Further thoughts on MQA....is it all it seems???

[Eichenbaum]

So, what is the goal of the speaker???

Speaker is a transducer. It converts electrical energy into mechanical energy. My point is: we can not say that electrical energy is the same as mechanical energy or that there is only one way to convert one into another. That's why sinergy is so important in a system.

Anyways the main point is that anyone can listen to recorded music as a hobby, it's a subjective hobby, but if one prefers technology as a hobby, or both, he needs specific knowledge in some areas, it's an objective hobby.

 

[Bobvin]

I have no dog in this hunt, and can't say I've heard MQA yet. But what I have read keeps me on the skeptical side of the equation. At this point I will make no purchases based on this new format.

I see things thus: our world is in rapid change. Companies are scrambling to adapt and predict. Nordstrom is embarking /gambling/risking on a new model because they know department stores, as we know them, will be a thing of the past. Same for most of what we are familiar with.

Streaming music might be what comes next, or could just be transitional to what comes quickly after. MQA appears to be a first shot across the bow to deal with streaming high bandwitdh data streams, but I am confident it is only the first of many attempts to tackle these issues. I expect some of the proprietary issues and encoding/decoding requirements will keep it from becoming ubiquitous.

Will MQA be around in ten years, somehow I think not. I tend to believe, particularly for generations younger than myself (and most 'audiophiles' in general) only more open-source solutions will be accepted. My opinions.

 

[awsmone]

Awsmone, it wasn't just myself who heard the fact that the MQA files sounded better, it was the whole group....no exceptions. I have NEVER stated that my opinion of the difference in SQ has changed, because it has not. What concerns me now, which is something that perhaps you are not comprehending, is the fact that the whole group believed that the difference was solely due to the MQA process, where in fact this might not have been the case ( or that the MQA process is nothing more than a simple upsample....commonly available to all at no additional charge ). Since you have not heard MQA and the demos been given, your skepticism struck me as very odd, based solely on what---what you had read somewhere or some other aspect...please do elaborate. (Particularly, as you now seem to want to defend the technology and the company behind it?? ) So what were your negative posts based on before, being a naysayer just because you could?? Please advice.

No..I am not defending the company

I am just amazed that you have gone from one level of hyperbole to the other extreme...that it's now a scam

Meridian is a " real" company, that make real products...no scam there

Yes I question the need for MQA itself, and started a thread to say maybe we already have the technology and don't need this

But

You rejected that line of enquiry.......

So now where do you sit?

Are you contending you were duped in the Demo by Peter?

 

[Ken Newton]

Yes I question the need for MQA itself, and started a thread to say maybe we already have the technology and don't need this...

The commercial technology has long existed for optimizing the time-domain. What was absent before MQA was an commercial format/standard that optimized or prioritized the time-domain.

 

[awsmone]

The performance technology already existed. What was absent was an commercial digital standard that optimized for the time-domain, which MQA does.

+1

Their patent makes the concept of a commercial standard with multiple end user outcomes their main driver
The SQ improvement is secondary based on their desire to make a compression standard that still sounds good