MQA is Vaporware

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, Brahan Seer said:

You asked for an example.
vitriol (noun) = bitter criticism or malice

There is zero vitriol in that. Describing truth bluntly can’t be considered vitriol. 

[MikeyFresh]

1 hour ago, Brahan Seer said:

Apple and Microsoft have countered criticism. My point is, how many folks on here are actively boycotting these companies?

 

I see no possible way to compare MQA to Apple or Microsoft, that's a poor analogy, and one which attempts to paint MQA as some kind of technology leader in the same vein as those tech giants, which they are not.

 

With a pathetic £459,820 in turnover for their last reporting year, MQA does not belong in any tech giant or technology innovator discussion. Whether one likes or supports the business practices of Apple or Microsoft is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand here.

[Brahan Seer]

My takes from my latest journey into the dark forest that is the MQAIV thread:

1. There is a lot of paranoia
2. Say you like the sound of something and someone quickly explains why you shouldn't
3. There is a lot of paranoia 
4. See above
   
    

[James lee]

42 minutes ago, Cebolla said:

 

Except TIDAL doesn't - passing hi-res MQA tracks through the 16bit/44.1kHz TIDAL HiFi quality connection bit depth reducing resampling mangle just makes them corrupted MQA tracks.

This is why I left Tidal, I heard the downgrade before I even figured it out.. so angry.

[Brahan Seer]

4 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said:

 

I see no possible way to compare MQA to Apple or Microsoft, that's a poor analogy, and one which attempts to paint MQA as some kind of technology leader in the same vein as those tech giants, which they are not.
It certainly doesn't paint MQA as a tech leader. And, I think it works well as an analogy, thanks. For example, life isn't a box of chocolates, not at all. But the analogy works. I fear that you may be taking things overly literally. 

 

With a pathetic £459,820 in turnover for their last reporting year, MQA does not belong in any tech giant or technology innovator discussion. Whether one likes or supports the business practices of Apple or Microsoft is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand here.
In my opinion, it is relevant. Thanks. :-)

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, Brahan Seer said:

My takes from my latest journey into the dark forest that is the MQAIV thread:

1. There is a lot of paranoia
2. Say you like the sound of something and someone quickly explains why you shouldn't
3. There is a lot of paranoia 
4. See above
   
    

When someone tells you and shows you who they are, believe them. In this case that someone is mQa. 
 

Why should people sit back until it’s too late?

 

The tech has been debunked. 

[KeenObserver]

To save time I'm going to go back to the responses to LS, copy them, and paste them.

 

It's all the same BS over and over.

[Brahan Seer]

31 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

There is zero vitriol in that. Describing truth bluntly can’t be considered vitriol. 

You genuinely believe that there is 'zero vitriol' in your below pasted statement? Come on, man, at least be honest - that's what you insist of MQA, right? 'describing the truth bluntly' - 🤣

It really blows my mind that audiophiles are onboard with MQA. It has zero to do with sound quality. If MQA was truly better, the content owners would be archiving content in MQA as fast as possible. The fact that none of them will archive a single album in MQA should be all that one needs to know. 
 
Think about it. MQA is all about control and money. The labels want control of the Crown Jewels and as for profit companies they want more money (nothing wrong with either). MQA enables both of these because the MQA files released are far less than the Crown Jewels and the labels are part owners of MQA. The labels can't lose with MQA. If the labels can't lose, how can any audiophile think he can win?
 
With Meridian losing tens of millions of dollars it was time to mine the intellectual property for money. MQA was just sitting there on the shelf. Clearly a solution for content owners, not consumers. That's what Bob invents. Solutions for content owners. How do I know this? Because people can't keep secrets. People on the inside leak information like a sieve, especially when they know lies are being told and something isn't right about the situation. 
 
All the companies that jumped onboard with MQA DACs, will now be struggling to find other ways to differentiate themselves because MQA homogenizes digital playback in a mediocre way. Forced leaky filters leaves one less point of differentiation for HiFi manufacturers. 
 

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, Brahan Seer said:

You genuinely believe that there is 'zero vitriol' in your below pasted statement? Come on, man, at least be honest - that's what you insist of MQA, right? 'describing the truth bluntly' - 🤣

It really blows my mind that audiophiles are onboard with MQA. It has zero to do with sound quality. If MQA was truly better, the content owners would be archiving content in MQA as fast as possible. The fact that none of them will archive a single album in MQA should be all that one needs to know. 
 
Think about it. MQA is all about control and money. The labels want control of the Crown Jewels and as for profit companies they want more money (nothing wrong with either). MQA enables both of these because the MQA files released are far less than the Crown Jewels and the labels are part owners of MQA. The labels can't lose with MQA. If the labels can't lose, how can any audiophile think he can win?
 
With Meridian losing tens of millions of dollars it was time to mine the intellectual property for money. MQA was just sitting there on the shelf. Clearly a solution for content owners, not consumers. That's what Bob invents. Solutions for content owners. How do I know this? Because people can't keep secrets. People on the inside leak information like a sieve, especially when they know lies are being told and something isn't right about the situation. 
 
All the companies that jumped onboard with MQA DACs, will now be struggling to find other ways to differentiate themselves because MQA homogenizes digital playback in a mediocre way. Forced leaky filters leaves one less point of differentiation for HiFi manufacturers. 
 

You can’t repeat untruths over and over to make them true. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

@Brahan Seer The truth isn’t vitriol. 

 

[KeenObserver]

18 minutes ago, Brahan Seer said:

My takes from my latest journey into the dark forest that is the MQAIV thread:

1. There is a lot of paranoia
2. Say you like the sound of something and someone quickly explains why you shouldn't
3. There is a lot of paranoia 
4. See above
   
    

 

If someone is going to smash the windows on my car, I'm going to confront them.

If someone is going to molest my child, I'm going to confront them.

If someone is going to take away my free choice, I'm going to confront them.

[Brahan Seer]

4 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You can’t repeat untruths over and over to make them true. 

Well, you guys would know - you've been trying now for 996 pages.
x

[KeenObserver]

1 minute ago, Brahan Seer said:

Well, you guys would know - you've been trying now for 996 pages.
x

 

Sounds like vitriol

[Brahan Seer]

1 minute ago, KeenObserver said:

 

If someone is going to smash the windows on my car, I'm going to confront them.

If someone is going to molest my child, I'm going to confront them.

If someone is going to take away my free choice, I'm going to confront them.

Holy guacamole. Like I said, lots of paranoia. 

[KeenObserver]

4 minutes ago, Brahan Seer said:

Well, you guys would know - you've been trying now for 996 pages.
x

 

Only responding to discredited BS that MQA fanboys have been posting.

[Brahan Seer]

3 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

 

Sounds like vitriol

Come on, it wasn't. It was funny, tho.
Laters, Vapourdudes.

[KeenObserver]

Just now, Brahan Seer said:

Holy guacamole. Like I said, lots of paranoia. 

 

Perhaps you recall the saying from 250 years ago: "No taxation without representation".

Of course, being from where you are, you might have a different perspective.

[MikeyFresh]

12 minutes ago, Brahan Seer said:

Holy guacamole. Like I said, lots of paranoia. 

Nope just substance, something you've not come close to mustering here.

 

16 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

Sounds like vitriol

Or trolling with no actual point to make, other than the very same old tired MQA talking points seeking to shift the narrative when they've got nothing else to present:

 

"Hey I think it sounds good", "I like the cool tech", "MQA is a company like Apple or Microsoft", "You guys are full of vitriol", "You guys are paranoid"... and so on.

 

Rinse and repeat, but don't ever respond to any valid criticisms or concerns at all ever, just pretend they don't actually exist, or that they absolutely pale in comparison to the supposed problem of an uncivil, mean, paranoid, internet cadre.

[Pierre LeMonf]

13 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said:

Nope just substance, something you've not come close to mustering here.

 

Or trolling with no actual point to make, other than the very same old tired MQA talking points seeking to shift the narrative when they've got nothing else to present:

 

"Hey I think it sounds good", "I like the cool tech", "MQA is a company like Apple or Microsoft", "You guys are full of vitriol", "You guys are paranoid"... and so on.

 

Rinse and repeat, but don't ever respond to any valid criticisms or concerns at all ever, just pretend they don't actually exist, or that they absolutely pale in comparison to the supposed problem of an uncivil, mean, paranoid, internet cadre.

Spot on Mr. Fresh. Bravo.

 

In fact, I believe the poster at Stereiphile, "Mieswall" are one and the same, and I would not be surprised if they are the notorious shill Peter Veith. Or Bob Stuart. Same tactics, detailed above, and same posting style.  Rather pathetic.

[firedog]

5 hours ago, Brahan Seer said:

The madness is, no, hold on, I've lost count of the madnesses. :-) I'm not interested in that sort of aggressive demand. I like the sound of MQA. I like the tech. I think that this forum is often massively unkind, unprofessional, unetc, etc, etc - so, I am addressing that. I do that same in other avenues of life, including other forumy stuff.

But the fact the MQA has been caught in out and out lies doesn't bother you, and we should just all be "kind" to them, regardless. 

Your double standard is very interesting.

[firedog]

3 hours ago, Brahan Seer said:

You genuinely believe that there is 'zero vitriol' in your below pasted statement? Come on, man, at least be honest - that's what you insist of MQA, right? 'describing the truth bluntly' - 🤣

It really blows my mind that audiophiles are onboard with MQA. It has zero to do with sound quality. If MQA was truly better, the content owners would be archiving content in MQA as fast as possible. The fact that none of them will archive a single album in MQA should be all that one needs to know. 
 
Think about it. MQA is all about control and money. The labels want control of the Crown Jewels and as for profit companies they want more money (nothing wrong with either). MQA enables both of these because the MQA files released are far less than the Crown Jewels and the labels are part owners of MQA. The labels can't lose with MQA. If the labels can't lose, how can any audiophile think he can win?
 
With Meridian losing tens of millions of dollars it was time to mine the intellectual property for money. MQA was just sitting there on the shelf. Clearly a solution for content owners, not consumers. That's what Bob invents. Solutions for content owners. How do I know this? Because people can't keep secrets. People on the inside leak information like a sieve, especially when they know lies are being told and something isn't right about the situation. 
 
All the companies that jumped onboard with MQA DACs, will now be struggling to find other ways to differentiate themselves because MQA homogenizes digital playback in a mediocre way. Forced leaky filters leaves one less point of differentiation for HiFi manufacturers. 
 

There is no vitrol there. Just a negative evaluation of MQA based on facts. Apparently you can't abide any criticism of MQA and call it vitrol.

 

Bob Stuart and MQA have literally been caught in lies. So if I say that they lied and are liars, is that vitrol?

[DuckToller]

It was quite amusing reading the Wiki about Brahan Seer.

Excellent choice.

Smart move.

BS.

[botrytis]

29 minutes ago, firedog said:

There is no vitrol there. Just a negative evaluation of MQA based on facts. Apparently you can't abide any criticism of MQA and call it vitrol.

 

Bob Stuart and MQA have literally been caught in lies. So if I say that they lied and are liars, is that vitrol?

 

Vitriol against people trying to use the same ol' lame excuses and not actually discussing the merits or demerits (more like it) of this, I won't call it a scheme (that's too obvious) technique and compare to what is currently out there. They won't because they know M-QAnon is an inferior product, more to go against the likes of MP3's, but MP3's are really more about size than sound.

 

There has been plenty of investigations into M-QAnon and their claims, they keep making along with their acolytes, have all been proven false. It causes ringing, it adds noise, it can be a DRM system, it was processed through a DSP system, so one can't use one, say with active speaker systems, and others.

[DuckToller]

41 minutes ago, firedog said:

So if I say that they lied and are liars, is that vitrol?

No, but for that remark you'll be "burnt in a spiked tar barrel" on behalf of BS' wifey.

[KeenObserver]

"Others have also questioned whether the Seer existed at all"

 

So, what is Brahan Seer, a composite of every MQA shill that ever existed?

 

I have never seen anything as pathetic as MQA. And the fanboys that promote MQA.