Speculation is one thing, skepticism arguably a prudent approach, but to wildly de cry something as snake oil or plainly invalid should be corroborated or one should leave well enough alone as it demonstrates unmistakably overt bias.
Hans bakhausen on meridian MQA codec
(sorry, I may have murdered his last name with a misspell)
In these two youtube links Hans educates on fundamental words and sampling rates, and then all about MQA as well as his own comparative audtitions listening to MQA files..
First…. ADC basics:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_wxRGiBoJg
secondly MQA background & tech:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5o6XHVK2HA
Hans B. explains the ‘lossy’ encoding function, which as I understood it does not compress audio in the ‘folding’ or ‘’unfolding’ process of the MQA technique.
A previously posted link I added above, is to a Digital Rreview account on how MQA was developed, by whom, and how it is to be technically implemented.
In that article and the subsequent public commentary much is illuminated.
I chose not to input more links here. There are numerous other articles from across the globe, but the chances of anyone reading them all is slim and all can be had via a Google search if MQA and, or , meridian is added into the search text.
MQA was announced around 2015 or so as a ‘new’ Meridian enterprise. It still is a Meridian concern.
The tech behind it seems valid enough, and as I described previously in this thread, its obstacles are not unlike any new format, although it’s promises are strong.
Its main promise is one need not rush out and buy MQA DACs to realize some portion of MQA proposed gains for orig contant, as there are two additional levels of HD to be realized IF the proprietary MQA consequent hardware is deployed in a home audio system. At that point one could, if the info was presented, obtain the full 192KHz .bandwidth.
When our Fedearl Govt. agency the FCC took on Dolby as the audio broadcasting standard it took a long time for us to await Dolby content as the basic default zenith among others were in the mix with their own idieas as to how to improve OTA audio transmissions and reception. Dolby was chosen.
. Still more time to bring it to media, and then still more time to have the tech side of home audio hardware fully appreciate and optimize it.
Dolby too has seen its own series of alterations and developments. It wasn’t always 5.1 multi ch audio. Nor was it Dolby Master Audio intill just a few years ago. DMA is still an option, not a default, it requires specific hardware to allow us to enjoy it.
Now Dolby Video approaches.
The same argument for DTS master Audio persists. If ya got the hardware, super. If not? Too bad.
MQA however says, either way, there will be a sincere improvement in audio quality. Approved gear or not.
No other format goes that far out on the limb, nor could they.
A single caveat remains even with MQA… ‘crap in and crap out. If the orig recording sucks. MQA ain’t fixing it. If it did not begin as a 192KHz source file, it ain’t gonna be one later. It will reamin, at 96KHZ or 48KHz, or possibly too, at 44.1KHz. it all depends. The ‘fingerprinting’.or security watermark however will tell us immediately if the orig file was re-arranged’ or intentionally upsampled to emulate High res files artificially.
Dolby Audio’s inception to maturation segment took what, thirty years or more to arrive? And it continues to morph.
How many iterations has HDMI undergone? How long did it take for that tech to get understood and accepted, by the public and then by audio nuts?
One cable? Impossible!
What will we do with all the money we’re saving using one single $10 wire?
As with any and all new formats the single largest element to overcome is time.
Two years on is not a whole lot of time for any format to acquire wide spread acceptance or possibly even far reaching public acknowledgement the thing exists.
It took Phillips and Sony CD format how long before they began to sound decent?
TIDAL’s issues with MQA hinge on the same issue it has previously…. Its catalog is not the best reflection of popular music or so many have mentioned this to me. meaning across past decades and thru the litany of genres music gets sliced up and into, it is not a deep or incisive representative go to catalog.
The jury will be out on this one for a good long while.
In the interim, leaning hard onto DA conversion of 16/44.1KHz seems the real ticket.
And as to revisit the topic herein, it’s the sampling rate that is more important. Not the ‘word length’ thereof.
So folks… to coin a phrase, ‘rip ‘em if ya got ‘em! …and at whatever native sampling rates they are. Then find a DAC which does an earnest, sincere exemplary job getting those bits into the analog section of your audio rig without the use of smoke and mirrors, and presents them in the flavor you prefer.
But then that’s just my humble opinion.
Hans bakhausen on meridian MQA codec
(sorry, I may have murdered his last name with a misspell)
In these two youtube links Hans educates on fundamental words and sampling rates, and then all about MQA as well as his own comparative audtitions listening to MQA files..
First…. ADC basics:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_wxRGiBoJg
secondly MQA background & tech:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5o6XHVK2HA
Hans B. explains the ‘lossy’ encoding function, which as I understood it does not compress audio in the ‘folding’ or ‘’unfolding’ process of the MQA technique.
A previously posted link I added above, is to a Digital Rreview account on how MQA was developed, by whom, and how it is to be technically implemented.
In that article and the subsequent public commentary much is illuminated.
I chose not to input more links here. There are numerous other articles from across the globe, but the chances of anyone reading them all is slim and all can be had via a Google search if MQA and, or , meridian is added into the search text.
MQA was announced around 2015 or so as a ‘new’ Meridian enterprise. It still is a Meridian concern.
The tech behind it seems valid enough, and as I described previously in this thread, its obstacles are not unlike any new format, although it’s promises are strong.
Its main promise is one need not rush out and buy MQA DACs to realize some portion of MQA proposed gains for orig contant, as there are two additional levels of HD to be realized IF the proprietary MQA consequent hardware is deployed in a home audio system. At that point one could, if the info was presented, obtain the full 192KHz .bandwidth.
When our Fedearl Govt. agency the FCC took on Dolby as the audio broadcasting standard it took a long time for us to await Dolby content as the basic default zenith among others were in the mix with their own idieas as to how to improve OTA audio transmissions and reception. Dolby was chosen.
. Still more time to bring it to media, and then still more time to have the tech side of home audio hardware fully appreciate and optimize it.
Dolby too has seen its own series of alterations and developments. It wasn’t always 5.1 multi ch audio. Nor was it Dolby Master Audio intill just a few years ago. DMA is still an option, not a default, it requires specific hardware to allow us to enjoy it.
Now Dolby Video approaches.
The same argument for DTS master Audio persists. If ya got the hardware, super. If not? Too bad.
MQA however says, either way, there will be a sincere improvement in audio quality. Approved gear or not.
No other format goes that far out on the limb, nor could they.
A single caveat remains even with MQA… ‘crap in and crap out. If the orig recording sucks. MQA ain’t fixing it. If it did not begin as a 192KHz source file, it ain’t gonna be one later. It will reamin, at 96KHZ or 48KHz, or possibly too, at 44.1KHz. it all depends. The ‘fingerprinting’.or security watermark however will tell us immediately if the orig file was re-arranged’ or intentionally upsampled to emulate High res files artificially.
Dolby Audio’s inception to maturation segment took what, thirty years or more to arrive? And it continues to morph.
How many iterations has HDMI undergone? How long did it take for that tech to get understood and accepted, by the public and then by audio nuts?
One cable? Impossible!
What will we do with all the money we’re saving using one single $10 wire?
As with any and all new formats the single largest element to overcome is time.
Two years on is not a whole lot of time for any format to acquire wide spread acceptance or possibly even far reaching public acknowledgement the thing exists.
It took Phillips and Sony CD format how long before they began to sound decent?
TIDAL’s issues with MQA hinge on the same issue it has previously…. Its catalog is not the best reflection of popular music or so many have mentioned this to me. meaning across past decades and thru the litany of genres music gets sliced up and into, it is not a deep or incisive representative go to catalog.
The jury will be out on this one for a good long while.
In the interim, leaning hard onto DA conversion of 16/44.1KHz seems the real ticket.
And as to revisit the topic herein, it’s the sampling rate that is more important. Not the ‘word length’ thereof.
So folks… to coin a phrase, ‘rip ‘em if ya got ‘em! …and at whatever native sampling rates they are. Then find a DAC which does an earnest, sincere exemplary job getting those bits into the analog section of your audio rig without the use of smoke and mirrors, and presents them in the flavor you prefer.
But then that’s just my humble opinion.
