advertisement


MDAC First Listen (part 00110110)

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

ChrisPa

pfm Member
mattgbell said:
I'd be very surprised if the stuff about hearing is MQA's IP. if it has any scientific merit at all, it'll almost certainly be in the public domain. So this isn't about IP.
Click to expand...

If it hasn't been done before - if someone else hasn't already worked out the links to the new concept or embodiment, and/or applied it commercially - then it's IP

Although, discussions about what is it isn't IP are simply a distraction from the design activities, which is where I'd like to see time continue to be spent :)

Which applies to all of these discussions here about MQA.
 
Can we take MQA discussions somewhere else?

History:

Yes, John was anti MQA

..but received a lot of noise from some of those who (wish to) remain part of the development, that - here, now, with the audio-related announcements at the beginning of 2017 - MQA was one of those things that many now perceived to be an essential item on the tick list of DAC specs: their interest in the MDAC/FDAC would disappear if the MQA box remained unticked

So the processing power was added to provide capacity for MQA.
- If I remember correctly there already was processing power within the design, but it's capacity/capability was increased; so not really a change in direction, rather a tweak to the design at that time.

It may have been scope creep, but it's now crept and it's not going to creep away again

So I for one don't care in the slightest whether John was against and is now for MQA, the bomb, knee-length boots...
It's no longer of any relevance to the task of getting the design finished and out

Can we just leave him to get on with that?
 
ChrisPa said:
Can we take MQA discussions somewhere else?

History:

Yes, John was anti MQA

..but received a lot of noise from some of those who (wish to) remain part of the development, that - here, now, with the audio-related announcements at the beginning of 2017 - MQA was one of those things that many now perceived to be an essential item on the tick list of DAC specs: their interest in the MDAC/FDAC would disappear if the MQA box remained unticked

So the processing power was added to provide capacity for MQA.
- If I remember correctly there already was processing power within the design, but it's capacity/capability was increased; so not really a change in direction, rather a tweak to the design at that time.

It may have been scope creep, but it's now crept and it's not going to creep away again

So I for one don't care in the slightest whether John was against and is now for MQA, the bomb, knee-length boots...
It's no longer of any relevance to the task of getting the design finished and out

Can we just leave him to get on with that?
Click to expand...
A fair and reasonable summary.
 
Julf said:
That is a somewhat curious statement considering how you started out rather hostile towards MQA until you got converted through some secret initiation.
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly John was not happy with the perceived DRM aspects of MQA not the underlying principles of how it worked outside of those concerns.
 
ChrisPa said:
Can we take MQA discussions somewhere else?

History:

Yes, John was anti MQA

..but received a lot of noise from some of those who (wish to) remain part of the development, that - here, now, with the audio-related announcements at the beginning of 2017 - MQA was one of those things that many now perceived to be an essential item on the tick list of DAC specs: their interest in the MDAC/FDAC would disappear if the MQA box remained unticked

So the processing power was added to provide capacity for MQA.
- If I remember correctly there already was processing power within the design, but it's capacity/capability was increased; so not really a change in direction, rather a tweak to the design at that time.

It may have been scope creep, but it's now crept and it's not going to creep away again

So I for one don't care in the slightest whether John was against and is now for MQA, the bomb, knee-length boots...
It's no longer of any relevance to the task of getting the design finished and out

Can we just leave him to get on with that?
Click to expand...
Well at obviously all that really matters is getting some product actually made Chris. But do you actually think that what is holding that up is too much MQA chat?
Perhaps we could restrict all posts to " when exactly is the detox going to be delivered?" and "is the Mdac2 really going to be ready by Munich?"
 
adamdea said:
Well at obviously all that really matters is getting some product actually made Chris. But do you actually think that what is holding that up is too much MQA chat?
Click to expand...

If you (or others) are asking for a reply from John or otherwise questioning his decision making process on MQA, then plainly, blatently, obviously - Yes

adamdea said:
Perhaps we could restrict all posts to " when exactly is the detox going to be delivered?" and "is the Mdac2 really going to be ready by Munich?"
Click to expand...

Actually those are the only questions that really are relevant to the development at this stage.
However, how would John answering those questions (yet again) spend his time fruitfully? You have his latest predictions - the rest is up to John.

Put simply: where do you want his time spent? answering questions? or designing and progressing production?
 
django said:
Come on John, you know perfectly well that you have made promises during last two years and then I got tired of waiting mdac 2/fdac/whatever dac which content changes every week. I really dont want to be rude and I totally understand prorities but four years of waiting is too much for me personally. So please update my mdac board as agreed.
Click to expand...

django,

I'm sorry I have so many customer units come thought my hands and working on many projects so sadly I cannot be expected to recall every unit. Please clearly explain, is your MDAC here for repair (Recap or clock problem) or was it sent over while Superior PCB was on the cards?

FIRST MDAC2 pcb's will not be ready until around Mid May - full production version within a 1 - 2 months.

What does "So please update my mdac board as agreed" I'm simply ask what did I agree? - obviously I cannot give you MDAC2 PCB's until they are available.
 
mattgbell said:
One of the reasons I struggle with this is that only a few weeks ago you were quite hostile towards MQA yourself.
Click to expand...

I'm naturally "hostile" to any closed system - especially when there's a sniff of DRM, but I've always said I'm prepared to give MQA a chance.

For many years now I've been saying that as I've grown older and more experienced in my field I've come to the realisation that the Time Domain is FAR FAR more important then the frequency domain and that despite our limited frequency range we seem to be acutely sensitive to the time domain - more so then simply our hearings natural frequency range would imply.

The MDAC's Optimal transient filter which is the only filter I can listen too on the MDAC and is the embodiment of the belief in time domain over frequency domain.

Whats interesting is that even as I grow older and my frequency range reduces with age - I'm still acutely sensitive to the time domain.. maybe even more so as I become more focused on its importances to audio reproduction.

So when MQA also started to make noise about the importance of the time domain over frequency domain then this NATURALLY perked my interested even though its packaged with what I'd call DRM...

You can spend you whole life fighting the establishment or you can say sometimes there's a lessor evil - we live with DRM but on the promise that "HOPEFULLY" we will have access to higher quality audio....

So over the past month I've dedicated time and resources into meeting with Bob and the guys at MQA and to insure that we can support MQA on the MDAC2 / FDAC.

I very much wish MQA the very best because as a "brother in arms" - I'm a firm believer in the time domains importance for audio reproduction and IMO its one of the important "missing link's" in digital audio we have been chasing all these years (and for me, its why NATIVE DSD wins over PCM digital).
 
sq225917 said:
He's seen the light. Simple really. Personally I can't see how it can sound any better than a decent hires master, but I'm prepared to be proven wrong in blind tests.
Click to expand...

Agree, I can't see it either but that is not so important.

What I find important and sufficient is:
  1. Best available Studion Master
  2. Sounds better than red book cd quality
  3. Is available from streaming services like Tidal
And I think that those that are against MQA should take their grudge to a MQA thread instead because it does not matter now that John have added MQA to the MDAC2 design.

Personally I am curious about MQA and are glad that John have added MQA to the MDAC2/FDAC so we can all get a chance to make our own judgement.
 
sq225917 said:
He's seen the light. Simple really. Personally I can't see how it can sound any better than a decent hires master, but I'm prepared to be proven wrong in blind tests.
Click to expand...

Simon,

When we next meet I'll be happy to explain why :)
 
Lets hope that MQA will not restrict access to that Best Studio Master to other interested parties after they will get hands on it and apply their encoding. I can understand that new encoding methods can require new hardware as well, but still not sure if MQA file is complety transparent to non MQA hardware.
 
It seems to me that those people who are objecting to John ensuring that the MDAC2 is MQA enabled are missing something. There is clearly a possibility of MQA gaining traction and becoming a standard feature (at least for a period of a few years) of well regarded DACs. The MQA capabilty is therefore a form of insurance that your MDAC2 is not going to become unsaleable because it can't play MQA files. It helps to protect your investment should you ever decide to sell your MDAC2.
 
That is true, extra features always are helpful. I myself recently got a bug and bought older dvd universal player which can play sacd and hdcd discs even if I do not have any hdcd encoded disc.
 
mattgbell said:
One of the reasons I struggle with this is that only a few weeks ago you were quite hostile towards MQA yourself.
Click to expand...

That is absolutely true. Incredibly dismissive and cynical I'd say.

But let's not take anything away from this thread. I have no investment emotionally or financially in thus thread but it really is the thread that just keeps on giving. TBH I find it so entertaining that I feel it should be pay per view.

Every time I read through a couple of pages I feel like I'm transported to a parallel universe and it matters not a jot that I don't even know what the Detox is or what it does. In fact I'm not entirely sure what all the other promised products are. But never mind, credit to all who contribute to this thread, you're making an old man very happy :)
 
Seriously Chris, my life has been significantly enhanced since I discovered this thread.

At least 90% of it is technically well beyond me, I don't know what the hell a Detox is but it's a joy to read.

The optimism of the folk involved inspires me. If I'm right people have been waiting four years for some vapourware to turn into a piece of kit. They've paid money up front and aside from a few impatient buggers they're all still forming an orderly queue. Quite remarkable.
 
Well HarryB, it's the absolute essence of hi-fi alchemy. It takes an ordinary music signal in on one side and scrubs all the unwanted electronic blemishes and artefacts from it, pushing out a cleaner, brighter, purer signal on the other side.

It will have a limited one-off production run (around 100 are expected to be produced) and, of course, only the lucky recipients will ever experience the expected improvement in sound quality. Those who have listened to the prototypes already attest to the performance so the only unknown is the impending delivery date.

I'm assuming you're here because you, too, like your music systems - of course you do! So how's it going to feel when you read on this most-active-of-threads that the owners are so happy with their products, knowing that you were around when you had the opportunity to get one yourself? Only you can answer that question.

All the best...
 
At it's best this thread is a torch for how things could be in audio, self-funding, cooperation, willingness to wait, optimism, selflessness, you'll find it all here.

Of course, occasionally you get a few ego's crashing the party telling us how much better it would be if we followed them, but they're wrong. We know the true way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top