer or just looking at a shot, TonyB passed out.. kidding.

Now.... talking about hearing? I am lucky to have met Assimilated... Danny. I have not met any others like him. Hands down. This guy could hear ants pissing on cotton. Serious. Ask anyone in Texas that spent anytime with him. I trust his judgement but have my preferences on sound as well.

As for MQA, still have no clue wtf it is.

DarqueKnight

halen wrote: »

As for MQA, still have no clue wtf it is.

MQA (Mysteriously Quirky Audio, or Most Questionable Audioformat) is a cash cow whose milk soured in the udder.

mhardy6647

DarqueKnight wrote: »

halen wrote: »

As for MQA, still have no clue wtf it is.

MQA (Mysteriously Quirky Audio, or Most Questionable Audioformat) is a cash cow whose milk soured in the udder.

that's a really unpleasant* simile



_______________
* Note that I am not implying that it's not apt; just that it's kind of... icky.

DarqueKnight

mhardy6647 wrote: »

* Note that I am not implying that it's not apt; just that it's kind of... icky.

What's really icky is naming something "Master Quality Authenticated" and implying that the digital file the consumer receives is the same as the studio master, after processing it with a lossy compression algorithm and re-inflating it with noise. And don't forget how gracious they were in making MQA backwards compatible with 16 bit legacy digital audio...as long as you don't mind less than CD quality 13 bit resolution with audible noise.

mhardy6647

I expect that MQA will die a TS Eliot [poetic, that is] kind of death.

Not with a bang but a whimper

tonyb

DarqueKnight wrote: »

mhardy6647 wrote: »

* Note that I am not implying that it's not apt; just that it's kind of... icky.

What's really icky is naming something "Master Quality Authenticated" and implying that the digital file the consumer receives is the same as the studio master, after processing it with a lossy compression algorithm and re-inflating it with noise. And don't forget how gracious they were in making MQA backwards compatible with 16 bit legacy digital audio...as long as you don't mind less than CD quality 13 bit resolution with audible noise.

I like that explanation, should be a sticky....somewhere.

BlueFox

Came across this on another forum. Whether true or not, I do not know. I doubt if I will buy this as not that big a Doors fan, but they do have a few good songs spread over a number of albums.

"Audiophiles might be interested to know that the CDs in this new release have been encoded with the MQA (Master Quality Authenticated) process. These are fully compatible with standard CD players, but when connected to an MQA-enabled device, it can play the same disc back in hi-res 176 kHz /24 bit."

http://www.superdeluxeedition.com/news/the-doors-waiting-for-the-sun-50th-anniversary-deluxe-edition/

Clipdat

^^ I'm not a fan, but I wouldn't buy that just based on the principle alone. Vote with your dollar.

tonyb

BlueFox wrote: »

Came across this on another forum. Whether true or not, I do not know. I doubt if I will buy this as not that big a Doors fan, but they do have a few good songs spread over a number of albums.

"Audiophiles might be interested to know that the CDs in this new release have been encoded with the MQA (Master Quality Authenticated) process. These are fully compatible with standard CD players, but when connected to an MQA-enabled device, it can play the same disc back in hi-res 176 kHz /24 bit."

http://www.superdeluxeedition.com/news/the-doors-waiting-for-the-sun-50th-anniversary-deluxe-edition/

Right there is the rub....when connected to an MQA enabled device. Meaning an MQA enabled dac usually.