Eurgh, that Stereophile article makes me want to stick a fork up my nose. It's so calculatedly misleading - the farrago of citations, half-truths and innuendoes that characterises their 'papers' is even more in evidence here. It's rare to see so much in the way of mathematics, footnotes (and repetitions of the word 'neuroscience') and so little goddamn substance. It's a veritable work of art - it reads like it was written by their legal department.

So would you buy a used audio format from that guy, then?

Interesting write up from Dr Jim Lesurf
http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/MQA/origami/ThereAndBack.html

BS explains how MQA finaly will fix digital audio of all labels. Everything ever sold in digital audio was simply done wrong.
MQA and Warner Stereophile link

Too bad our savior-in-chief didn't get to the tapes before time  did?

Is this like a Monsanto-model type thing? Making money from every earful of music, rather than every mouthful of food, consumed by everyone in the world?

Thanks to Wombat for the link.

Quote:
"If a recording is important enough, and all there is is a 78, that's where we start. . . We're really concerned about producing the definitive thing," not the thing with the highest bit depth or sampling rate."

So it's just DRM then. With the advantage that it's the "definitive" drm'd version.

There is no definitive thing in pretty everything ever released. If you follow remasters of the last 30 years the EQ choice alone from version to version makes me believe this authenticated thing is hogwash. The MQA man only pushes the knob once again with a more stylish EQ until MQA+ will use another one in some years.
Funnily it often believed these HiBit releases are "flat" transfers.

MQA cures 24 bit ADC "smearing" also.
Next, it will be used for gout.

And the part before it:

Stuart indicates that MQA is not about high resolution in the usual sense; it's about authenticity. "As far as we're concerned, anything from a cylinder forward is legitimate as long as it's the definitive statement about a recording,

I would want this, if only for unmastered pre-compression-applied stuff from the last twenty-five-or-so years to be released in a better version. Not holding my breath though ...

Quote:
"If a recording is important enough, and all there is is a 78, that's where we start. . . We're really concerned about producing the definitive thing," not the thing with the highest bit depth or sampling rate."

So it's just DRM then. With the advantage that it's the "definitive" drm'd version.

Yeah, my placebo receptors already smell enough DRM for a significantly negative bias.

We were able to fingerprint and reverse-engineer the A/D out of the recording."

- BS

He's apparently saying they went back to the original digital recording and, using the original ADC as a guide,  'reverse engineered out' anything he deemed was distortion due to the ADC. 

IOW, a fancy version of noise modelling+denoising, which we know audiophiles just love, right?

Stereophile's craven sucking up to BS is pathetic even by its low standards.

Has anyone done an ABX test with an MQA release vs a FLAC?

No real abx i heard of. The MQA'd versions sound different to their older available versions. People say the new MQA version played over an MQA capable DAC and its captured output by a modern ADC are sounding indistinguishable.

why would somebody with Bob Stuart's legacy produce a fraud?

why would somebody with Bob Stuart's legacy produce a fraud?

Retirement fund?

https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2013186561&recNum=132&docAn=GB2013051548&queryString=nano%20OR%20filter%20OR%20ceramic&maxRec=599628

Although it is necessary to have a decoder to achieve lossless reproduction of an original high-sample-rate signal, the signal provided to the legacy listener thus being described as 'lossy', the reduction to lossy is carried out in a manner that is described as 'benign' in audiophile circles

You can't get more scientifically valid than "being described as 'benign' in audiophile circles", now can you?

cheers,

AJ

it is necessary to have a decoder to achieve lossless reproduction of an original high-sample-rate signal

Without further qualification, I'm being kind by only saying this is misleading at best.

I think this would be an appropriate first track to be encoded in MQA:

:-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLEhh_XpJ-0

Yeah, I know you can buy MQA encoded music now.  I just think the video is very appropriate for MQA.

Highresaudio.com has decided to stop offering music encoded with MQA, as they consider it a lossy format:

http://www.hifiplus.com/articles/highresaudio-to-stop-offering-mqa/#comment-3207552914

The comment section is... Interesting, to say the least. I have no idea who Peter Jasz is, but he seems extremely invested in MQA.

He's apparently saying they went back to the original digital recording and, using the original ADC as a guide,  'reverse engineered out' anything he deemed was distortion due to the ADC. 

IOW, a fancy version of noise modelling+denoising, which we know audiophiles just love, right?

Correcting phase and amplitude errors in the frequency response of the ADC is a straightforward linear process, and if done correctly would make the result more objectively correct.

However, trying to correct for aliasing, noise, etc would be as you suggest.

Cheers,
David.

Correcting phase and amplitude errors in the frequency response of the ADC is a straightforward linear process, and if done correctly would make the result more objectively correct.

Maybe, but the mastering engineer already performs all corrections/adjustments to get the best possible result—if MQA changes it audibly, then it’s worse.

Highresaudio.com has decided to stop offering music encoded with MQA, as they consider it a lossy format ... ... ...

Alternative headline: Highresaudio.com not all bad!

... ... ... I have no idea who Peter Jasz is, but he seems extremely invested in MQA.

He seems extremely interested in you!

.

... ... ... I have no idea who Peter Jasz is, but he seems extremely invested in MQA.

He seems extremely interested in you!

If you read through his Disqus comment history, he's a very hotheaded audiophile true believer with very little social grace. He goes straight for the insults every time.

I just read the block close to that link and skimmed a bit more. I can easily believe it is typical. People that behave like that on the internet tend to... behave like that on the internet.