MQA and the "Pre Ring - Post Ring" Hoax


There's been a lot of misinformed babble on various audio forums about impulse response, digital filters, "time errors", "time correction", "time blurring", and similar pseudo science clap trap to convince audiophiles that suddenly in the year 2018, there's something drastically wrong with digital PCM audio - some 45 years after this landmark technology was developed by Philips Electronics engineers. Newsflash folks - it's a scam.

First, let's take a close look at what an impulse or discontinuity signal really is. The wikipedia definition actually is pretty accurate thanks to a variety of informed contributors from around the globe. It is a infinite aperiodic summation of sinusoidal waves combined to produce what looks like a spike (typically voltage for our purposes) in a signal. Does such a thing ever occur in nature or more importantly in our case - music? Absolutely not. In fact, the only things close to it are the voltage spikes that occur when a switch contact is thrown or an amplifier output stage clips because supply voltage to reproduce the incoming signal waveform has been exceeded. So if this freak of nature signal representation doesn't exist in nature or music, of what good is it in measuring the accuracy of audio equipment? The answer might surprise you.

In fact, impulse response, or an audio system's response to an impulse signal, is one of the most useful and accurate representations in existence of such a system's linearity and precision - or its fidelity to an original signal that is fed to it.  A lot of  focus has been placed on the pre and post ringing of these "discontinuity signals"  but what you have to understand is that the ripple artifacts are nothing more than an analog system's (all electronics is analog -digital is just a special subset of analog) limitation in attempting to construct the impulse or discontinuity signal waveform. They are a result of the impact produced by the energy storage devices themselves in creating the signal. To create a large energy peak, you need large storage devices. The larget the capacitor for example, the longer in time it takes for it to absorb and discharge electric field energy. This is the same with inductors. One type stores electric field energy - the other magnetic. Smaller value capacitors can react to voltage changes very quickly but are limited in the peak value of energy that can be stored and dissipated. But if you combine a large number of high value and low value devices in a circuit and apply a voltage spike, you wind up with the kind of oscillations you see in an impulse response graph. Small capacitors for example, rapidly reach their charge capacity and can discharge into larger capacitors that are much more slowly building up charge in the transition from no input voltage to full spike value. This "sloshing around", if you will, or oscillation is what happens in circuits built to provide extreme voltage attenuations. In a linear, time invariant system, any rapid change in frequency response or time response - has these characteristics.
So effectively the entire debate about ringing in digital audio is a misnomer - a hoax. The impulse response ripple is not something that happens in real world sounds or in a properly designed audio reproduction chain. Ever since digital oversampling was developed in consumer products in the early 1980s, there has been no need for steep analog filter circuits with their attendant ringing. The problem very simply DOES NOT EXIST. The ringing generated  artificially in an impulse signal is useful in that it provides a very high frequency stimulus to linear audio systems as  a means of measuring high frequency and transient response. IT IN NO WAY BY ITSELF, REPRESENTS THE TIME DOMAIN BEHAVIOR OF THE AUDIO REPRODUCTION CHAIN. An accurate audio reproduction system should fully render the impulse signal in all its pre and post ring glory without alteration. Any audio system that eliminates or significantly alters this pre/post ringing present in the signal that is fed to it is not truly "high fidelity" and is thus bandwidth limited.
cj1965
cj1965
If people think they can contribute to a thread like this with ignorant insults and not get them thrown back in their face, they're delusional
Please don't threaten contributors here. Please.

A high percentage of audiophiles completely disregard the value of ANY objective criteria when it comes to the sound reproduction industry. That is simply not acceptable 
If you find behavior here unacceptable, please alert the moderators rather than threaten contributors here.

With regard to the use of CAPS. Unfortunately, a lot of people don't read or attempt to reasonably comprehend others comments before putting forth stupid, misinformed attacks or snarky comments to help boost their fragile egos.
Please, stop with the insults and the threats.

 
cj1965, Please calm down. If MQA is a hoax, it will not become the industry standard. So far it is only being used to stream hi-res on Tidal. Tidal always offers the albums it has encoded with MQA in 16/44.1 also.

I don’t know how familiar you are with this forum, but we try to keep
discussion low key and friendly. There is another audio forum known for angry arguments, insults and hostility. If you prefer to express yourself that way, I think you would find that forum suits that style better.

So go ahead and present your arguments against MQA, but without the anger towards people who haven’t come to the same conclusion.
@tomcy6

I'm very calm. Use of capitals doesn't mean I'm not very calm. I'm not sure how to highlight or boldface anything for emphasis using this interface. Unlike most of the participants here, I don't bother posting to such forums very often. I just don't have the time to amass 5 or 6 thousands posts on an audio forum so I'm a little green when it comes to finding features like emojis or text editing buttons.

As for anger or hostility towards others - if someone pops into this or any other thread with an insulting comment like:

you're a "truther" spreading propaganda - without anything to back up this statement or factually contradict anything presented in the thread, they will be responded to in kind (see above comment from rbstehno). Essentially all of that users comment was personal attack and nothing was focused on the actual information presented in this thread which centers around ignorance of what a Dirac Delta or Impulse function really is. Whether or not you or others have thin skin and don't like it when someone points out the complete lack of knowledge or understanding on the part of members talking about "pre ring" - I can't help that. The facts are what they are. Impulse signals are what they are - special signals that have absolutely nothing to do with what audio circuitry deals with on a regular basis.

All forums such as this strongly encourage participants to focus on the subject matter and avoid attacking the messengers. Just because you don't like the message, it doesn't give you or rbstehno the right  to personally attack another member's character with unsubstantiated "truther" or "propagandist" labels.
MQA and MP3 have near same level of signal loss.
I did A/B with 24/96 vinyl rip.
MQA is just as lossless as MP3.

Your point that preringing and postringing do not exist is not generally accepted as fact among the people who design and build audio equipment.  If you want to present that opinion to us, fine, but to say it's fact and that anyone who doesn't agree is ignorant is not helpful to your cause.  I'm just suggesting that you lower the intensity of your posts a little.  We don't need an MQA war here.  As I said, there are forums where such a war would be welcome.