[Twiga]

@ whydontumarryit:

What would Shryer (or most of the other "audiophile reviewers" do without a random adjective generator?   

[Letitroll98]

Jeepers, I remember when all anyone bitched about was Sarjan from 6 Moons.  I haven't subscribed to any of the rags for decades, I do read their content from time to time when offered for free online.  My main problem is that it's rare that I've heard more than one cut of the music they're using in the review, it's like it's a contest between the writers to see how rare and eclectic the music selections for review can be.  I have no idea what they're talking about because I've never heard the music.

And being a digital dyslexic I missed the entire MQA debacle, I don't have a single DAC in the house that unfolds MQA.  I've heard it at shows, but who could determine subtle differences there.  When Tidal flipped I cancelled my subscription and moved to Quboz, cheaper and better.  As an old man I've been through way too many failed formats to jump on anything latest and greatest, remember Betamax, Laserdisk?   The best thing with MQA is that it's demise doesn't make any equipment obsolete, it was just extra.  It's dead, just not yet buried, we're only waiting for the funeral.

[gbaby]

Why are you all happy about a business filing bankruptcy?  If you don't like a device or the technology, don't purchase it, but celebrating failure (if it indeed does fail) kind of makes you a crappy person.

Since you had the gall to make a post like this, I think it makes you a crappy person. I’m sorry you dranked the Kool-Aid or you lost your money in the investment. 

[bacobits1]

I'm a crappy person. 

[rbbert]

I'm a crappy person. 

The consensus here and elsewhere (not counting some of the audiophile press) is that MQA is unneeded at best and otherwise probably flirts with fraud, so being positively inclined about its probable demise is hardly being "crappy".  Its mere existence over the past several years has also added to many manufacturers' cost of doing business, which costs are of course passed on to the consumer.  It would be interesting to know what (if any) incentives might have been offered to Bryston to support it.

[whydontumarryit]

Implementation is the support. I doubt Bryston had anything to do with it. Other than starting this thread, I mean.

[R. Daneel]

Apparently MQA will be no more.

james

Well deserved.

I can see the attraction – a nice logo coming from smart people with PhDs and whitecoats with a promise of superior audio quality. The problem was, of course, that they were arrogant megalomaniacs. They didn’t just want a share of the market. No. They wanted it ALL. All the Suns in the licensing business. The arrogance was such that they treated the public and artists as idiots. Despite their best efforts and the millions that went into the pockets of their partners, websites, magazines and even artists themselves, a small but critical mass formed and exposed the truth. If they had gone for a smaller market share, it might have worked. But then, they wouldn’t have made as much as they wanted. One wonders how much is enough.

Well deserved indeed.

[newzooreview]

Neither Bob Stuart nor Peter Craven has a Ph.D.

Bob Stuart appears to have studied electrical engineering at Birmingham University. The statement on a couple of sites is, "Bob Stuart studied electronic engineering and acoustics at the University of Birmingham and operations research at Imperial College, London."

On the Royal Academy of Engineering site, among the list of people who received their "Prince Philip Medal," he is not given the title "Dr." while others on the same list are.

Engineers typically see a Master's as the terminal degree, although Ph.D. programs in engineering do exist.

His publication record lists his affiliation as being with Meridian. He seems to have gone straight from the classroom to founding Meridian in the 70s. Most of his publications exist in the gray region between research and marketing that often occurs in engineering.

He is a tech entrepreneur rather than a white-coat academic.

[R. Daneel]

Neither Bob Stuart nor Peter Craven has a Ph.D.

Bob Stuart appears to have studied electrical engineering at Birmingham University. The statement on a couple of sites is, "Bob Stuart studied electronic engineering and acoustics at the University of Birmingham and operations research at Imperial College, London."

On the Royal Academy of Engineering site, among the list of people who received their "Prince Philip Medal," he is not given the title "Dr." while others on the same list are.

Engineers typically see a Master's as the terminal degree, although Ph.D. programs in engineering do exist.

His publication record lists his affiliation as being with Meridian. He seems to have gone straight from the classroom to founding Meridian in the 70s. Most of his publications exist in the gray region between research and marketing that often occurs in engineering.

He is a tech entrepreneur rather than a white-coat academic.

Point taken!

Although I never intended for my post to be taken literally, by 'white coats' I simply meant people who are perceived by others as being 'smart', since smart usually equals authority, especially in entertainment industry which HIFI is certainly a part of.

There's no denying that people behind MQA are smart, hence the thousands of posts on internet forums and us here lamenting the topic.

Meridian, for its size, was a high-tech company but I'm afraid, it's days are long gone. When was the last time they introduced a revolutionary product? Engineering is a noble occupation, even if I do say so myself, but the hard work and responsibility are seldom rewarded. Licensing, on the other hand, is where the money is.

Also, I'd like to point out the difference between electrical and electronic engineering since people often mistake one for the other. The former deals with power generation (power plants), distribution and consumption on a larger scale, both industrial and residential. On the other hand, electronic design engineers work on devices of a smaller scale i.e. circuit board of an electronic device. That's a very important distinction to make.

Cheers,
Antun

[gbaby]

There's no denying that people behind MQA are smart, hence the thousands of posts on internet forums and us here lamenting the topic.

Cheers,
Antun

You are giving these folks too much credit. They are not smart; slick is more appropriate. 

[rbbert]

You are giving these folks too much credit. They are not smart; slick is more appropriate. 

No, they are very smart; Bob Stuart probably knows as much as anyone about digital audio, both the hardware/software engineering and the psychoacoustics involved.  MQA is in many ways a masterpiece in both areas.  If it had been introduced in 2005 rather than 2015 we all could easily be singing its praises.

[James Tanner]

Subterfuge is Subterfuge no matter how smart someone may or may not be.

james

[RDavidson]

If it had been introduced in 2005 rather than 2015 we all could easily be singing its praises.

Yep! In this day and age MQA was nothing more than a solution looking for a problem that no longer exists. By way of subterfuge, they tried to use their “technology” to gain a foothold on the ENTIRE music streaming and digital gear industry. It really made me VERY angry. It was absolutely nothing more than a cash grab and way to handcuff digital gear manufacturers and ultimately consumers! MQA can crawl under a rock and die!!!

[R. Daneel]

You are giving these folks too much credit. They are not smart; slick is more appropriate. 

Perhaps I am, but history is full of missed opportunities, enough to declare the MQA folks smart, as opposed to all of those who weren't.

If Philips had licensed compact cassette in the '60s, it would have become the biggest tech company in the world. Other, smart people, would have surely seen the potential if they had created the MC, but not Philips. On the other hand, there's Ray Dolby as a success story. So, on the back of many a electronic device there is always something about U.S. patents being licensed from Dolby, even if the device itself has nothing to do with any of the noise reduction or surround standards. Making 'money for nothing' (no reference to Dire Straits' 1985 hit) is better than money for something.

We can argue about the merits and morals of this 'leaching' but the fact is, it does take some smarts. I'm sure you can agree with that.

Cheers,
Antun

[gbaby]

Perhaps I am, but history is full of missed opportunities, enough to declare the MQA folks smart, as opposed to all of those who weren't.

If Philips had licensed compact cassette in the '60s, it would have become the biggest tech company in the world. Other, smart people, would have surely seen the potential if they had created the MC, but not Philips. On the other hand, there's Ray Dolby as a success story. So, on the back of many a electronic device there is always something about U.S. patents being licensed from Dolby, even if the device itself has nothing to do with any of the noise reduction or surround standards. Making 'money for nothing' (no reference to Dire Straits' 1985 hit) is better than money for something.

We can argue about the merits and morals of this 'leaching' but the fact is, it does take some smarts. I'm sure you can agree with that.

Cheers,
Antun

Sorry, but I cannot agree. Using knowledge to take advantage of folks is not smart, but slick and evil. As has been noted, subterfuge is subterfuge. You may want to re-read the post by R. Davidson. The MQA folks were trying to take over the entire recording industry having people like me repurchase my entire music collection. No!

[GentleBender]

It doesn’t take smarts to be greedy and arrogant.

[sfraser]

Subterfuge is Subterfuge no matter how smart someone may or may not be.

james

"Subterfuge"  ...LOL, had to look that one what James. And it will be place in the quiver .

[viggen]

i have issue with mqa's name.  i am led to believe based on the name that i am listening to a master recording when listening to mqa music.

it should change its name to cac, commercial audio codec for the codec's true authenticity.

[rbbert]

The MQA folks were trying to take over the entire recording industry having people like me repurchase my entire music collection. No!

This post illustrates the difference between MQA the company and MQA the technology.  I very much dislike both, but I can respect the design and engineering of the technology, even if I don't care for it.  MQA the company is a different story.

[gbaby]

This post illustrates the difference between MQA the company and MQA the technology.  I very much dislike both, but I can respect the design and engineering of the technology, even if I don't care for it.  MQA the company is a different story.

I hope you don't have any investment in MQA. This technology was invented by Meridian, and they formed a limited corporation under the head of Bob Stuart. It was marketed as uncompressed music technology that sounded even better than analog or SACD.  While the company never provided a means of objectively testing it, I'd say the smart people are the ones who discovered the fraud. I don't respect the technology or the company as they were fraudulent from inception. Sorry.