Here was me thinking it was a counter argument. Protectionism eh? Careful that may be seen as sensationalism.
1 Like
It would also be helpful if the two axes could be aligned as they are significantly different between the two charts.
Hello @WiWavelength,
Here’s the sox chart:
Keep in mind, this file was upsampled to 352.8 kHz for side-by-side analysis with the DXD version. The original 88.2 kHz recording to the eye looks identical sans the imaging at the original FS * 2 (~88.2kHz).
1 Like
As @WiWavelength says, it is your graphs/measurements that are the exception and need explanation, not @Wim_Hulpia’s. I call upon @moderators to explain the Roon employee @john erroneous measurements and heavy handedness towards @Wim_Hulpia
edit: @john , measurements are hard. You should avail yourself of the many independent sources on the internet of MQA measurments. Your obviously bunking them up in some way.
Hello @crenca,
I explained how my measurements were taken, what more explanation are you looking for? If you can explain where I may have made a mistake I’d be interested to know.
My interest here is to ensure that the Roon community remains a vibrant place to discuss topics relating to Roon, all-things-audio, and otherwise. Tolerating misinformation is damaging to the discourse and makes the forums a less trustworthy and interesting place to spend time.
-John
5 Likes
I have no idea how you bunked them up, or if you did, or how @Wim_Hulpia bunked his up, or if he did. Measurements are hard and can go wrong a thousand different ways. I do know that yours look to be the exception, not his. If your that concerned about “misinformation”, remove your own analysis. If you want trust, look around for independent measurements and post/link them. Trust but verify as someone once said…
When I have ‘no idea’ I tend to stay quiet or ask a relevant question.
2 Likes
Wim did not do any measurements, he copied some graphs from a post by Mansr from 2017 and made his own comments about them. It might have helped all the discussions, if he had included a link to the post he took the graphics from.
I have linked the originating post for you; it comes from a 2017 thread in Audiophile Style, aka formerly Computer Audiophile. MQA spectrum plots - General Forum - Audiophile Style
And, yes, they are different, not the first of which is that Mansr is running code outside of an actual MQA device and is certainly NOT using Roon. Please reference the original post if you want to understand what Mansr was saying.
6 Likes
Hello @Rugby,
Ah, that makes sense. Looking at the thread, “mansr” went on to apologize for posting the charts as they had mistakenly not been using the MQA Decoder.
-John
6 Likes
I’m trying to remember if the original plots were updated as the link to the new thread is dead - all this was several years ago…
Roon management should stay out of MQA discussion. Any participation vis a vis MQA should be limited to Roon business decisions and tech support. Other posting could be viewed as MQA endorsement (or criticism). Leave that analysis and rhetoric to independent third parties. Roon already has at least one MQA apologist Joel on staff, and that is more than enough.
AJ
3 Likes
They seem to have corrected a mistake. Is that not what people are here for? If it doesn’t align with your belief then so be it.
I tend to find custard goes well with humble pie myself.
2 Likes
Hello @WiWavelength,
The reason I entered this discussion was that the charts posted did not match my conception with how MQA works and I wanted to ensure that Roon was handling the MQA Decoding correctly in case we had a bug.
If you feel that a company posting measurements of their own product on their discussion forums is out-of-line I don’t know what to tell you…
-John
6 Likes
I agree, but perhaps not realistic given Roon is a cog in the MQA machine as it were. Still it would be nice…
This link is relevant I believe. I think this is the updated measurements/thread that is dead in the first one:
John, you did not correct the error. Rugby did. A non Roon employee. No Roon staff intervention necessary.
My points are sound, and they still stand.
AJ
1 Like
I’m firmly against MQA from the proprietary implementation angle, I genuinely don’t care how it sounds. That said I think things are taking a dark turn here. How are Roon to support their MQA implementation without some expertise here? Expertise tends to be borne out of enthusiasm, one persons “apologist” is anothers’ knowledgeable support/dev.
5 Likes
The spectrograms included this post are in-line with the measurements I made and further invalidate the spectrographs posted earlier in the thread.
2 Likes
Going through that thread now (brings back memories) but I tend to agree, though buried in that thread is further measurements/evidence of the high frequency noise, aliasing, etc. etc.
If you’re truly interested in contributing to the discourse on these forums (and elsewhere) I suggest avoiding Ad hominem arguments.
Consider this:
It would have been very easy for someone to come into this thread, see the now verifiably inaccurate “measurements” that were posted and assume that there was something broken about Roon’s implementation of MQA. The post didn’t include any information about how the measurements were taken, it would have been reasonable to conclude that Roon was used to make them.
This is why my response to @Wim_Hulpia included:
A) Asking “what is the source for these graphs?”
B) A full explanation of how I took the measurements.
C) An invitation to point out any faults in my testing methodology.
If you would like to actually address any of the points I’ve made, I’ll summarize below:
A) The spectrograms posted were either mis-interpreted or incorrectly measured.
B) Tolerating misinformation is damaging to the discourse and makes the forums a less trustworthy and interesting place to spend time.
C) Us providing measurements backing up the performance of our application does not meet the criteria of a neutral party “intervention”.
-John
6 Likes