MQA is Vaporware

[rickca]

Get over yourself already.

[rickca]

Have any of the recording artists who own TIDAL made supportive statements about MQA? Are any of them on a Warner label?

 

How did MQA get early buy-in from partners like Technics, Onkyo and Pioneer? I think that would be an interesting story.

 

It must not cost much in royalties to add MQA support to a product. How can Audioquest offer MQA on the DragonFly at no additional cost? Is MQA giving early partners a discount for business development?

 

There are just a lot of questions around how MQA momentum got started ... beyond the enthusiastic support of the audio press.

[rickca]

Here's a summary.

 

I fart in your general direction. Now go away, before I taunt you a second time!

[rickca]

Can we make this more constructive? Michael Lavorgna isn't going to change his style or personality, right?

 

If we are concerned that MQA represents a clash between consumer and corporate interests, we need to collectively figure out how to effectively counteract its momentum.

 

The question here has been whether this momentum is real or just a lot of propaganda and MQA business development investment activity.

[rickca]

I suppose the Sony announcement will come at Munich High End.  They probably signed quite some time ago, but MQA wants a constant drumbeat of press releases so that MQA is continuously in the spotlight while they get their act together.  This managed perception of momentum really is very tiresome.

 

Clearly, this is just speculation.  The only certainty is yet another round of rapturous excitement from audio journalists.

[rickca]

3 minutes ago, Sal1950 said:

Rt66,  Looks like the guys have run out of gas in the debate for the second or third time now in this thread. LOL

Not to worry, after a bit of a reprieve another MQA drum beater story will emerge and we can start beating up on it all over again.  

Wait for the MQA announcements at Munich High End.  Then it will be game on again.

 

If Sony signs on, we'll hear all kinds of crap about how that means DSD is dead from people who don't really understand either MQA or DSD.

[rickca]

13 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Here you go.

Munich PR _11 May 2017_FINAL.docx

Thanks a lot, Kal!  Looks like Audioquest Dragonfly MQA firmware finally available 5/17.

[rickca]

8 hours ago, fung0 said:

People keep saying "Don't worry, our high-res PCM-FLAC files won't go away." But they will. That's the whole point.

I completely agree.  The labels like MQA because MQA distribution files are readily identifiable as such.  To combat piracy, the labels will eventually withdraw authorization to distribute non-MQA files, whether it is streaming or downloads.  Then they will issue takedown requests for anything out there that isn't MQA.

 

The campaign claiming that MQA sounds just as good if not better is just propaganda to counter any resistance.  MQA has enlisted audio journalists to enthusiastically embrace MQA as a technical wonder.  If they don't, they risk losing their industry insider status ... no more nondisclosure agreements, no more software betas, no more invitations to launch events ... your career is over.

 

Of course, there's no proof that this is where we're headed, so the journalists just dismiss this as nonsense.  But it makes perfect sense.  The stakes are too high, there's so much money to be made.

[rickca]

25 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

The question then is how do they recover these costs?

Perfect question ... what is the business case for converting your catalog to MQA?

 

The labels can easily get a good ROI by combating piracy.  Many companies spend a lot of money on tracking down the source and distribution of counterfeit products.  So if it isn't MQA, it's counterfeit once you no longer authorize distribution of anything but MQA.  What if the free tiers of music services were no longer viable in an MQA-only world, and many of those listeners signed up for a paid subscription?

[rickca]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I don't disagree labels like MQA, but I can't figure out why they all wouldn't be onboard if it's as cut and dry as everyone thinks. 

You would think if anyone is sensitive about being hacked and losing control of product distribution, it would be Sony.  I agree it's puzzling.

[rickca]

17 minutes ago, mansr said:

The person it was in reply to has spent the last couple of days incessantly belittling and ridiculing anyone who doesn't sing the praises of MQA. I don't mind that you deleted my post, but please consider why I posted it, even if it was a bit uncivil.

I didn't see the post, but there's definitely someone in here who matches that description.  FACT.

 

Let's be particularly kind with CA newbies.  We want them to feel welcome.  Some will become valuable contributors.

[rickca]

Maybe MQA should adopt Blurred Lines as their official theme song.

[rickca]

3 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

The labels still have to spend money to track the sources and distributors of your illegally copied music. Nothing has changed.

I think you did an effective job of identifying the holes in my argument.  I was just trying to come up with an anti-piracy business case for the labels to adopt MQA.

[rickca]

Sounds like Sony and Merlin have joined the MQA partner list, announced today at Munich High End.  Could someone at the show confirm this please?

[rickca]

I posted this in another thread, but I think it belongs here.  @PeterSt please comment, thanks.

 

Can't the filter be customized by the DAC manufacturer implementing MQA?  For example, Berkeley plans to offer MQA on the Alpha DAC Reference Series 2 in 2Q2017.  It will be an MQA renderer.  I can't believe Berkeley is going to use some awful filter on their $19,500 DAC just so they can tick the MQA box in their specs.

 

I know every implementation needs to approved by MQA.  I can imagine the DAC manufacturers just love that part. 

[rickca]

17 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Should be another content related announcement Wednesday. 

Did you ever get a Sony press release in Munich re MQA?

[rickca]

If this thread becomes another intellectual hangout I'll have to leave!  

 

 

 

[rickca]

1 hour ago, Jud said:

I want to know the wine that can get you your own chamber concert with a Strad.

I suggest La Tache.

[rickca]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

You should research when Sony actually signed the deal with MQA. You may change your story. 

I heard that both Sony and UMG signed a few months after the Warner deal.   Don't ask me for my source.

[rickca]

38 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

I'd love to, but then I'd burn my sources and methods :~)

I get my stuff straight from the NSA, don't you?

[rickca]

54 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Tidal is much more about fun and agenda than profits. 

I could have a lot of fun with $200 million.

[rickca]

56 minutes ago, #Yoda# said:

I don't know if anyone mentioned it before, but the labels have started a two-tier strategy for new releases as I expected in an other forum about a year ago.

This is an interesting development.  Too early to freak out, but this could be a step toward making MQA the sole authorized way of distributing hi-res beyond 24/44.1 (or 48).  That would be a bummer.

[rickca]

Just now, mansr said:

Don't say nobody warned you.

Hey, I warned me.  If you look at my earlier posts, this is exactly the concern I expressed.

[rickca]

2 hours ago, Fitzcaraldo215 said:

Omigosh!

If you make fun of me, I will simply integrate you into my paranoid delusions.  You know that's how it works.

[rickca]

1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said:

Universal hasn’t started converting files to MQA.  Neither has Sony. The Warner catalog converted up to April was converted by MQA.

Thanks very much @Rt66indierock.  It's nice to get some real information about MQA and the hi res streaming market.