Skip to main content
Topic: McGill U MQA study (Read 1050 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

McGill U MQA study

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=19396

A Comparison of Clarity in MQA Encoded Files vs. Their Unprocessed State as Performed by Three Groups — Expert Listeners

Quote
Conclusion and Future Work
From the data collected, it is shown that it may be possible to discriminate between the two formats, but a generalization for clarity ratings was not possible within the circumstances of the experiment.

Basically a wash. Might ask authors if one of the MQA encoded FLAC 30s excerpts can be made available for analysis.

cheers.

AJ
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #1
Ain't it dead yet?
I thought even the slower ones realized all this crap is about encrypting the well known PCM at a maximum of 17bit/96kHz in a patentable and licencable way.
Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!

Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #2
This thing just won't die (...yet).
http://www.audioxpress.com/news/sabre-dacs-from-ess-technology-to-integrate-mqa-rendering
http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/feature/Worlds_First_HiRes_CD_by_Universal_Music_Japan

For hardware makers it's the new tick box to check in their marketing materials. For music labels, another excuse to re-re-re-issue old CDs at a high premium for all audophiles to purchase the same music yet again. And since it seems Universal Music is on board... a way to deliver more of their watermarked sound.

Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #3
This thing just won't die (...yet).
http://www.audioxpress.com/news/sabre-dacs-from-ess-technology-to-integrate-mqa-rendering
http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/feature/Worlds_First_HiRes_CD_by_Universal_Music_Japan

For hardware makers it's the new tick box to check in their marketing materials. For music labels, another excuse to re-re-re-issue old CDs at a high premium for all audophiles to purchase the same music yet again. And since it seems Universal Music is on board... a way to deliver more of their watermarked sound.
Alright, so we need to somehow spread the knowledge among non-technical people so that they know that it's bullshit and won't buy it.


Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #5
MQA is a pure marketing. As it is just differently encoded 24bit PCM, it can never be any better than 24bit PCM. There's not a bit of additional resolution.

Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #6
This thing just won't die (...yet).
http://www.audioxpress.com/news/sabre-dacs-from-ess-technology-to-integrate-mqa-rendering
http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/feature/Worlds_First_HiRes_CD_by_Universal_Music_Japan

For hardware makers it's the new tick box to check in their marketing materials. For music labels, another excuse to re-re-re-issue old CDs at a high premium for all audophiles to purchase the same music yet again. And since it seems Universal Music is on board... a way to deliver more of their watermarked sound.

i would not take audioxpress.com too seriously. A quote from another page on there website is "how far we have evolved from the dreaded MP3 (MPEG-1 Audio Layer III), now officially discontinued." http://www.audioxpress.com/article/show-report-notes-from-the-aes-milan-convention ::)

Is this FAKE news?

Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #7
Alright, so we need to somehow spread the knowledge among non-technical people so that they know that it's bullshit and won't buy it.
Aren't you assuming that anyone who's interested in placebophilia would actually be interested in being disillusioned?  ;~)

Personally, I suspect the reason stuff like this exists is because some people need it. Obviously it's not meant for those in the know, so to speak.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?  ;~)

Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #8
Need?!?
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #9
i would not take audioxpress.com too seriously. A quote from another page on there website is "how far we have evolved from the dreaded MP3 (MPEG-1 Audio Layer III), now officially discontinued." http://www.audioxpress.com/article/show-report-notes-from-the-aes-milan-convention ::)

Is this FAKE news?
A google search gives more results than one page. https://www.avsforum.com/mqa-news-from-munich-high-end-2018/
"For Munich 2018, MQA has announced new hardware and software partners [...]"
"The company has announced new hardware partnerships with Hegel Music System and Lyngdorf Audio. Hegel will unveil its new H590 amplifier at the show. Furthermore, MQA’s partnership with LG will continue, the G7 ThinQ handset will have decoding built in. Plus, ESS technology announced that it’s bringing decoding and rendering to its SABRE mobile DACs."

Need?!?
There is a market for this kind of thing. Nobody needs it, but some people want it. It's the new shiny toy, it's marketed as the best thing ever, as always. So someone might decide to give it a try... then confirmation bias will just make it sound great for them.

Alright, so we need to somehow spread the knowledge among non-technical people so that they know that it's bullshit and won't buy it.
Non-technical people are not the problem at all. Most consumers are happy with spotify, youtube, itunes and maybe a CD purchase every once in a while. This will go the SACD way, let some time pass and only a few people will still be interested. These are the same people you can't convince with rational arguments. They will insist it sounds better as they recite the miracle properties of their format of choice, just as if they were a sales rep reading the marketing material.

Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #10
There is a market for this kind of thing. Nobody needs it, but some people want it.
I used the word need deliberately as in some people "need" new pseudo-formats in order to make or spend money, look important, be special, etc. From my perspective, there's more to this issue than just audio engineering, there's also psychology.

Looking at the lengths that people have gone to in regards to MQA, clearly it's some kind of a "need".
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?  ;~)

Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #11
Need?!?
Sure. Stereophiles are desperate for help with their archaic systems. Anything helps, even some aliasing distortion w/EQ (remember an actual EQ is taboo). Let's not forget one of digitals many issues is "sterility". Plus when one is addicted to scams and parched for another...yep, need.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #12
Like Ativan, in other words.
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #13
PS: shouldn't this discussion be in the "Other Lossy Codecs" sub-forum?

;)
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?


Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #15
Extended inaudible frequency response at the expense of potentially audible dynamic range.  HDCD was a much better gimmick.
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #16
PS: shouldn't this discussion be in the "Other Lossy Codecs" sub-forum?
;)
Yeah was a bit stumped on this one. Technically, it's a Listening Test (McGill study), of a Lossy Codec that involves Scientific Discussion. Figured what the heck, General Discussion it is. McGill promises more in future.
Meanwhile if Tidal folds, can't see this sham surviving.                
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: McGill U MQA study

Reply #17
Oh, just poking fun over the irony.  Listening tests would probably be the best place.  My days of being a tight ass over these things are long gone.
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2018