DimitryZ
pfm Member
Another perfect example of nasty and entirely false accusation that the management here happily tolerates.
Shame on you.
MQA
- Thread starter Rosewind
- Start date
- Status
Shame on you.
George J
Herefordshire member
Oh dear, oh dear.
Dear Dimitry,
More misplaced assumptions and by now you will see why that is comical. You keep doing it.
They do say that if you repeat the process the likely result will be similar, but as I said earlier, I admire your tenacity. You really would make the best grave digger I know, and I have known several grave diggers. One sadly died on the job.
I have a beautiful sixty plus year old VHF FM radio which I run most days, varying from half an hour to maybe three hours. It is the best home audio source I ever have had, now two years on from a full restoration to as close to original condition as possible these days.
ALL OTHER music is streamed! Either locally from my hard drive or various internet sources including a lot of YouTube! Naturally the radio does win, as I noted earlier, when commenting that live concert radio has the potential to be the best replay source ... that is provided the performance goes well ...
Please do think about about making assumptions and posting on their basis at least in my case.
I did look up "noodnik" and am touched that you should mention it. An old Polish word as I understand it. I shall be able to impress my Polish friends with an increased Polish vocabulary in future! "I am your English noodnik!" They will have a good laugh at that!
But at least here in the quoted reply you state that the improvement brought by MQA is not consistent, but rather one must take it, now and then. So pot luck would be my natural reaction to that. It suits some recordings better than others. How to know which to go straight to so as to avoid wasting time?
In another post on this page you remarked that people do not read. Another wrong assumption in my case. You make far too many unfounded assumptions ... A question about anything you are not sure about would secure the answer, and lead to genuine discourse. I pointed out earlier that you need to start a friendly debate rather than adopting a passive aggressive approach that has the result of putting peoples' backs up. You don't take heed of good advice, and you surely are in need of it. It is only proffered to be helpful, but I suspect that you are indeed beyond help.
On reading, I read copiously, but I don't believe it all. Of course it depends on the credibility of the author of the words! I am sure that you know that almost every post you make here, because of your abrasive, chip-on-the-shoulder style actually diminishes your credibility one post at a time. And as I stated, you have injured MQA in this thread more than a thousand avowed anti-MQA actors!
Keep it up, Dimitry. It comedic gold. Too good to miss.
As ever, best wishes from George [your favourite noodnik].
Yank
Bulbous Also Tapered
You have dismissed and ridiculed legitimate objections out of hand.
Tony L
Administrator
You offer an entirely subjective preference based on a largely unknown dataset. No one has any issue with that in the slightest. You like it. We get it. Move on. The issue comes with you trying to use that entirely personal subjective impression to back up MQA’s marketing rhetoric and your constant bellowing at those who crave a little real scientific analysis of the actual claims, not your subjective preferences. You constantly blur the two together and end up attacking other posters for applying logical objective scrutiny to this product.
Again no one questions, or maybe even cares about, what you like. Your personal preference is in no way scientific analysis. It is of no more value or relevance than my liking 60 year old valve amps and giant Tannoys. It is certainly not any counter point to those who question the integrity of a deliberately ambiguous locked-in fee-based technology in a market where the original selling points of this lossy technology (“lower bandwidth” etc) are clearly no longer relevant. We can all stream multiple 4k movies, so what is this ‘technology’ for again?
Rosewind
Lost in Translation
As stated by someone above, DimitryZ's posts are damaging MQA more than any well-considered question put forward by anyone in this thread. There is a Russian saying that goes something like this,
Болту́н — нахо́дка для шпио́на.
A chatterbox is regarded highly by spies.
By behaving undisciplined and irascible he has hurt his own tenuous case for MQA.
Болту́н — нахо́дка для шпио́на.
A chatterbox is regarded highly by spies.
By behaving undisciplined and irascible he has hurt his own tenuous case for MQA.
DimitryZ
pfm Member
Here is our problem, George.
You continue to accuse of behavior you yourself engage in, a form of psychological projection, I suppose.
Most of your post is usually VERY long winded snarking, mixed with increasing use of insults, unsolicited behavioral advice and are, frankly, very boring. My unsolicited advice to you is to try brevity.
Out of your very long post, the only and very small relevant nugget of information with respect to this discussion, is the question if one can know which recordings will benefit from MQA. But this is an actual good question hidden between numerous snarks.
In my experience, MQA has the best performance with smaller groups in acoustic or acoustic-like settings or recording setups. A jazz trio, a vocalist with piano, a baroque group - this is the styles where MQA can add what I can only describe as "performance specificity." It's not that it clearly enhances venue acoustics, an effect that we, as audiophiles are familiar with - there is plenty of recording acoustic evident in the LPCM version. Rather, I described it in 595 as "it is this" performance.
Sometimes we get this effect in LP playback with a great table and a great cartridge, like Transfiguration Phoenix. In my very long audiophile life, it is a rare effect. I will take it anytime I can.
And I have to apologize as I must have confused you with numerous others here who don't stream.
Timcat
pfm Member
The point isn't whether he likes it or not, the point is that he confirms that MQA does not sound like his original recording.
George J
Herefordshire member
Rob998
Scimmia Nordoccidentale
Well, if George ever gets to listen to a full fat MQA recording of that, through equipment that you deem acceptably high resolution, I for one would be incredibly interested in his professional opinion of how good it is at presenting an actual performance.
I would bet a mortgage payment that R3 through his Leak and Quad pisses all over MQA.
George, of course, would be less coarse in his discourse.
DimitryZ
pfm Member
And JC says that it does.
DimitryZ
pfm Member
We do not have BBC radio broadcasts, so you well maybe right.
DimitryZ
pfm Member
Did he lose rights to his music? How is it being released without his agreement?
Or does the recording company owns his catalogue?
There is apparently a backstory here. Mr. Young apparently had an early partnership with Bob Stuart in developing his Pono player. It was going to have a special light and everything. They apparently parted ways, Neil went to develop his Pono player with Ayer and Bob went to develop the evil MQA.
George J
Herefordshire member
Dear Dimitry,
It would be fair to say that BBC Radio Three often manages a quality and sense of occasion that no recording, however reproduced and on whatever medium, comes close to. It is strange, like a direct connection to the performers. I have a very high bar to raise with recording replay with my radio set-up. it is also true that the daily lunchtime chamber concerts on R3 are actually the best of the best and my vintage radio of Leak and Quad does this sort of programme better than anything. I don't really think I need to worry much about recordings with the riches that R3 brings!
Sorry to have taken somewhat of an issue, but I am not convinced that replay of any sort is all that good except radio, which can be so absorbing that I can forget that I is not in the hall, rather than my own little flat!
Best wishes from George
It would be fair to say that BBC Radio Three often manages a quality and sense of occasion that no recording, however reproduced and on whatever medium, comes close to. It is strange, like a direct connection to the performers. I have a very high bar to raise with recording replay with my radio set-up. it is also true that the daily lunchtime chamber concerts on R3 are actually the best of the best and my vintage radio of Leak and Quad does this sort of programme better than anything. I don't really think I need to worry much about recordings with the riches that R3 brings!
Sorry to have taken somewhat of an issue, but I am not convinced that replay of any sort is all that good except radio, which can be so absorbing that I can forget that I is not in the hall, rather than my own little flat!
Best wishes from George
Rob998
Scimmia Nordoccidentale
Boston, of all places in the US apart from NY & LA, must have a good quality classical/jazz FM station? I’m sure you could get an idea through your High Resolution system?
miktec
retired
Neil Young has his own horse in this race
You might want to read this RS article:
https://www.rollingstone.com/pro/news/neil-young-archives-streaming-hd-music-946192/
"It’s through this lens that I’d now like you to consider Young’s own online subscription service — the Neil Young Archives. This portal not only allows his own super-fans access to his complete catalog of music (in a hi-res format, naturally), but also to view digitized relics from his career, including exclusive videos, photos— and even live streams of his modern tours."
Craig B
Re:trophile
Many of the NPR stations have superb sound quality. WDET-FM 101.9 Detroit, for example, used to boast that they used no compression in any of their broadcasts. I used to drive down that way for work quite often, and the sound would steadily become more lifelike as the signal level increased along the way. One could clearly hear the difference, even on a hotel clock radio.
DimitryZ
pfm Member
Excellent description. It sounds like a fabulous listening. I loved my 57 and 988 quads when I owned them.
Consider that MQA attempts to achieve something similar with some recordings. They don't succeed consistently. But to do this even sometimes is so rare, that I would take a system that can do this even a third of the time any day of the year. A successful MQA release holds your FULL attention. I am pretty sure that on a good MQA release in the musical genre you respond to, listening to my system, you would be riveted.
Last edited:
DimitryZ
pfm Member
We do, WGBH, which has Fri-Sun jazz show - the famous "Eric in the Evening." Eric Jackson is a famous jazz personality in Boston.. His super deep baritone was/is perfect for setting crossovers and sub levels. He is a walking jazz encyclopedia.
They used to do live club broadcasts before Covid and hopefully will restart again soon.
The sound was indeed excellent. I once had to call in the venue to tell the sound engineer his balance knob was too much to the right.
John_73
pfm Member
No.
The problem here very much *is* you.
I suggest you take a step away from this thread for a few days. Then go back and read your contributions anew, try and step outside of yourself and see how others might have viewed what you’ve written.
Rob998
Scimmia Nordoccidentale
I hope he was appreciative of the advice.
I’m not being facetious for once, one of my bugbears is poorly implemented sound at live venues, especially when you absolutely know it’s nothing to do with the venues acoustics.
The last reasonably sized gig I went to before the pandemic hit was to see one of my favourite songsmiths, Michael Head (He’s had various bands, The Pale Fountains, Shack, The Strands). He doesn’t tour very often, so it was a rare treat to be able to see him live. Especially as he’s a Liverpudlian, and the gig was in Liverpool.
The sound system was fine, because the support act sounded good, but when Mike came on he was utterly lost in the mix, drowned out by the lead guitar and drums which were way too far forward in the mix.
Unforgivable given that his music is driven by the lyrics and his gentle vocal performance (usually, he’s more than capable of belting it out if he wants to). Unfortunately I couldn’t get to the sound desk or I would have done the same as you.
Last edited:
- Status