I was just thinking the same!
The last news was
but since then the DS2 might have kept the team pretty busy.
@Paul, are you able to say how things are going with the AirLens and its beta release?
Also, I know you were looking into MQA implementation - could you say what resolution we can expect via the AirLens going into the DS2?
He’s a bit of MQA back-story.
Was a Bob Stuart / Meridian idea quite a few years ago when high res streaming in the UK was a problem because of slow internet speeds. We still have a lot of old copper cabling. So muck around with the data to make it easier to send online.
Before you could say boo to a goose, internet speeds got a lot better and it became redundant. Qobuz released a 24/192 service and all was fine and dandy.
So do the BS thing (his initials are RS, but BS seems more appropriate), call it a new format, stack it with 6 layers of DRM and market the cr@p out of it. Bingo! BS wins the lottery.
Next, cash in. Sell it to a new company for something like $15m, put other people’s money on the line, and keep marketing the cr@p out of it.
Fortunately for the MQA crew, the investors are so loaded the $5m annual spend (with next to $0 revenue) is petty cash and they continue to drip feed it.
As of 31 December 2020, the latest accounts, the annual revenue was just under £500,000 (about $600k). The coffee shop under the flat where my son lives has a higher turnover. To get to this stratospheric level of business, they have accumulated losses of £32,032,202. That’s about $35m.
So the moral of the story is that, rather than peddling MQA, BS would have been better off opening a coffee shop in Islington.
e&oe.
p.s. The primary issue of data rates was explained at the launch in 2014.
MQA sounds better than anything other than DSD on my system using the DS with Bridge II. The time domain correction that you may not be aware of is a great technology.
On some recordings, the MQA “master” is clearly the best track available to listen to when played via Roon/Tidal over Bridge II to the DS Sr.
I would like to maintain practical access to these files as my system evolves.
That said, it has not been my experience that the MQA file ALWAYS sounds better than other available files.
Is this still the schedule, Paul?
I heard they expect it to slip until January.
Here is the note I got from Barry. Seems straight forward enough.
There are three (kind of) levels to MQA unfolding:
• MQA core decoder – first level decoding to 88.2 or 96 kHz.
• MQA renderer – when combined with the core decoder, implements the final unfold
• MQA full decoder – implements the final unfold
The AirLens only does the first unfold, so the core decoder level.
Thanks for the basic overview. I feel I don’t quit get the full picture.
There must be some deliberate choices involved, in that (IMO) the AL can calculate whatever it’s being fed: as you explain the first unfold.
So, knowing that and e.g. Roon is also performing that first unfold, it would not be so hard to have the AL do that final unfold (instead of just the first or nothing at all)?
Or is it that simple: the first unfold is royalty free and the final unfold isn’t - and PSA isn’t willing to pay for that (for reasons of value for money)?
Sort of my question too. If the AL can only do the first. Does that mean Roon core has to do all three of your DAC does not do anything?
Taken together, these two bullet points don’t make sense to me.
Think you may have miss-typed or left something out…?
FYI, to all (from Cambridge Audio Support):
Excerpts:
No Unfold
As expected, this is the raw folded MQA file that can be played back through any device as no decoding is required. This is typically better than CD quality at 44.1 or 48 kHz.
MQA Core Decode
This is the point at which the first unfold takes place. The MQA Core Decoder authenticates, decodes full dynamic range and matches to the current playback settings. This can be performed either within software (TIDAL, Audirvana, Roon) or hardware that contains a MQA Core Decoder, and at this point the file is upscaled to 88.2 or 96 kHz.
MQA Core Decode with Hardware Rendering
In this method of playback, a combination of software and hardware is used to further unfold the file. As with MQA Core Decoding, the software decodes the MQA 24 bit / 44.1kHz file, and unpacks it to 24 bit / 88.2 kHz. This file is then output to the hardware renderer where it is expanded up to 24 bit / 352.8 kHz.
Full Decode and MQA Renderer
Full Decoding and MQA Rendering is only possible using hardware with MQA certification, and is the optimum playback method of MQA files. This will require all stages of the unfold or processing to take place within the hardware, which is fed the untouched MQA file before performing the various decodes and rendering. This is typically the highest possible quality and files can be upscaled to a maximum resolution of 768 kHz.
Clear as mud…?
All I know it works now with Roon and both my streamer and DAC do not support it. So if I add the Airlens and it supports a piece it should work just fine.
This requires licensing.
I think your wasting your time as it doesn’t fit what they want to hear. No matter how many times it’s explained.
To “fully unfold” MQA you need hardware as the last 2 unfolds require a DAC chip with the proper filters to implement their pre-ringing and other filters. Since the AirLens isn’t a DAC, it was never going to do beyond the first unfold.
Roon only does the first unfold as well.
To be “full MQA” you need an MQA compliant DAC. The AirLens will just pass the bits needed onto your “full MQA” DAC to decode the rest (the additional 2 or full resolution MQA). That is, if you have an MQA DAC. If you don’t, the best you can do is the first unfold and that gives you:
I suppose we could frame this slightly different.
You are expecting those of us not interested in MQA to subsidize you?
I am totally fine if you want to pay extra for MQA in a User/Licence model. Of course that would be very challenging for PSA to negotiate. Perhaps if they could establish a true-up process with MQA Ltd… But even that would most likely require a commitment of X units over Y time to establish a pricing scheme. Unless there’s a simple flat Fee/Unit price.
May I ask what your Use Case is for MQA?
Hi @jamesh. Thank you very much for getting back to forum members on this. The question had been circulating for a while and it’s nice to understand what unfolding will or won’t be happening with the AirLens.
Somehow the Bridge II does full decode and render for the DS mk1 up to 192kHz. And it sounds great.
It was by design. The company that made the BII designed it and licensed MQA. I can’t remember the name of the company that designed it. I think it begins with a “C”.
@ipeverywhere gave an excellent explanation as to how the Bridge II used I2s to unfold MQA without getting the DAC involved. I was rather hoping something similar might be possible with the AirLens, but not to be.
My perspective for the frame of this sub thread is to have clarity on what it requires to have MQA in the PSA Universe of AL and MKII. Or rather what are the actual stumbling blocks - and not beating around the bush about it. We’re all grown ups, aren’t we?
I’m not promoting or are in favour of MQA, but do have some files lying around. To be able to reproduce these in their full glory would be nice. So, how much would licensing actually cost: $10, 100 or 1000 (and add to the cost of the final product)?
For me $100 would be way too much, but I could overcome that with the expense of the AL. But why limit that question to my person only and not make a poll out of it, when the actual licensing costs are known?
As it appears, full MQA requires not only its properties of the AL, but also of the MKII. That would make all of this a senseless discussion, which could have been obviated by clearly stating the basis of design. But of course, I could have missed that one somewhere in these threads.