Jump to content
Rt66indierock

MQA is Vaporware

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

 You know that is not so.  What is your purpose in asking?

Your posts remind me of him.  And I don't know it's not so.  Just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Paul R said:

 

Trust exactly whom? And in exactly what respect? 

 

Trust the technical minds minds and at least the potentional of the technology for sound reproduction? Sure.

 

Trust the marketing minds and the potential for abuse? Probably not.

 

Trust most of the reviewers? Yep, they try hard to be both accurate and mostly objective. Some are just stuffed shirts with a desperate need for recognition, but those are few and very far between in our hobby world. 

 

There is is no way to wrap up the issue into simple little sound bytes suitable for the evening news. The subject needs more of an NPR in depth reporting treatment.

 

You shouldn’t trust the technical minds. At best they were years late and Bob Stuarts track record of producing technology for sound reproduction speaks for itself. The market has rejected his ideas. The Meridian financial statements document this very well.

 

The marketing folks have shown their true colors. I find it fascinating that I have better access to the MQA Ltd people than the audio press does, and I have been open that my goal is the liquidation of MQA Ltd, and the intellectual property not end up in the hands of the labels or the major shareholder (an investment fund).

 

Trust most of the reviewers? I received a lot of apologies at RMAF 18 for their overly enthusiastic support of MQA. After I said at the end of RMAF 17 I’ll let anybody walk away right now. Many did and we talked about who wouldn’t.  From 2014 to 2016 I didn’t see any reviewers trying hard to objective and accurate when talking and writing about MQA.

 

I don’t ask anyone to trust me. Listen for yourself, volume match, do your own measuring, check my facts then report back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think I would trust Bob Stuart with pretty much any audio subject, as the man is brilliant technically, and has shown that in the audio world time and time again since the 1970's. That's a long track record of achievement, and MQA did not fail in a technical sense, but rather in implementation and marketing. Technically, it has the potential to provide better sound. It also has the potential to lock people into an unpleasant situation with non-MQA music files. 

 

Honestly? I don't know who you are, or what possible motivation you could have to be attacking Bob Stuart with what appears to be such anger. Stuart is, and pretty much always has been, one of the good guys. Sounds like some kind of personal agenda just from what you wrote above.  I haven't been very active on the system for the past year or so, so I might have missed when you introduced yourself. 

 

-Paul

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would dispute with you that it is not the MQA algorithm that has failed, but rather, the intentionally crippled implementations of it.

 

I believe most (if not all) of the implementations were designed to "protect" the music industry interests,  along the same lines as why the music industry has consistently refused to provide high quality master recordings for decades. 

 

MQA *could* be used to release master level recordings, but the industry just will not sanction that. The result? Same old crap. People's reputations sullied, and a lot of anger in the community. 

 

IMNSHO, YMMV, etc.  - Paul 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Paul R said:

I would dispute with you that it is not the MQA algorithm that has failed, but rather, the intentionally crippled implementations of it.

 

I believe most (if not all) of the implementations were designed to "protect" the music industry interests,  along the same lines as why the music industry has consistently refused to provide high quality master recordings for decades. 

 

MQA *could* be used to release master level recordings, but the industry just will not sanction that. The result? Same old crap. People's reputations sullied, and a lot of anger in the community. 

 

IMNSHO, YMMV, etc.  - Paul 

Sorry, but you're not making any sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, mansr said:

Sorry, but you're not making any sense.

 

Okay, let me restate it. The technology of MQA is absolutely capable of doing everything that it was claimed it could do - namely put master quality music in the hands of audiophiles and music lovers. 

 

The implementation of MQA was intentionally crippled, and not by Stuart. Or at least, not by Stuart alone. 

 

Not sure how to say it any clearer than that. 

 

P.S.  Do I support MQA? No. I think it is the DIVX of the audio world.  -Paul

Edited by Paul R
Dang typos, add a PS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2018 at 8:38 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

In a world without competition this offering would be tiered / more expensive. However, some VERY LARGE and VERY WEALTHY companies will give away or include stuff like this at no visible cost to the consumer, in order to one-up the other guys. 

 

Hi Chris

 

Have you heard anything more on this?

 

Is 2019 the year MQA Ltd signs a big contract with one of these wealthy companies you mentioned above?

 

Or has this fizzled out?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Hi em - Given that I’m no longer on MQA’s Christmas card list I don’t get any inside information now days. 

 

I’ve talked to a few people about what I originally heard and got some interesting feedback. Nobody seems to think these big companies will bite on MQA.

 

For example, MQA Ltd gave a demo to Amazon. Amazon was interested in MQA because it could light the blue light on Amazon devices. Amazon said it couldn’t explain high resolution to its customers but that blue MQA light was all it needed. 

 

However, nobody seems to think Amazon will ever pay MQA to include its technology when Amazon could just create its own blue light and play regular flac or something similar.  

 

 

Thanks Chris. The Amazon blue light story made me chuckle.

 

Spotify and Apple Music subscriber numbers continue to grow, so I don't see either of those in any rush to change anything in terms of sound quality. But no rush doesn't mean they're always looking at ways to get some sort of competitive advantage.

 

We know Spotify trialled CD quality streaming in 2 years ago. 

 

Apple Music getting into headphones (first with Beats and soon their own branded headphones, it is rumoured), they might want better 'end to end' sound quality - from 'Mastered for iTunes' to the headphones. They can probably do that skipping MQA, even offering better AAC quality than presently offered. Beats headphones sound quality has improved a lot the last years, so the trajectory is good, even though I still much prefer my MrSpeakers Aeon Closed cans.

 

Of 'the big 4' that leaves Amazon and Google, who have the cashola but lacking in paid music streaming subscriber numbers.  Let's see where things go.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×