Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Archimago wrote: > Just reading from overseas... Thanks GE. Do you happen to have a link to > the paper you're referring to? Maybe Arnyk can chime in here... Hi Archimago! Only just picked up your post, I've had a totally frantic week. Arny gives the links at the end of his post (#395) on page 40 of the "External DAC on Transporter: best output option" thread. Happy reading, don't forget to have some aspirin to hand :D ... Dave :cool: Golden Earring's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=66646 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
adamdea wrote: > . > One could go on, but the gist of it is that the level of understanding > of perceptual science required to see through the entire subjectivist > canon is about the same as the level of understanding of physics > required to understanding that cartoon characters do not obey newtonian > mechanics. That's all well and good but what about quantum mechanics? Since we all know that to fully understand the mysteries of high end audio a full and thorough understanding and knowledge of advanced quantum mechanics is required. And once one has obtained this knowledge and understanding one will clearly see that the difference between objective and subjective is nonexistent. :) Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. & sub Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Energy sub Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0 Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar Garage: SB3-JVC compact system Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso Server: LMS 7.9 on dedicated windows 10 computer w/2 Drobos 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
That is a pretty good analysis. I always wonder if audio subjectivists ever use a measuring tape, spirit level or even a car speedometer - after all, aren't their senses perfect and absolute? "To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953 Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Archimago wrote: > Beyond that, I agree, there is no value in much of the subjective > reviews out there when it comes to adjudicating sound quality. > > I think what is fascinating is how seriously the subjective reviewers > take themselves and their opinions. I think that part of the problem is that there is an entire bogus conceptual scheme built around the audiophile hobby about the nature of hearing and the listening process. Once it is acquired it is quite difficult to "un-learn". In essence it is based around a set of tacit assumptions that human beings are a sort of sound quality detection advice and that fluctuations in one's listening experience must be caused by variations in the sound pressure waves reaching the ears. On this model thinking that two things sound different is like thinking you can see someone else in the room- a perceptually based conclusion which can only be mistaken as a result of extraordinary disturbance of the perceptual system/hallucination etc. The curiosity is that even the most superficial acquaintance with the basics of perceptual science would immediately uncover this conceptual error. I have noticed that even some very smart people in the industry (some of them engineers and scientists in other disciples) seem to lack any curiosity about how perception works. It is quite difficult to persuade people with so little intellectual curiosity to rethink their position as to what it may mean to say that measurements "can't explain" what they hear. One could go on, but the gist of it is that the level of understanding of perceptual science required to see through the entire subjectivist canon is about the same as the level of understanding of physics required to understanding that cartoon characters do not obey newtonian mechanics. adamdea's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37603 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Mnyb wrote: > Objektive characterisation of loudspeakers . Sean Olive of Harman > International had an article about it years ago . > > They claim to have some sort of method involving many different > measurments a staggering undertaking if i remember there where dossens > of them . > > For from small signal electronics, preamps DACs whatever where noise > and distortion is diminishingly small magnitudes below our threshold of > hearing . > Making subjective reviews even more pointless as you actually describe > the source material flowery terms with all kinds of cocnetive bias . I believe Toole & Olive do the "spinorama" measurements to get a sense of off-axis response for speakers. Alas, I have no access to the usual Google / YouTube information today, but Audioholics talk about it: http://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/loudspeaker-myths-and-truths/loudspeaker-myths-anechoic-chambers I know Toole has a video that goes into good depth. Yes, once we get into the realm of competent DACs, the differences are so microscopic compared to loudspeakers that it is a waste of time with subjective myth-making. I suppose there is some entertainment value in record recommendations and subjective comments on quality of workmanship, ergonomics, and apparent reliability (notice how frequently reviews like -Stereophile -seem to have issues with faulty gear!). Beyond that, I agree, there is no value in much of the subjective reviews out there when it comes to adjudicating sound quality. I think what is fascinating is how seriously the subjective reviewers take themselves and their opinions. Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective' audiophile blog. Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Objektive characterisation of loudspeakers . Sean Olive of Harman International had an article about it years ago . They claim to have some sort of method involving many different measurments a staggering undertaking if i remember there where dossens of them . For from small signal electronics, preamps DACs whatever where noise and distortion is diminishingly small magnitudes below our threshold of hearing . Making subjective reviews even more pointless as you actually describe the source material flowery terms with all kinds of cocnetive bias . Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3 sub. Bedroom/Office: Boom Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4 Misc use: Radio (with battery) iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad (spares Touch, SB3, reciever ,controller ) server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Golden Earring wrote: > Hi Archimago! > > I agree wholeheartedly with the points that you make. > > It is certainly the case that loudspeakers are still (despite massive > advances in materials available for driver construction since I first > started my audio quest for nirvana some 45 years ago) the weakest link > in the chain, & the most appropriate choice for an individual listener > will be governed by the size (& shape) of their listening room, the > particular combination of compromises used by the various manufacturers > (who usually have some kind of "house" sound throughout their range) > that meshes best with the musical ear of the listener, & also on the > type of music that is to be reproduced. If you predominantly listen to > string quartets, you will have an easier time finding loudspeakers that > you like than you will if you have more catholic tastes (like me, & I > suspect, the majority of the members of this forum). > > I am not particularly bothered which "genre" a musical performance is > (often relatively arbitrarily) assigned to, I am interested in whether > it is an emotionally engaging musical performance. I like listening in > the dark with no distractions, in the (probably delusory!) belief that > this helps my analogue brain focus on the sound without any other > sensory distractions. I do have to observe certain safety protocols when > indulging myself like this since my 18 year old black cat *-still-* > hasn't twigged that, unlike her, I cannot see in the dark (or for that > matter that my eyes are located much further away from my feet than in > her configuration... ). This is slightly dangerous for me, but > potentially disastrous for her. I have a powerful flashlight to hand! > :D > > The almost total inadequacy of any commonly quoted objective > measurements of loudspeaker performance for the purpose of assisting > one's selection of a loudspeaker that suits you is apparent. Arnyk sent > me the link (on another thread) for a recently published paper by 3 > Danish academic researchers who were attempting to make headway with > this issue by inventing new objective measures which actually do > correlate to the sound produced. It was a tough read - I think it took > me 3 run-throughs fully to fathom their chosen methodology & ultimately > I was less than impressed with the amount of progress which they had > actually made by the end. > > However, if anyone would like to have a headache this weekend, I'll go > off & find it so that you can judge for yourself! Throwaway remarks like > needing a "specially experienced listening panel" & the need for the > experiment to be conducted by "experts" gave me cause for concern that > the scientific method (which requires the results of experiments to be > readily repeatable) was not being closely followed despite the undoubted > qualifications of the authors... > > Have a great weekend all! > > I'm off to a Richard Thompson concert this evening - I attended one of > the early concerts in his current tour & he was so good that I got > tickets to see him again before he retreats back to the US which has > been his home for the last 30 years. I'm really looking forward to it! > > Dave :cool: Just reading from overseas... Thanks GE. Do you happen to have a link to the paper you're referring to? Maybe Arnyk can chime in here... Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective' audiophile blog. Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Archimago wrote: > > As for this: > -"Anyhow, I'm not sure demo gear comes to anyone for free for real."- -- > drmatt > > No. Nothing is really for free. The price is that of a review of sorts > and at least an endorsement, right? > > As for Chord, I have heard some great sounds from these at the local > audio show and showroom. The most interesting thing about these DACs I > think is how they've taken the opposite direction from MQA. Instead of > weak, poorly antialiasing digital filters of something like 32 to 64 > taps with MQA, they implement very long "brick wall" type filters with > tens of thousands of taps. If time domain performance were about impulse > responses, this is like giving the finger to Bob Stuart and MQA's > typical presentation material ;). Yeah a review. If not an endorsement a fair shot at least. But it's true to say that no company is going to ship a ton of stuff at their own cost to people who consistently say unpleasant stuff about it. The best review sites are the ones who buy the gear themselves (opticallimits.com for example.). Yes, I really liked the Hugo, but didn't like it as much as the Mytek which I got for a third the price.. The FPGA approach was interesting. They threw so much hardware at the DAC part of the FPGA they ran out of space to implement stuff like a "default volume level", you know, things like that.. -Transcoded from Matt's brain by Tapatalk- -- Hardware: 3x Touch, 1x Radio, 2x Receivers, 1 HP Microserver NAS with Debian+LMS 7.9.0 Music: ~1300 CDs, as 450 GB of 16/44k FLACs. No less than 3x 24/44k albums.. drmatt's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59498 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Archimago wrote: > LOL... Don't think I *can* even convert to being a subjectivist if I > wanted to at this point :rolleyes:. > > For one thing, I honestly find it remarkably -boring -writing about the > subjective experience of what one hears. The reason being that when > writing that stuff, one recognizes that the words are just describing an > ephemeral internal experience that can (and should) be different for > each person based on life history. This is also why I typically just > briefly glance over subjective reviews these days. I can appreciate > album recommendations and general discussions about the gear and why it > might be great... > > -But do I really care about the quality of the supposedly perceived > subjective change- when some golden-eared guru replaced cables or > switched a $5000 DAC when we know these experiences are prone to bias? > Not really. Some devices that are more difficult to characterize might > be worth a read - like speakers. > > Too many people describe too many subjective experiences already in this > world (like every month of -TAS -and -Stereophile-). I really can't see > how any more will actually educate, add knowledge, or change the hobby > in any positive direction... > > As for this: > -"Anyhow, I'm not sure demo gear comes to anyone for free for real."- -- > drmatt > > No. Nothing is really for free. The price is that of a review of sorts > and at least an endorsement, right? > > As for Chord, I have heard some great sounds from these at the local > audio show and showroom. The most interesting thing about these DACs I > think is how they've taken the opposite direction from MQA. Instead of > weak, poorly antialiasing digital filters of something like 32 to 64 > taps with MQA, they implement very long "brick wall" type filters with > tens of thousands of taps. If time domain performance were about impulse > responses, this is like giving the finger to Bob Stuart and MQA's > typical presentation material ;). Hi Archimago! I agree wholeheartedly with the points that you make. It is certainly the case that loudspeakers are still (despite massive advances in materials available for driver construction since I first started my audio quest for nirvana some 45 years ago) the weakest link in the chain, & the most appropriate choice for an individual listener will be governed by the size (& shape) of their listening room, the particular combination of compromises used by the various manufacturers (who usually have some kind of "house" sound throughout their range) that meshes best with the musical ear of the listener, & also on the type of music that is to be reproduced. If you predominantly listen to string quartets, you will have an easier time finding loudspeakers that you like than you will if you have more catholic tastes (like me, & I suspect, the majority of the members of this forum). I am not particularly bothered which "genre" a musical performance is (often relatively arbitrarily) assigned to, I am interested in whether it is an emotionally engaging musical performance. I like listening in the dark with no distractions, in the (probably delusory!) belief that this helps my analogue brain focus on the sound without any other sensory distractions. I do have to observe certain safety protocols when indulging myself like this since my 18 year old black cat *-still-* hasn't twigged that, unlike her, I cannot see in the dark (or for that matter that my eyes are located much further away from my feet than in her configuration... ). This is slightly dangerous for me, but potentially disastrous for her. I have a powerful flashlight to hand! :D The almost total inadequacy of any commonly quoted objective measurements of loudspeaker performance for the purpose of assisting one's selection of a loudspeaker that suits you is apparent. Arnyk sent me the link (on another thread) for a recently published paper by 3 Danish academic researchers who were attempting to make headway with this issue by inventing new objective measures which actually do correlate to the sound produced. It was a tough read - I think it took me 3 run-throughs fully to fathom their chosen methodology & ultimately I was less than impressed with the amount of progress which they had actually made by the end. However, if anyone would like to have a headache this weekend, I'll go off & find it so that you can judge for yourself! Throwaway remarks like needing a "specially experienced listening panel" & the need for the experiment to be conducted by "experts" gave me cause for concern that the scientific method (which requires the results of experiments to be readily repeatable) was not being closely followed despite the undoubted qualifications of the authors... Have a great weekend all! I'm off to a Richard Thompson concert this evening - I attended one of the early concerts in his current tour & he was so good that I got tickets to see him again before he retreats back to the US which
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
LOL... Don't think I *can* even convert to being a subjectivist if I wanted to at this point :rolleyes:. For one thing, I honestly find it remarkably -boring -writing about the subjective experience of what one hears. The reason being that when writing that stuff, one recognizes that the words are just describing an ephemeral internal experience that can (and should) be different for each person based on life history. This is also why I typically just glace over subjective reviews these days. I can appreciate album recommendations and general discussions about the gear and why it might be great... But do I really care about the quality of the supposedly perceived subjective change when some golden-eared guru replaced cables or switched a $5000 DAC when we know these experiences are prone to bias? Not really. Some devices that are more difficult to characterize might be worth a read - like speakers. Too many people describe too many subjective experiences already in this world (like every month of -TAS -and -Stereophile-). I really can't see how any more will actually educate, add knowledge, or change the hobby in any positive direction... As for this: -"Anyhow, I'm not sure demo gear comes to anyone for free for real."- -- drmatt No. Nothing is really for free. The price is that of a review of sorts and at least an endorsement, right? As for Chord, I have heard some great sounds from these at the local audio show and showroom. The most interesting thing about these DACs I think is how they've taken the opposite direction from MQA. Instead of weak, poorly antialiasing digital filters of something like 32 to 64 taps with MQA, they implement very long "brick wall" type filters with tens of thousands of taps. If time domain performance were about impulse responses, this is like giving the finger to Bob Stuart and MQA's typical presentation material ;). Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective' audiophile blog. Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
I didn't say "better" did I? I just said different. -Transcoded from Matt's brain by Tapatalk- -- Hardware: 3x Touch, 1x Radio, 2x Receivers, 1 HP Microserver NAS with Debian+LMS 7.9.0 Music: ~1300 CDs, as 450 GB of 16/44k FLACs. No less than 3x 24/44k albums.. drmatt's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59498 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
drmatt wrote: > Have you tried the Chord Hugo/TT and friends? Not mqa certified I think, > but quite different sounding from others, IME. > > > -Transcoded from Matt's brain by Tapatalk- This could be the moment for Archimago to affect a conversion to subjectivism (even to the extent of writing some drivel somewhere to "prove" his credentials) so that some fool will lend him some of this stuff & he can apply his particular "skill set" to it... :D Dave :cool: Golden Earring's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=66646 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Have you tried the Chord Hugo/TT and friends? Not mqa certified I think, but quite different sounding from others, IME. -Transcoded from Matt's brain by Tapatalk- -- Hardware: 3x Touch, 1x Radio, 2x Receivers, 1 HP Microserver NAS with Debian+LMS 7.9.0 Music: ~1300 CDs, as 450 GB of 16/44k FLACs. No less than 3x 24/44k albums.. drmatt's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59498 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Golden Earring wrote: > Hi Archimago! > > Mytek make a studio-orientated DAC called the Manhattan (now in version > 2, so *-someone-* must be buying the things!) at a cool $6000. > > It has word clock in & out, so that you can buy several & sync them up > for multi-channel - at a price! > > Don't know if it has MQA, but since it's for monitoring in the studio > listening room I suspect it would have... > > Give Michal Jurewicz a call & see if he'll lend you a full set for > objective evaluation. He might just do it, he seems to be very proud of > his designs. > > As for you being seduced by such things, I've got you pegged with the > "unclubable" Groucho Marx :D > > Dave :cool: Good one GE: "PLEASE ACCEPT MY RESIGNATION. I DON'T WANT TO BELONG TO ANY CLUB THAT WILL ACCEPT PEOPLE LIKE ME AS A MEMBER". Groucho Marx Actually, I do belong to a number of non-profits, little get togethers (including a local audio gathering a couple years back), and of course more professional "clubs" so to speak. The -*"fraternity of subjectivist audiophile"*- (and it is very much a fraternity of typically old dudes) - not so much. :eek: On a "serious" note, regarding MQA, while the more expensive Manhattan DAC (ESS 9038) I'm sure is good, what would be interesting would be a -non-ESS Tech DAC based decoder-. The reason being that we know what kind of filtering parameters they're programming into these ESS DACs, but what about a TI/Burr Brown DAC or an AKM DAC? All kinds of reasons worth asking about this of course... Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective' audiophile blog. Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Mytek offer a no quibble 30 day money back deal if you buy direct on their website... ;) -Transcoded from Matt's brain by Tapatalk- -- Hardware: 3x Touch, 1x Radio, 2x Receivers, 1 HP Microserver NAS with Debian+LMS 7.9.0 Music: ~1300 CDs, as 450 GB of 16/44k FLACs. No less than 3x 24/44k albums.. drmatt's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59498 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Archimago wrote: > Love it man, send that $10K MQA DAC ASAP! > > I want to run a few impulse responses thru and see if I can verify the > 16 MQA filters across the price points... I already have the measurement > from the $100 AudioQuest Dragonfly Black, $2000 Mytek Brooklyn, and this > $10,000 device will fit in nicely to the study. > > Any manufacturers out there interested??? :rolleyes: > > Not sure if I can -forget- conclusions... But I could try to rework > things. :D Hi Archimago! Mytek make a studio-orientated DAC called the Manhattan (now in version 2, so *-someone-* must be buying the things!) at a cool $6000. It has word clock in & out, so that you can buy several & sync them up for multi-channel - at a price! Don't know if it has MQA, but since it's for monitoring in the studio listening room I suspect it would have... Give Michal Jurewicz a call & see if he'll lend you a full set for objective evaluation. He might just do it, he seems to be very proud of his designs. As for you being seduced by such things, I've got you pegged with the "unclubable" Groucho Marx :D Dave :cool: Golden Earring's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=66646 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
ralphpnj wrote: > ... On the other hand, a nice "loan" of a $10,000 MQA enabled DAC might > go a long in helping one to forget that conclusion. Love it man, send that $10K MQA DAC ASAP! I want to run a few impulse responses thru and see if I can verify the 16 MQA filters across the price points... I already have the measurement from the $100 AudioQuest Dragonfly Black, $2000 Mytek Brooklyn, and this $10,000 device will fit in nicely to the study. Any manufacturers out there interested??? :rolleyes: Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective' audiophile blog. Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Archimago wrote: > Will see man. :-) After all these years of soft, touchy-feely subjective > audiophile writers, I suspect objective guys will be a little too hot to > touch for the scam elements of the industry. > > -"Now let me welcome everybody to the wild, wild west > A state that's untouchable like Elliot Ness"- > > -- Tupac Shakur I do so love it when a reviewer in TAS or Stereophile starts the review with a detailed explanation of the technical aspects of the equipment under review and then proceeds to go all voodoo and magic with respect to the sound quality, as if the two were completely unrelated. And of course in the case of MQA the two are completely unrelated since any careful review of the technical aspects of MQA would lead anyone with a firm grasp on the science of digital audio to conclude that MQA does absolutely nothing to enhance the audible sound quality. One the other hand, a nice "loan" of a $10,000 MQA enabled DAC might go a long in helping one to forget that conclusion. Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. & sub Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Energy sub Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0 Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar Garage: SB3-JVC compact system Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso Server: LMS 7.9 on dedicated windows 10 computer w/2 Drobos 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
ralphpnj wrote: > Only problem is you will not be offered the loans to write objectively > about the equipment but rather to write subjectively, as per the > advertisers instructions. Will see man. :-) After all these years of soft, touchy-feely subjective audiophile writers, I suspect objective guys will be a little too hot to touch for the scam elements of the industry. -"Now let me welcome everybody to the wild, wild west A state that's untouchable like Elliot Ness"- -- Tupac Shakur Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective' audiophile blog. Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Archimago wrote: > Hey Ralph! > > I suppose every man has his price but my viewpoints I suspect are rather > difficult for the high end to get behind... Heck, I think the day they > offer hyper-expensive long term loans to me that Id be happy to accept > will be a nice indication that mainstream audiophilia has turned the > corner into a more objective hobby! > > Thats the kind of paradigm shift Im looking for. :cool: Only problem is you will not be offered the loans to write objectively about the equipment but rather to write subjectively, as per the advertisers instructions. Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. & sub Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Energy sub Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0 Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar Garage: SB3-JVC compact system Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso Server: LMS 7.9 on dedicated windows 10 computer w/2 Drobos 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
ralphpnj wrote: > Very nice "musings" post. Haven't read the comments yet but the article > does a nice job of trying to separate science from opinion. > > One question that comes to mind: will your "musings" start to drift now > that you have the audiophile press' attention and, as was the case with > Computer Audiophile site, you are slowly brought into the inner circle > with generous "loans" of hyper-expensive equipment and other nifty > perks? Just sayin' Hey Ralph! I suppose every man has his price but my viewpoints I suspect are rather difficult for the high end to get behind... Heck, I think the day they offer hyper-expensive long term loans to me that Id be happy to accept will be a nice indication that mainstream audiophilia has turned the corner into a more objective hobby! Thats the kind of paradigm shift Im looking for. :cool: Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective' audiophile blog. Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Mnyb wrote: > Wonder if universal is going to embedd thier horrible watermark in a MQA > file to :D I still wonder where they want to go. Recent releases of the big labels don't have high samplerates, are watermarked and are compressed to DR4. The quality has declined clearly. Nobody should buy CDs or downloads anymore. Nobody should have a good sounding master at home. My bet is they want to produce stuff that is listened over streaming 1-3 times and done and if you like it you indirectly pay for every listen for the next 50 years. A CD you can buy and listen 50 years. The pushing of vinyl still goes on also. MQA is the streamed format for the audiophiles of today and the future. Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Wombat wrote: > Hi Dave, > here in germany we have a saying to tease someone who did something > great. Under friends we say as i translate: "Now you can call yourself > Sir" > Cheers! Hi Wombat! I don't mind having my leg pulled. Unfortunately, people invariably choose the same leg, so these days I walk with a pronounced limp, L - I - M - P, limp... Dave :cool: Golden Earring's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=66646 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Hi Dave, here in germany we have a saying to tease someone who did something great. Under friends we say as i translate: "Now you can call yourself Sir" Cheers! Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Mnyb wrote: > The main features are 1. proprietary ( license revenue ) 2. and lossy ( > the record companies does not need to disclose a studio master ). > > Wonder if universal is going to embedd thier horrible watermark in a MQA > file to :D My gran told me , "Tell the truth & shame the Devil!". I'm up for that... Dave :cool: Golden Earring's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=66646 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
The main features are 1. proprietary ( license revenue ) 2. and lossy ( the record companies does not need to disclose a studio master ). Wonder if universal is going to embedd thier horrible watermark in a MQA file to :D Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3 sub. Bedroom/Office: Boom Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4 Misc use: Radio (with battery) iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad (spares Touch, SB3, reciever ,controller ) server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Wombat wrote: > I guess you had everything interpretring my post wrong but it is nice > you still enjoy making long posts... > It simply means that he shouldn't loose grip to reality by all the > praise he receives for the many hours he spends with his blog (and > absolutely deserves!!!) > > Btw. Since so much of these listening reports over the last years seem > to be triggered by 'the fear of ringing' i guess people with the right > psychogram welcome to add the ache of 'phantom blur'. > MQA offers the cure and many will believe in it no matter how shady the > format is as others believe in femto clocks. Hi Wombat! If I've misinterpreted your post, then I apologise: however you must admit that you are cryptic at best! Just for the record I have no interest in MQA - since it is in essence a lossy codec I totally fail to see how it can faithfully reproduce the original recording it is encrypted from, let alone improve it. We have a terse English word for this kind of thing - bollocks! I trust that I have satisfied your preference for brevity this time at least... Dave :cool: Golden Earring's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=66646 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
I guess you had everything interpretring my post wrong but it is nice you still enjoy making long posts... It simply means that he shouldn't loose grip to reality by all the praise he receives for the many hours he spends with his blog (and absolutely deserves!!!) Btw. Since so much of these listening reports over the last years seem to be triggered by 'the fear of ringing' i guess people with the right psychogram welcome to add the ache of 'phantom blur'. MQA tries offers the cure and many will believe in it no matter how shady the format is as others believe in femto clocks. Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Wombat wrote: > This may be the reason that shortly he only responds to PM when "Sir > Archimago" is used... Hi Wombat! I see that you have popped up for air again. I would like to take issue with your cynical viewpoint (albeit disguised as sardonic humour) since Archimago has (so far at least) maintained a dignified silence in response to your goading. So I would like to thank him on behalf of this forum for the considerable amount of time & effort he has expended in trying to demystify the enigma that MQA decoding represents (since its proponents are unwilling to give any clear scientific explanation of its purported benefits that could be tested according to our venerable scientific method with repeatable results) and to put forward the proposition that he has *-not-* in any way sided with the "snake oil" marketing faction of the hi-fi industry. My own sense of the results of his meticulous efforts & survey was exactly the opposite of this, in that MQA decoding does not seem to offer a significant technical advance even though a minority of the participants in his survey claimed to have heard marginal "improvements" on some, but not all of the programme material offered. This could have resulted simply from the mildly euphonic effects of its unusual choice of filters appealing subjectively to certain listeners, just as some people "like" the non-linearity of all-valve amplifiers because the perceived "warmth" to the sound that they tend to produce makes for a more "musical" experience for them. I have used the quotes in the previous sentence quite deliberately because they relate to subjective matters that appeal to some listeners & decidedly not to others. So I think that it is entirely unreasonable to suggest that Archimago is promoting MQA as a technological breakthrough in any sense. It is all to easy to do nothing but offer destructive criticism & snide comments masquerading as humour, so I am delighted to spring to Archimago's defence in this case if, for whatever reason, he is unwilling further to debate the matter himself... Dave :cool: Golden Earring's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=66646 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
ralphpnj wrote: > Very nice "musings" post. Haven't read the comments yet but the article > does a nice job of trying to separate science from opinion. > > One question that comes to mind: will your "musings" start to drift now > that you have the audiophile press' attention and, as was the case with > Computer Audiophile site, you are slowly brought into the inner circle > with generous "loans" of hyper-expensive equipment and other nifty > perks? Just sayin' This may be the reason that shortly he only responds to PM when "Sir Archimago" is used... Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
Very nice "musings" post. Haven't read the comments yet but the article does a nice job of trying to separate science from opinion. One question that comes to mind: will your "musings" start to drift now that you have the audiophile press' attention and, as was the case with Computer Audiophile site, you are slowly brought into the inner circle with generous "loans" of hyper-expensive equipment and other nifty perks? Just sayin' Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. & sub Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Energy sub Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0 Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar Garage: SB3-JVC compact system Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso Server: LMS 7.9 on dedicated windows 10 computer w/2 Drobos 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
