Hi pedal,

Yeah, well, I like to stay neutral on this.

Something else is that being in Administration not necessarily is a negative thing. It is merely a protective matter which is temporary until "things get solved". Which things ? in this case the money funder who disappeared while money is required. "Don't spend too much for now" etc.

What I don't know is whether that funder was also an investor (thus, someone who makes money over the lending of money after buying himself out). If that is so, there is only (much) more money for MQA at this moment. Still it would require Administration or something like that.

The constructions within MQA ltd are quite vague. Example : most investors will receive (or have received) shares of MQA. That is all air. So when all is unwound (MQA Ltd is quit) those shares have a value. And if *then* there is no funder hence no money, people may get angry here and there. And those people are quite big names.

Of course we know how good MQA (Bob et al) is at story telling. So it would require careful observation of what really is the matter.

Best regards for now,
Peter

MQA in Administration

That could be related (please continue over there about that subject).

Day before yesterday I sent a reminder - but no response at all, so far. Next week I will try another address or call.

Is there anyone who can still normally login ? I mean, I can't login with my phone as well. Something "Login Session timed out".

Regards,
Peter

Dear people,

Since somewhere this week, Tidal Login failed (preceded by Unauthorized messages - possibly no message at all but just nothing working). This is "software player" (like XXHighEnd) related.

I am waiting for a response from Tidal support. I will post back here when there is news.

Best regards,
Peter

Hi Ramesh,

I have always said that where the wires go is unimportant, but not everybody agrees with that. Anyway, Roberto does not think it is important either, so go ahead with just putting them next to each other (but people tend to have for sequence B-W-Y-R-G, so say the B (or whatever comes first for what you use) always in the leftmost pint (with the red dot)).

Peter

As far as I know / can remember, nobody with the NOS1 etc. has them - this is probably because I never advertised them.
OK, one person has them, but he most probably won't know. He won a prize and the prize were these. I sent them to him and never heard a thing about it. He probably did not understand ...
(this was maybe 7 years ago)

Of course I use them myself but back at the time they did *not* work out under the Mach II of back then. I wonder whether I actually tried them under the Mach III. Hey, maybe not and maybe I should do that.
For the NOS1 it's a night and day difference.

Phasure Audio Footer

Peter

PS: Yours will be on your doorstep tomorrow.

Hey Ramesh,

We can well say that Audio is "dead" so to speak, were it for new desires. It can be sensed from anywhere -  even I myself play music now instead of testing it (for SQ).
On some side note : I have joy automatically from the more and more and more improving Lush^3 config I am now using for I think two years (the Roberto config). I don't know how it is possible that this "burn in" keeps on going - and maybe I am dreaming it. But anyway, I don't need to do anything and next week it sounds better again.

The Lush^3 is not made longer than 2 meters because chances are fair it won't work in the random system. You can try the 3 meters of course, if you only don't send it back - haha. For the Phasure-Phasure application the chance exists that it works well - theoretically I could try it myself, right ?
If you really have the option just the same to use the ET^3 at the longer length - really no issues there; I would take that then.

FWIW, my Orelos are 50 cm from the (glass) backwall. No issues whatsoever. At the sides I have just over 1 meter.
Mine are toed so they cross just behind me (that is at over 6 meters of distance).

Best regards,
Peter
 

The pin-out is as normal as can be. However, apart from the ^2/^3 configuration means, a normal HDMI cable bears no standard on whether ground connects to the plug hence your chassis (either side). Therefore the HDMI^2 has an additional configuration to set *that*.

No, I wouldn't know of any person ho regularly posts or posted here who has the HDIM^2. I think I can tell that us" XXHighEnd guys don't buy the "hoopla" of having a DDC (Digital to Digital Converter) where such a cable can often be used for (or Ethernet hence ET^2 / ET^3); this additional step is, well, additional.
I think we made 200 or so for people using a DDC.

I recall to have sold one to someone who used it for the normal application (or that I knew about it) - like you intend. I also recall some WOW and OOO from him but this was without qualification (like better picture or something).

Regards,
Peter

Oh wow ...

Ramesh, I wished you have told your (back then due) ticker. I think I can imagine the excitement and stress and everything. Maybe I slightly recall that maybe it wasn't the right time when Covid jumped on us ...

Yes, the world definitely has changed. And Yes it is in my imagination that by now we sit back and relax and have found what we looked for. It seems even to count for me.

Hugs ...

Hi Colin,

Maybe it wasn't entirely clear : those MQAs are 16 bits and 44.1. There can't be anything in there to do with. And thus it is good that nothing is done with it because it would be illegal if something *is* done with it (like Roon and Tidal Player do).

You can always look in the middle-top of the CD cover (the one shown during playback). If that shows 1411 it is 16 bits and 44.1 KHz.
If it is 24 bits withoutunfold (your last textual example I think) it will show 1411/16*24 = 2116 (2117).
Is it 24 bits unfolded, then 2116 * 2 = 4232. More is not possible because more never unfolds (the made up story/lie). This doesn't prevent that it can be upsampled from there. This shows in the left pane in the XXHighEnd gui. There can also show the native 24/192 if it would be that. Etc. ...

Maybe superfluously : the 24 bits MQA's which don't unfold exist from almost the beginning. Electrified from Boris Blank is such an example (the 24/44.1 version - a 24/96 version exists too). Thus that is an example which will show 2216 in the top of the Coverart. Let's say that these are "deblurred" just the same, but not HiRes.

The ones I show in my last post(s) are 16/44.1 and whether deblurred or not, I thus don't do anything with them because there is nothing to do**. In my version that is ! And they are denoted MQA16. Ad oh, since I now know that (recall it), I now see that I can look for them by searching for MQA16 - see below above the mouse pointer.

**): Deblurring and such does not happen on your side; it happens at the encoding server-side somewhere (ehh, if at all). The decoding is only for the unfolding. Unfolding means : expanding to Hires - which requires 24 bits first.

Peter

Addendum :

Notice that I use 2.11 just like you for the Audio PC. But it is the updated version on the Music Server PC that will cause this.

Maybe the below is telling ?

Stupid thing is that I now don't know what I am "skipping" (don't show) as such. So XXHighEnd just finds these and deals with them exactly how I would want. Or maybe a year ago I thought to go skip them because worthless ? ... But I did not do that ? and now insights change and I am even happy with that because I/we can choose (to skip the MQA16 denotes ones) ?

Peter

PS: The Quality : HI_RES is not correct of course. But this is officially in the data provided by Tidal - just saying ...

So I just obtained this one and a couple more. I see that I denote these "formally" MQA16 (see in the title bar below). This does not unfold or act strange or anything; it is just not dealt with by the MQA decoder. Also see the 1411 kbits/sec in the top-middle.

Does it sound optimally ? I don't know - I didn't know it. And because I didn't have it plus I like to have it "all" (from Gruppo Sportivo) I am a happy camper. It better had been 100% untampered with, but alas.

Please notice that there are also "opportunities" so to speak; I mean, this album was not there at Tidal a while ago. So maybe because of MQA it now is ?

Regards,
Peter

A limited result ...

When I go 6 months beyond that end date, I have some more (2nd screenshot). Btw, mind the blue icons only (44). But I already know by heart that most I see are 24/44.1. They also don't unfold but they are decoded. This is fine with me and not of my interest today. The interest is : find the software means I must have (had !) in there to leave the 16/44.1's alone for decoding. The the Deep Purple ones.

Peter

I have been more than busy this week, but ran coincidentally on the albums you see below - the rightmost three.

They don't unfold at all, although the pre-process marked them as MQA anyway (MQA44). They play as 16/44.1, but are of course upsampled like everything. I can see that they are from June 2021 and I will most probably be able to find more what I prepared from that time period.

Point is : these sound just fine to my ears, though special for their era (something like end 60s I'd say). *That* they still sound special is a good sign. It somehow (wants to) tells me that this was not tampered with. And so indeed, there will be some bit (now and then) used for the MQA detection, but that does not disturb (my ears).
Keep in mind : these are not decoded. XXHighEnd just leaves them alone, and this is in the XXHighEnd version you use too (the latest). Where these still can be found - I don't know (I did not look either) but it could be worth trying. But more importantly : I should have a reference by these. IOW, what is the software NOT doing to them and why. Probably today I can not test that (because all what seems fake I skip), BUT I know the dates of these plus I will be able to trace back by date what I all changed since (ahem) April 2021 (latest public version).

So right; I now can search / sort by date for MQA 16/44.1 from around that time (June 2021) and listen to more of them ...

Colin, again thank you very much for the spent effort. I will try to make that fruitful.
Peter

Thank you so much for all you hard work, Colin.

All is a bit pitfall-ish, already because I don't think that MQA claims that CDs can "unfold" (but you refer(red) to links some times from BobS which need a subscription which I have not - so I can't really read what is in there). What I know is :

In 2016 or so I was told (by telephone) that at some stage normal CDs would be MQA'd too. In by book this won't and can't mean that they will be able to unfold, as there is nothing to unfold. Now, it could be hoped that it does (unveils a higher sampling rate), but I don't have these hopes at all because it just can't be. And as you saw, that is not so indeed.
The real pitfall of course is the "law" of upsampling to 88.2. Thus, Roon must do that (governed by MQA Ltd), Tidal player must do that, hardware must do that, all must do that. And XXHighEnd does not.

The fact that XXHighEnd can not deal with it, is because at the time it was not recognized that it should be decoded (it did not exist). Most probably if I would hand it properly to the decoder, it indeed "deblurs" as you tell it, but it may also depict to upsample, and the combination could work BUT is worse than the original CD upsampled by known XXHighEnd means.

While the deblurring could be a pile of BS (in my view), the 24 bit files at least comprise highres inside, and they *can* unfold to normal 88.2 / 96. It is 99 times better than all the fake highres around, as I don't recall any fake MQA highres. So for that matter alone it may sound better, and about the deblurring I don't know. Mind you, the way MQA (via hardware) depicts the upsampling, is very much alike Arc Prediction with no ringing and such. So that part is ... well ... uhm ... the good part according to MQA (they may call that deblurring because actually there is less blurr by no-ringing (much much more to say about this), but if that were all there is to it, then MQA is a pile of air, except they offer highres while others do not. And mind you, I know for a fact that MQA has access to originals, e.g. the big producers had/have not.

One step more to unfold : If MQA would not present the LOWER res files, there would nothing left to be upsampled per the means MQA wants (which takes care of the not-ringing filtering).
So you see, MQA could be the biggest hoax ever, because it does not even deblur. It does one thing only (as how I see it) :

1. Bring a highres file in low reaolution (downsample it !)
1. Offer a couple of low-ringing filters which blur less according to what we are used to (DAC filters and such).

Yes, that is 2x 1.

The coincidence with XXHighEnd we have is
a. The adjacent DAC is NOS(1) and does not do a thing for filtering;
b. The filtering applied by software is not-ringing even one sample.

So that is 2x something (of also nothing).
Thus the bad luck for MQA is that I already do exactly the same, with one difference : I can't magically create highres from CD's (can only upsample them), while MQA has access to the originals often, which are highres and don't exist anywhere else (for those occasions that they don't). Again, this story is longer, but I know.
We would be better off if we had those originals with all there 24 bits in e.g. 96 or 192 sampling rate, but they just don't exist outside of what HDTracks et all may uncover.

We are also better off with the original CDs and this is exactly what happened as long as e.g. Tidal let them be and not molest by MQA encoding. Maybe, very maybe, that is just a hoax, and for that I should alter the software instead of writing posts like this. But still, a post like this takes 20 minutes, while finding where to be in the code (because this is about tweaking) is easily a day, and I don't have that day.
But I will. I mean, now I know that the 16bit CDs could be unmolestedly in there (apart from here and there one bit used to turn on a green or blue light), I should listen to those and especially not decode them and normally upsample them.

Best regards,
Peter

Hi Colin,

You now seem to turn things upside down. :-)
If you tweak that .MTT file with btw :

(your own text)

It *is* decoded. But nothing will happen because ... I say so ?
I am afraid you listen too much to Bob.

Obviously I asked you for a reason to make that Spectogram. This is because it will show nothing above 20.050 - at least to my expectation.
Now upsample them (like Roon or anything does). Now it will show ...
... data which is rubbish.

You can do that yourself by upsampling 2x and grab the UnicodeTrack0001.wav file (in your XX folder). Now put that in a normal music folder and make a Spectrogram of it.
This is nothing worth much and only for your reference so you can see the "fake" happening. This is no unfolding of course. This should have (if so) shown by the Spectrogram you made.

Kind regards as always,
Peter (not fed up by this at all !)