MQA is Vaporware

[wushuliu]

1 hour ago, lucretius said:

 

And this too:

 

“We don’t really have to educate the 40, 50 and 60-year-olds because they already know. They have CD collections at home, they already know the benefit."

 

So where the heck are redbook CDs going? Are they insinuating that the production of redbook CDs will come to a halt?

 

IOW, this is the MQA snow job target market. The audiophiles who read the Mejias sections of Stereophile and actually thought the magazine was reaching younger readers. 

 

Apple only just went DRM-free last year. And now comes a new format that involves more DRM hijinx? It's not going to fly with younger ears. It will however, as it is on the brink of now, be gobbled up by audiophiles.

 

Common sense says Tidal has shown the way: MP3 and equivalent will be lower-tiered pricing and DRM-free. Hi-Res will have MQA, cost more with additional tiers and packages, and will allow audiophiles to be locked in no problem so they can milk you over and over again knowing that odds are if the object is shiny enough, you'll pay up.

 

 

[wushuliu]

5 minutes ago, mav52 said:

I really think your on point about this.  The music industry now has a medium to control the pirating of their music and that's using DRM regardless of a few audiophiles might think about what MQA really is or isn't. Its DRM all the way, the industry is speaking and MQA Capt Stuart listened. I hope that makes sense as I'm installing my Hurricane panels at the moment.

 

And look how well this has worked in the past. You've already got major awareness regarding internet rights and privacy due to FCC. People are in a fighting mood. It's been three years of this MQA talk already. If audiophiles and associated companies are already divided, what chance does MQA have?

 

In fact I predict a backlash and ascendancy of the 320mp3 crowd in opposition to hi res if it's made equivalent to MQA. We've done this rodeo already.

[wushuliu]

7 hours ago, fung0 said:

 

This is very well put. Attempts to make this debate about sound quality are mis-conceived.

 

Even the most glowing reports place any possible sonic advantage of MQA at no better than 'extremely subtle' - while the many less-positive reports (not to mention essentially all detailed technical analysis) indicate no better than placebo levels of improvement, at best, and at least subtle levels of sonic degradation, at worst. Even by the most charitable reading of available evidence, MQA is clearly not a significant step forward in audio quality compared to FLAC/PCM or DXD. And very possibly a slight step backward.

 

Against that, we have the format's numerous, overt and absolutely undeniable practical drawbacks. It's lossy, it's proprietary, it's expensive (at every point in the distribution process), and it introduces mild DRM (with a significant chance of truly onerous DRM in future) into a distribution system that is at last almost entirely free of it. To counterbalance these negatives, MQA would need some sizable positives... and, very clearly, there are none to be had. (Other than the thrill of buying yet another shiny new DAC.)

 

The onus is very much on the pro-MQA camp - and especially MQA Ltd. - to provide a strong justification for such a highly disruptive new format. This they have utterly failed to do. When pressed, they repeatedly fall back on lauding the vague, highly subjective and all-but-inaudible 'coloration' of MQA encoded music. That sort of argument is enough to sell one DAC over another, but not even remotely sufficient to sell a whole new industry-wide audio format.

 

Summing up everything stated so far in this thread (and I have read it all): it's fail, fail, fail for MQA. And yes, that's absolutely taking into account all glowingly subjective reports from people who just love MQA. Folks: you're free to love whatever you love - but you'll have to pardon the rest of the world if it asks a better reason to reshape itself than according with your emotions.

 

Hear hear!!!

[wushuliu]

On 10/17/2017 at 8:14 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

I don't believe 4k video was something consumers asked for or need. I'm not sure it's actually that good for anyone other than those with giant screens who sit close, and the people selling goods. 

 

Lossless 1080p, which isn't sent into homes via streaming, satellite, or cable, would be better. When people see how good an over the air HD video looks compared to lossy 4k, they may think twice about 4k. The same can be said for great 44.1 versus high resolution and MQA.

 

MQA will go over like 3-D and the 240hz gimmicks TV manufacturers tried SO hard to push for years, doing their best to convince us that movies were better if they looked like soap operas. Now they are back to focusing on what counts, resolution and image quality (*cough* uncompressed *cough*).

[wushuliu]

FYI. February will be the 4 year Anniversary of MQA...

[wushuliu]

2 hours ago, crenca said:

 

As he has already said - I think he is just spamming this thread.

 

He's had threads shut down elsewhere, so he's moved over to CA...

[wushuliu]

2 hours ago, Charles Hansen said:

 

Hi Nikhil,

 

Thanks for enlightening me. While I've heard of Sanskrit, I didn't know what it actually was. Apparently an almost dead language from many thousands of years ago from the region now called India, and important to certain religions such as Buddhism. I mistakenly assumed it was a Japanese word, although now that I think about it this could not be right as it would be extremely difficult to pronounce in Japanese, where there are no stressed syllables. It's really only readily pronounced with an accent on the second syllable.

 

Since I don't know any Sanskrit (there are apparently around 50,000 in India who are fluent), could you kindly let me know the translation?

 

Thanks!

 

Sanskrit is considered the mother of most languages, including Latin. The word mother, matr, comes from sanskrit. As does father, and Man, amongst many others...

[wushuliu]

4 hours ago, Brian Lucey said:

 

 

Just an aside here ... still on the basic topic of codecs.   Comparing all these files (above) is the game some people play to feel like they are in the process of creation. Yet that is not the case.   It's off topic.

 

1. There is the master file in the mastering session.  The master.

2. There is the released master (may or may not be the same files)

3. There are profit motivated other options released often with the lie that they are better, at higher sample rates..

4. Folks get invested in the AB of these NON MASTER files for sport.  This is simply a case of being USED to make money for others.

 

Higher sample rates DO NOT equal a better sound, a more accurate sound, a more faithful to the source or more respectful to the artists, etc, sound.

 

Reality check please.

 

Boom.

[wushuliu]

Gotta side with Brian on this. I don't see what's controversial about what he's saying. We as audiophiles and consumers have very little clue about the professional studio recording and mastering process - and I'm not talking small independent audiophile-oriented stuff that gets cycled through the usual audio magazines. This makes the MQA and streaming talk all the more frustrating because there is ZERO transparency on the source material.

 

You'd think if MQA was so artist and quality focused they would make every effort to reveal that info. I wouldn't be surprised for instance if someone like Rick Rubin or, say, Beck, or even Kanye, worked with 'lower res' (to us) as part of their palatte. Hell yeah I'd want to hear that directly, not some hi-res conversion just to appease a demographic that is convinced the higher the bit rate the better.

[wushuliu]

10 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

We always want our music in the format that it was recorded in. This is why sites that cater to audiophiles usually provide technical information/session information on the recording that they sell.

 

I'm not aware of sites that provide that kind of information for recordings that aren't niche audiophile-oriented. 

[wushuliu]

1 minute ago, firedog said:

You are talking about modern music - mostly electronic multitrack recordings with a lot of processing. 

 

He's referring to the overwhelming majority of music period. Unless The Beatles are no longer considered 'modern'.

[wushuliu]

22 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Holy crap, look at Youtube!!!  The actual blog post that graphic comes from is here.

 

And I didn't expect to see Amazon Prime Music ahead of Apple Music for streaming.  Overall, this is a really depressing bit of truth for audiophiles.

 

Which is why I don't fault Lucey for his perspective. We make up .00000notworthit of the streaming community. Difference is we are willing to pay whatever it takes for any shiny new object. 

 

Let's be clear, it's been 4 years. By any mainstream metric, MQA is dead in the water. Same as DSD. But for this micro-niche community, slapping the logo on a product and buying a license means you can have a new product cycle, added value, and a whole new infusion of cash that makes the licensing cost worth it.

 

It's easy money, and for that I don't blame the audio companies. The trade reporting and audiophile community response however, have no excuse. I have never seen a topic over which both objective-minded AND subjective-minded people have been in such agreement: MQA is a scam.

[wushuliu]

Lucey didn't follow audiophile forum etiquette. Given his background, his posts made a lot of sense and his impatience understandable. How do you curb your arguments for a group of people who think debating MQA merits hundreds of pages despite that no matter what angle you're coming from it's been easily discredited? I mean, from an outside perspective it has to look ridiculous. It's like the People's Front of Judea vs. The Judean People's Front bit from Life of Brian. Who in their right mind has patience for that?

[wushuliu]

1 hour ago, Foggie said:

A funny story but seems (to me at least) relevant in a twisted way. 

 

Was traveling recently and went to get some coffee (well brand chain).  I ordered a plain 'ol coffee and went on my way.  I took a sip and something wasn't write.  Went back to the desk and stated I ordered a black coffee (house brand), what is this?.  The very nice (millennial) gal explained to me "oh I added some of this flavored cream and a little of this and a little of that, I think it tastes the best this way"!!  

 

Literally stunned at what just happened, I was speechless.  WTF.  I kid you not, true story. 

 

First thing I thought of was this debacle.  I set down my DRM'd coffee and politely ask for a reg coffee and went on my way.  Still in awe of that experience. 

 

Arguably the best post about this entire debacle and the tech world at large. Whether it's Facebook, Netflix, or MQA.