pbphoto

Just go to iTunes and search for Audio Test Tones. There is a CD with the same name from Audiolab. The 30 second samples might be all you need...

I do something similar with REW and a UMIK-1. 90-degree calibration. Use REW's generator to produce a full-range Pink-PN while using REW's RTA and the UMIK-1 to analyze the Pink-PN signal while I do about 10-15 seconds of figure-8 patterns around my listening area. After saving it down, I use REW's EQ (variable smoothing), feeding it general parameters to automatically get my SPL corrections in the right range. But then I adjust from there - usually dialing the automatic corrections back and avoiding correction gains. Basically, less is more and I'm just trying to correct some obvious room gains and very lightly apply a 'house sound.' In my case, I then export the EQ as wav files which I feed into Roon's convolution filter.

I guess technically, 'format' is off a bit. The way I understand it is MQA is a new method of encoding audio into a standard 44.1/16 PCM audio format, which can then be packaged up into either a FLAC file for streaming or a CD for physical distribution. (Yes MQA CD's exist.) If you play back the MQA encoded PCM audio using software or a device that understands MQA, the stream will be unfolded into higher resolutions that (maybe) sound better than CD quality. If you play back the MQA encoded PCM audio using software or a device that is not MQA certified, you get standard CD quality - or slightly less than standard CD quality according to some arguments. Your damn right it is also a new SKU. That's where the money is - a huge opportunity to sell you another Sgt Pepper's. If you have a Tidal account, find some of their "original masters" playlists and then go find multiple versions of the same songs on that playlist. Usually there is an MQA album and then a normal CD album. Why they are keeping both around, I'm not sure... However, it does allow you to easily compare if you have an MQA certified DAC. I've done this a little bit this weekend and I can't hear a difference, although I do admit I haven't done any super critical listening. If anybody has an example of a Tidal song where the MQA version is noticeably different from its CD cousin (and both appear to come from the same source), please share.

I have no doubt you heard a difference between the two streams during the demo. I believe you. That's why they do demos. However, I respectfully disagree with just about every other point, analogy and conclusion you are making above. We'll have to leave it at that and see how this all plays out. I'm going to continue to follow the topic and educate myself (and my ears). Maybe I'll hear and see the (blue) light someday :-)

That is the point actually. MQA claims to deliver superior sound quality to Redbook using similar bandwidth as Redbook. I don't know enough to know if this is true or not. Not sure if anybody does at this point. Also, the term 'original master recording' is vague and changes over time. Just look at all the constant remasters of old catalogs. How many Sgt Pepper's do you have? What I do want is the best sounding master possible given the current technology in at least Redbook non-lossy format. If MQA can improve on this and I can hear it, I'm all in. What I don't want is to be locked-in to a proprietary format that says it's better because it puts a blue light placebo up on my DAC, tricking me into buying another Sgt. Pepper's :-)

MQA's name implies, and their marketing says, they control the sound end to end (analog to analog) by certifying and profiling every step in the sound recording and reproduction process. If MQA sounds superior/different to a lossless Redbook equivalent, is it because the technology can compensate for deficiencies in the chain, or is it truly able to unfold a Redbook stream into higher resolution sound, or did they simply re-master and/or re-EQ the source? I've got an MQA capable DAC but I haven't played around with it too much. Another downside is you have to disable processing, room correction and volume control in your software streamer so that it passes the MQA stream untouched to the DAC, otherwise you don't get the MQA light.

That's one of the arguments against MQA - they invented a problem that didn't need solving.

Very informative - thank you. I suspect as part of the "MQA processing" there has to be some re-mastering and EQ enhancements going on - like "Mastered for iTunes" downloads on the iTunes Store. In addition, MQA embeds a profile of the source ADC into the file so that the end-user "MQA certified" DAC can use this info when it unfolds the MQA file. This is part of their "you hear what the artist heard in the studio" and "time domain de-smearing" pitches. If the original hi-res file was already well mastered and recorded, then as you point out, MQA probably has less of an impact. To get the full benefit of MQA, you need an MQA-certified DAC, as you had during your listening session. If you don't have this, you can still get some of the benefits of MQA via software like Roon or Audirvana. And users that have neither a software streamer that understands MQA or an MQA-enabled DAC should still notice a sound improvement playing an MQA file at 24/48 because somebody has re-mastered and EQ'd the source, even if it is slightly inferior to standard Redbook bit-wise. At least that's my understanding. I think everybody on the planet is all for well mastered, hi-res audio streamed inside a package that consumes roughly the same amount of bandwidth as Redbook. MQA promises all of this and more (but there is some debate as to whether it is really hi-res and lossless.) The concern, among others, is with its distribution, control, and royalty scheme.

I'm not saying I agree with him one way or another, but he has had some quotes over the years that have made me laugh: "Just because the rooster crows when the sun comes up doesn't mean he made the sun come up." "A man never stands so tall as when he stoops to kiss an ***."

The average "discerning ear" on this site is well over 50 years old with a good chance of a hearing aid inside of it, so take it with a grain of salt ;-). Enjoy your new LSII's!

Enjoy the music!

...Or, for that matter, get you back to standard Redbook resolution if you don't buy an MQA enabled DAC, which 90+% of the people probably will not. There are a lot of dubious claims and marketing hype right now with MQA that apply even if you have a DAC that supports it. The reviews that say it sounds better - is it because of MQA itself or simply a differently EQ'd source? Beyond a streaming codec, MQA is also a distribution control mechanism. If you follow the money, it's all in favor of the folks that invented MQA or are pushing MQA. Smells like a SACD/DIVX-like scheme at this point. We'll see how it pans out, but I don't see it panning out unless companies with real money (Amazon, Apple) get behind it.

Michigan is going to need the 4 point line like the Harlem Globetrotters if they are going to get back into this.

Cool - The H3's are fantastic fun speakers that can blow out your townhouse if you want - no need to think you are making due. I don't have it listed in my signature but I do have the Schiit Mani phono preamp driving my VPI turntable - sounds great. My analog path is VPI (ortofon blue) --> Schitt Mani -->. Schitt Sys passive pre-amp --> McIntosh amp. Klipsch speakers are so sensitive, an active preamp is not needed. I think Schiit makes the best gear for the money - the Bifrost multibit (I have the older 4490) is amazing for the price. I have no experience with Project Turntables but I believe they are good value. Are you replacing your Thorens or is this for a new system? Again, the ortofon 2m blue is fantastic for the price IMHO. For blogs, this site has a lot of knowledgable folks and it gets entertaining often. There's also a large contingent of old farts with hearing aids that won't hesitate to tell you what tweeters sound the best, but they mean well :-) I also lurk on avsforum, psaudio, and Roon. this is a neat site I found recently: http://archimago.blogspot.nl I'm in Downers Grove.

Let me know how it goes.

If you will be sitting 8ft away, and the speakers are up against the short wall, I would keep them on the floor, ~6ft apart CTC, and adjust toe-in to your liking - in a range from crossing slightly behind you to slightly in front of you. You could also try them in the corners of the short wall, which would be about 8ft apart CTC, but then definitely toe them in so they are pointing at you or slightly in front of you.

Is the room being used as a bedroom - i.e. with furniture and a bed? or is it an office with an open floor plan?

Try tilting them back a little bit.

No more posts for you until you close the chardonnay cabinet!

They always say everyone stumbles and says something dumb on their 8219th post, so this will pass and you will recover. Don't be discouraged.

If my widow sells my LS II's for $1500, I'll be pissed.

I agree this is a problem. Those studies referenced above are concluding people are getting dumber because vocabularies are declining in content and complexity over time. The eggheads who did these studies are obviously using a "Jump to Conclusions Mat" invented by Tom in the movie Office Space.

Wow - is that what LS II's are going for now?

Was one of your accounts hacked with a brute force attack?

I had a subscription to Stereo Review (and maybe Audio for a time) in the 1980's while I was growing up. I enjoyed reading about all the gear I couldn't afford. As mentioned above, Julian Hirsch's reviews were informative between the lines concluding in some of the most expertly wordsmithed non-speak ever put down on paper in the English language. The old joke about the conclusion to all his speaker reviews: "Of all the speakers I have heard this year, this is certainly one of them."