MDAC First Listen (part 00110101)

[iansr]

If an album has been remastered will MQA regard that as the best master? There's obviously a subjective judgement involved in such things. I listened to Every Picture Tells a Story the other day on Tidal and at first I thought there was something wrong with my system because the mix was so buggered up.

 

[mattgbell]

Matt,

Its taken to mean the highest quality "Master" the studio owns - for a company like Time Warner they have a very good index system - the bigger problem is with smaller labels who have no index system - and might just present a CDR as the highest quality "Master". During the meeting I was going to joke MiniDisk but could not at the time recall the name of the format

MQA "Scan" each track to weed out any "errors" such as MP3 / Watermarked files etc... then combined with the studio records certify as the "highest" quality Master - atleast "Known".

The MDAC2 will be able to indicate the Master's original Data rate... eg. 96KHz or 192Khz etc... or even 48KHz (such as older DAT recordings)

Thanks, John. I agree that the weeding out of egregious faults, such as audible watermarking, is a good thing. (We know that UMG use audible watermarking widely, and since UMG music is about 25% of all the music streamed, getting rid of the watermarking will be a big step forward.)

But it still doesn't address the 'subjective' question; given two different masters at an acceptable bitrate and without egregious faults, which master gets the MQA seal of approval? Which is Ian's point below ...

If an album has been remastered will MQA regard that as the best master? There's obviously a subjective judgement involved in such things. I listened to Every Picture Tells a Story the other day on Tidal and at first I thought there was something wrong with my system because the mix was so buggered up.

 

[JohnW]

If an album has been remastered will MQA regard that as the best master? There's obviously a subjective judgement involved in such things. I listened to Every Picture Tells a Story the other day on Tidal and at first I thought there was something wrong with my system because the mix was so buggered up.

Yes, hard to say - hopefully it will be indicated as "remastered"... I prefer older recordings complete with warts..

Metadata can also be embedded within the files so maybe a fuller description can be included.

 

[JohnW]

As time progresses more recordings "Mastered in MQA Studio" will be released - this will included the full optimised signal chain - So MQA is just a stepping stone for a better future (one hopes)

 

[mattgbell]

John,
one last question before I stop bothering you about your discussions with the MQA folk. Did they shed any light on the claims about temporal "deblurring"?

 

[00fiete]

here are some news about MQA:

https://sempre-audio.at/Bilder/HIGHRESAUDIO/MQA-Technical-Analysis-Hypotheses-Paper.pdf

 

[django]

Hi John,

You have had my M-DAC almost fours months now. Could you provide timeline when it is possible to get it back?

 

[JohnW]

Hi John,

You have had my M-DAC almost fours months now. Could you provide timeline when it is possible to get it back?

Django,

Please remand me what is the story with your unit its history and fault?

Ser # will be good - I have about 5 MDAC's waiting for my attention.

 

[JohnW]

here are some news about MQA:

https://sempre-audio.at/Bilder/HIGHRESAUDIO/MQA-Technical-Analysis-Hypotheses-Paper.pdf

Just an awful paper - if I where Bob I'd be rather upset.

So typically Germany - just full of "technical" Analysis, but NO attempt to listen or try and understand whats wrong with PCM digital - he REALLY misunderstands the engineering behind MQA.

I believe Bob and I are thinking / working on very much the same lines when it comes to Time domain and what MQA refer too as time domain "blurring" - I can see that Stephan Hotto has completely misunderstood what "We" believe is important.

I had hope I could sit down with Bob and just have an open discussion out "our" working experiences and current understanding - but regrettably time did not allow, I have a feeling that Bob might have like to hear an "independent" designers experiences work that follow what he believes... sitting down we could have combined our work an affirmed / opened up our perspectives.

I believe Bob work follows some of my own "beliefs" based upon a few choice words in his papers that have a deeper meaning to someone who works along the same lines and can smile thinking to themselves "Yes - I'm with you on this one" and understand your deeper underlying statement...

Mind you, I could also be reading my own beliefs into a few choice words like a fanatical lunatic reading the Bible and seizing a few pertinent words to reaffirm there own beliefs that everyone else are infidels THE unfaithful and must die...! Ouch

 

[mattgbell]

Just an awful paper - if I where Bob I'd be rather upset.

So typically Germany - just full of "technical" Analysis, but NO attempt to listen or try and understand whats wrong with PCM digital - he REALLY misunderstands the engineering behind MQA.

I believe Bob and I are thinking / working on very much the same lines when it comes to Time domain and what MQA refer too as time domain "blurring" - I can see that Stephan Hotto has completely misunderstood what "We" believe is important.

I had hope I could sit down with Bob and just have an open discussion out "our" working experiences and current understanding - but regrettably time did not allow, I have a feeling that Bob might have like to hear an "independent" designers experiences work that follow what he believes... sitting down we could have combined our work an affirmed / opened up our perspectives.

I believe Bob work follows some of my own "beliefs" based upon a few choice words in his papers that have a deeper meaning to someone who works along the same lines and can smile thinking to themselves "Yes - I'm with you on this one" and understand your deeper underlying statement...

Mind you, I could also be reading my own beliefs into a few choice words like a fanatical lunatic reading the Bible and seizing a few pertinent words to reaffirm there own beliefs that everyone else are infidels THE unfaithful and must die...! Ouch

It sounds like you don't know what the 'temporal deblurring' does then. Would that be correct?

 

[AndyU]

What does "temporal deblurring" mean? Can someone give me two files, one before "temporal deblurring" and one after, so I can make up my own mind?

 

[JohnW]

No,

I believe I understand MQA's take on 'temporal blurring' but that Stephan Hotto does not understand the direction MQA has chosen - and more importantly for which reasons.

 

[JohnW]

What does "temporal deblurring" mean? Can someone give me two files, one before "temporal deblurring" and one after, so I can make up my own mind?

Its not down to files, you need to have the full MQA chain WITH MQA hardware render - Not just the Tidal decoded data.

I did say that MQA works on many levels and this is part of the "confusion" behind MQA - MQA have not clearly explained to the public the various "levels" and techniques involved / available with MQA - MQA is a multifaceted end to end replay "system" encompassing many ideas and techniques...

 

[mattgbell]

No,

I believe I understand MQA's take on 'temporal blurring' but that Stephan Hotto does not understand the direction MQA has chosen - and more importantly for which reasons.

If you understand it, can you tell us, in broad terms, what it is?

 

[AndyU]

Its not down to files, you need to have the full MQA chain WITH MQA hardware render - Not just the Tidal decoded data.

I did say that MQA works on many levels and this is part of the "confusion" behind MQA - MQA have not clearly explained to the public the various "levels" and techniques involved / available with MQA - MQA is a multifaceted end to end replay "system" encompassing many ideas and techniques...

So I repeat my question. What is "temporal deblurring"? I agree that MQA have not explained the various levels and techniques involved. Can you?

 

[Hawtin]

No,

I believe I understand MQA's take on 'temporal blurring' but that Stephan Hotto does not understand the direction MQA has chosen - and more importantly for which reasons.

If it is so, then you can at least in broad terms explain what is going on. That would be quite simple, no?

 

[Stunsworth]

I did say that MQA works on many levels and this is part of the "confusion" behind MQA - MQA have not clearly explained to the public the various "levels" and techniques involved / available with MQA - MQA is a multifaceted end to end replay "system" encompassing many ideas and techniques...

Well it's true that most posts about MQA have concentrated on its ability to fit 24/96-192 into a smaller container.

The thing that's struck me listening to MQA streams from Tidal is the improvement in sound staging, solid with instruments and vocals firmly located.

 

[JohnW]

If you understand it, can you tell us, in broad terms, what it is?

IF and IF I'm correct that MQA independently encompasses some of my own ideas and developments WRT time domain , then no way I am going to lead the horse on this one as its too controversial (sorry) - you will have technophiles getting all worked up and it will rapidly turn into a childish back and forth never ending loop - so NO WAY.

I've worked long enough in this industry to understand why MQA might have chosen not to talk about some of the more fundamental aspects behind MQA.

Sorry, but just look at the way AndyU (no disrespect to Andy) has already jumped in - and this is WHY I have chosen keep certain principles only spoken about in private communications to a trusted few...

For the few that have visited me, I have opened up the principles behind Detox etc.

I dont feel its my job to "convince" non believers - for one thing I know for sure is that most people are not receptive to ideas different to there own fundamental beliefs - so I don't try to push my own

 

[AndyU]

IF and IF I'm correct that MQA independently encompasses some of my own ideas and developments WRT time domain , then no way I am going to lead the horse on this one as its too controversial (sorry) - you will have technophiles getting all worked up and it will rapidly turn into a childish back and forth never ending loop - so NO WAY.

I've worked long enough in this industry to understand why MQA might have chosen not to talk about some of the more fundamental aspects behind MQA.

Sorry, but just look at the way AndyU (no disrespect to Andy) has already jumped in - and this is WHY I have chosen keep certain principles only spoken about in private communications to a trusted few...

For the few that have visited me, I have opened up the principles behind Detox etc.

I dont feel its my job to "convince" non believers - for one thing I know for sure is that most people are not respective to ideas different to there own

So it's a big secret that only insiders like you are privileged to understand and the only choice us poor punters have is to be "believers" because if we don't "believe" you (without any evidence, argument, explanation or demonstration) then that "proves" we are not worthy and not trusted and can't be allowed into the special inner circle of "believers" that make personal visits and are entrusted with the principles that are only to be spoken "in private communications to a trusted few".

I think not.

 

[JohnW]

Well it's true that most posts about MQA have concentrated on its ability to fit 24/96-192 into a smaller container.

The thing that's struck me listening to MQA streams from Tidal is the improvement in sound staging, solid with instruments and vocals firmly located.

Thats the point, the and my strong "objection" to Stephan Hotto "paper" there is no attempt to listen to the results of MQA - just 40 odd pages of trying to discredit MQA.. you have to ask why?