You will notice that I have consistently and very carefully said 'perception' and not 'hearing' - post after post - when referring to ultra-sonic frequencies, and so we should all
MQA discussion
- Thread starter asiufy
- Start date
You will notice that I have consistently and very carefully said 'perception' and not 'hearing' - post after post - when referring to ultra-sonic frequencies, and so we should all
I appreciate the distinction, but in the end, does it really make a difference if indeed these ultra-sonic frequencies are captured by the media and reproduced by some formats and our ability to experience their presence gives us the impression that the reproduced music sounds more real to us, that is, it reminds us more of our memory of the real thing?
Unfortunately, given the lack of actual information available about MQA, there soon becomes little more to discuss
Yes good point
Back to MQA
Here is the link to 2l file comparison which includes rbcd versus MQA http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html?
You have to be impressed as JA was by the compression ratios
Since some high res files are half a gigabyte, the MQA masters are quite small!
Maybe a major benefit for us with bulging server HD...
Since some high res files are half a gigabyte, the MQA masters are quite small!
Maybe a major benefit for us with bulging server HD...
Unfortunately, given the lack of actual information available about MQA, there soon becomes little more to discuss
I find it rather telling that even when direct questions are put about specific details of MQA, the answers are often deflections. This approach cannot be calculated to gain acceptance for MQA from technical types.
When talking about perception, it is usually extreme phenomena like bone conduction in physical contact. This has nothing to do with sitting in a chair and listening to music.
Al,is spot on, in regards this
It's currently believed it requires direct contact
I have only seen a few publications suggesting thru air perception
One suggested we can pick if the ultrasonics have been removed , but cannot hear the ultrasonics on their own
However as I have stated before the main issue for ultrasonic content in music reproduction are 2
1. It's is important in the time domain
2. Attempt to remove ultrasonic content in digital recordings creates other problems downstream if the sampling rate is insufficient to be above the "natural" musical pass band
Many have commented that most older microphones only spec to 20khz
Also the energy content falls with increasing frequency
However, because of the high dynamic range of cd, even if the musical spectra in the ultrasonic region is 40 DB down, it will be folded back down into the auditory band without filtering
And much of this will go into the 0-7 kHz area where the ear is most sensitive
Brick wall filtering will cause preringing, but block the fold back
Please note the patent on the aphodising filter , avoids preringing but is specified to allow 32db of breakthrough in the 0-7 kHz band
To my mind I am increasingly favourable to the idea of MQA as a technology
But ultimately the market place and people's ears and wallets will decide
Archimago's comparisons found only about a 10% smaller file size than FLAC, which is lossless, so given that MQA is slightly lossy, it hardly seems worth all the hocus pocus
More importantl, IMO, is that you can compare several different hi-res formats including MQA
Yawn. So many hi-res promises over the years. I'll believe mass acceptance when I see it.
Personally I would not put too much faith in Archimago's work. There is a bit of misleading information on that site. Like Audioholics and Xiph, there is quite a bit of bias and bad information there.
Indeed. And I have never understood why mass acceptance is needed. Be the 1% who enjoy the benefits. If other people don't get it, their loss.
It seems many really don't understand how MQA works.
Yes a larger file in DXD can be be around 500MB. But MQA cannot produced anything over 96 Khz.
It can unfold to 192 by umpampling in the final unfold. It will never be identical DXD file.
Smoke and mirrors.
We've been debating Archimago's comments on hirez for years on the Hoffman board. I've seen a lot of bad information on that. I have not studied his MQA work but I doubt the quality of the analysis based on prior experience.
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |