garym wrote: > I don't understand your anger in this response. Not "anger," annoyance with the trolling. Julf isn't interested in "discussing audio issues," he's an authority in his own mind, knows EVERYTHING, and KNOWS with absolute certainty that MQA is gimmicky technology, "quackery," "pixie dust," a "unicorn fart." His signature shows he has an 'ax to grind'. His goal is clearly to insult those who may have something favorable to say about MQA.
garym wrote: > Julf is asking a technical question about comparisons, which is > relevant, and then following up with a very reasonable answer to your > question about why one would care. Not. My question wasn't generalized "why [any] one would care," but specifically "-Why would I even care?"- To date, MQA is solely relevant to the streaming world as it claims a form of lossless compression of larger studio master files. As a TIDAL HiFi subscriber, my post (#18) simply references what I _subjectively_ heard with a simple consumer A/B test and what I _personally_ consider better SQ. (Are subjective opinions of aesthetic value permitted in these forums or not?) Julf knew before he asked his "technical question" that ONLY a TIDAL employee would have knowledge regarding whether similar or dissimilar source files were used. His question was "bait" to serve his agenda of disparaging MQA. His response "Because you might want to know if the improvement you hear is because of superior technology, or just better/different source material" is NOT "very reasonable," but again serves HIS agenda. You and he might want to know, but *a**s a **steaming music** consumer, I don't have a dog in the fight about whether my experience of improved SQ is attributable to MQA technology, better source files, or both. * I fully understand why OTHERS (including the two of you) might want or need to identify the primary and tertiary causes for better sound quality, but I never claimed to have that information. I simply testified as to what I heard. Ok? In any normal discussion, there's no need to insult other's subjective opinion. garym wrote: > If I'm comparing what appears to be two identical cars except different > colors, and one very much outperforms the other, I'd really like to know > whether the engine and drivetrains are identical or different so I can > understand the performance drivers. (as opposed to simply saying, wow, > the blue car is better and that's all I need to know). It may be that > one simply buys the blue car and is happy (as they should be). But this > is a forum discussing audio issues and users typically are interested in > the "whys and hows" related to our audio. Fine. You agree with me. But you're obfuscating the events. Julf's agenda here is clearly not to "discuss audio issues," but rather to disparage both what he considers "quackery" along with those persons who don't share his opinion. It's the 800lb gorilla sitting in the middle of this thread. *Source*: TIDAL HiFi, Pandora One > MySqueezebox.com using iPeng 9.2.1 app on iPhone6s/iPad *Great Room*: SB Touch(1) > AudioQuest TOS > PS Audio DL3 DAC > Audio Envy 10' cables > 200w powered Martin Logan (ML) Purity speakers, SB Touch(2) >JVC 110w amp > ML Motion 4 & AudioEngine 5. *Garage:* SB Touch(3) > Wyred mINT > Cullen Cables > ML Motion 12 *Carry Anywhere: *TIDAL >iPhone 6s > Bose Mini BT speaker. *Streaming Media:* https://www.facebook.com/groups/535747176592597/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ DanSmedra's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=62637 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=106754 _______________________________________________ Touch mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
