MQA is Vaporware

[Rt66indierock]

First thank you Chris for allowing this debate it had to be hard on you. For the record a process or format needs to be .25% of the population to be real enough to not be considered vaporware.

 

Vincent1234 some of your comments frighten me. Since they are not related to my original post I will address them in a separate thread. But your comments on MQA were helpful to the debate.

 

I wanted the debate about MQA to focus on the amount of music available and providence of the source used to create the MQA file. Special thanks to those who have added their knowledge.

 

Jason Victor Serinus at Stereophile on January 6, 2017 in his CES coverage dutifully reported that there are 15,000 albums available in hi-resolution and the potential market for premium music service is 12 million people. I believe both numbers and the reports that paid streaming services reached 100 million subscribers at the end of 2016. I don’t think it was intended to show 7 out of 8 paying subscribers don’t care about premium streaming services.

 

I am wondering three things. How many people will pay to stream those 15,000 hi-res albums currently available? How much of the catalog will have to be hi-res to interest those 12 million potential customers? And will MQA get a significant piece of this market?

[mav52]

 

I am wondering three things. How many people will pay to stream those 15,000 hi-res albums currently available? How much of the catalog will have to be hi-res to interest those 12 million potential customers? And will MQA get a significant piece of this market?

 

Well its hard to say. According to Digital Music News over 100 millions people are streaming music and this article also notes there are approximately 103.1 million people paying, worldwide. It would be difficult to know what they are streaming. But people are streaming music and paying for it. MQA depending on this little trial Tidal has going on will provide some data so its to early to tell. Will a bunch of high school kids spend $20 a month to get their music and who knows what MQA will cost after the trial is over, will the price stay the same , will other labels come on board to support MQA, we as users don't have a clue.

 

More Than 100 Million People Now Pay for Streaming Music Services

[Vincent1234]

Vincent1234 some of your comments frighten me. Since they are not related to my original post I will address them in a separate thread. But your comments on MQA were helpful to the debate.

 

Hi Indierock,

 

It wasn't my intention to frighten anyone with my comments. [emoji6] If I did I do apologize.

I will always be open to discuss any topic raised here further.

Thanks for your compliment. [emoji4]

 

Cheers,

Vincent

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[crenca]

#1) I am wondering three things. How many people will pay to stream those 15,000 hi-res albums currently available?

 

#2) How much of the catalog will have to be hi-res to interest those 12 million potential customers?

 

#3) And will MQA get a significant piece of this market?

 

Excellent questions Rt66indierock. Here are my speculative answers (they are speculative questions obviusly):

 

#1) Assuming you mean a premium service (as in $extra$) equivalent to the current Tidal 16/44 "HIFI" service, about what ever pay now - in other words a "Hi Res" service (MQA or something else) does not add or subtract significantly from what ever Tidal's market penetration into the 12 million potentials (using Serinus' #'s) is currently.

 

#2) Frighteningly little - most customers will sooth themselves with a handful of favorites, and hang on to the ever present promises of more to come.

 

#3) It will have all of the market, as it is the only game in town. There is no competing DRM standard (publicly known) with which it will have to compete. I am convinced now that the current 16/44 Tidal streaming is an aberration - the labels have allowed it as an experiment but are uncomfortable and will not do any more of it without a DRM standard with which to sooth their anxiety (even though this is actually not important in reality).

[Vincent1234]

I am convinced now that the current 16/44 Tidal streaming is an aberration - the labels have allowed it as an experiment but are uncomfortable and will not do any more of it without a DRM standard with which to sooth their anxiety (even though this is actually not important in reality).

 

Hi Crenca, why do you think this regular 16/44,1 Tidal was just an experiment and why would the record companies force Tidal instead to use MQA with DRM? In both cases (current 16/44,1 and new MQA files) any DRM would not be needed IMO, as the files are only streamed anyway and as such can only be copied using some sort of recorder.

Or are you pointing here at music files that Tidal users can buy as a download? I have no idea how substantial this download part is compared to their overall business..

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[crenca]

Hi Crenca, why do you think this regular 16/44,1 Tidal was just an experiment and why would the record companies force Tidal instead to use MQA with DRM?

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

 

Because as Absolute Sound's Robert Harley argues (rightly IMO) in his:

 

Master Quality Authenticated (MQA): The View From 30,000 Feet | The Absolute Sound

 

It is all about the "business realities", not about the sound quality. First and foremost on the list of "business realities", is the unreality (i.e. the false believe/understanding) of "the industry" that piracy and open format/standards is the source (or even a major part) of their woes (i.e. the fact that their market keeps shrinking year after year). Soooo, they are seeking a DRM "solution" to this unreality like a vampire seeks blood...

 

Before anyone objects, I am not arguing that piracy is a non-problem - what I am saying is that it is a problem like a minor skin rash is to stage 4 cancer. The cancer is "Video killed the Radio Star"...

[Vincent1234]

Because as Absolute Sound's Robert Harley argues (rightly IMO) in his:

 

Master Quality Authenticated (MQA): The View From 30,000 Feet | The Absolute Sound

 

It is all about the "business realities", not about the sound quality. First and foremost on the list of "business realities", is the unreality (i.e. the false believe/understanding) of "the industry" that piracy and open format/standards is the source (or even a major part) of their woes (i.e. the fact that their market keeps shrinking year after year). Soooo, they are seeking a DRM "solution" to this unreality like a vampire seeks blood...

 

Before anyone objects, I am not arguing that piracy is a non-problem - what I am saying is that it is a problem like a minor skin rash is to stage 4 cancer. The cancer is "Video killed the Radio Star"...

Yes, I get that. But what about my remark that Tidal streaming only of any sound format does not require any DRM at all?

 

IMO DRM would only make sense in case of downloads, not in case of streaming.

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[Abtr]

Does anyone see a way to search the Tidal MQA catalogue for specific titles (in the Windows app)?

[Samuel T Cogley]

Does anyone see a way to search the Tidal MQA catalogue for specific titles (in the Windows app)?

 

+1

[NOMBEDES]

I am loving my VPI Classic 4 turntable more and more. All this fear and loathing is just not worth it.

 

As for benefits of High Rez recordings/MQA? Only a small number of all recordings meet audiophile standards.

 

Only a very small number of recent recordings meet audiophile standards.

 

Therefore, why would anyone pay for a high rez download or stream of a poor recording?

 

Would not a CD or LP of a quality recording would be a reasonable alternative to a monthly charge for dreck?

[barrows]

I am loving my VPI Classic 4 turntable more and more. All this fear and loathing is just not worth it.

 

As for benefits of High Rez recordings/MQA? Only a small number of all recordings meet audiophile standards.

 

Only a very small number of recent recordings meet audiophile standards.

 

Therefore, why would anyone pay for a high rez download or stream of a poor recording?

 

Would not a CD or LP of a quality recording would be a reasonable alternative to a monthly charge for dreck?

 

Because sampling any recording at a higher rate makes it sound better. The digital filters applied can be much more benign with even 24/88.2 and 24/96, and this leads to much less digital artifacts (and hence less "digital" sounding in the old school use of that term). I am not advocating for MQA/streaming, but for real hi res when available.

[NOMBEDES]

Because sampling any recording at a higher rate makes it sound better. The digital filters applied can be much more benign with even 24/88.2 and 24/96, and this leads to much less digital artifacts (and hence less "digital" sounding in the old school use of that term). I am not advocating for MQA/streaming, but for real hi res when available.

 

 

Well said @brrrows. You may be right. I, however, remain doubtful. If anyone can make the Rolling Stone's recent "Blue and Lonesome" sound good, more power to them. Great music, but a compressed disaster. I fear that a higher sampling rate would only enhance the horror.

[Jud]

Because sampling any recording at a higher rate makes it sound better. The digital filters applied can be much more benign with even 24/88.2 and 24/96, and this leads to much less digital artifacts (and hence less "digital" sounding in the old school use of that term). I am not advocating for MQA/streaming, but for real hi res when available.

That may be the thing that makes the least sense to me about MQA. All the stuff they are doing at fairly low sampling/upsampling rates seems like a solution to a last-decade problem. Lossless compression of 24/96 might resolve problems of file size as well as or better than what they're doing, and MQA could apply any filter they cared to. They might not be able to charge quite as much for it, but that might actually result in higher volume of uptake by industry and consumers.

 

Oh well, what do I know?

[semente]

It's not the licensing (at least from what they say) but limited content availability that Jason and Mike have pointed to, as they have with DSD.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

But apparently the future could be in uprezzing Redbook to DSD so they might have missed the train, or more likely those that buy their PCM-only DACs are missing the train... Maybe.

[Rt66indierock]

But apparently the future could be in uprezzing Redbook to DSD so they might have missed the train, or more likely those that buy their PCM-only DACs are missing the train... Maybe.

 

Where is this train you are talking about?

[crenca]

Where is this train you are talking about?

 

Well it is hear @ Computer Audiophile, where at least 2 dozen or so of us do it every day

 

Seriously, I have found the upsampling-to-DSD-via-HQPlayer/Roon crowd in various unexpected places around the web, so it does have an honest following in the niche of Audiophiledom.

 

Only Miska can confirm just how small (or large) the niche is by telling us his sales figures...

 

But this as compared to MQA is a non-starter, because MQA is not about SQ anyways...

[Rt66indierock]

I am loving my VPI Classic 4 turntable more and more. All this fear and loathing is just not worth it.

 

As for benefits of High Rez recordings/MQA? Only a small number of all recordings meet audiophile standards.

 

Only a very small number of recent recordings meet audiophile standards.

 

Therefore, why would anyone pay for a high rez download or stream of a poor recording?

 

Would not a CD or LP of a quality recording would be a reasonable alternative to a monthly charge for dreck?

 

Good points.

[Ralf11]

Where is this train you are talking about?

 

this one?

 

[Rt66indierock]

Well it is hear @ Computer Audiophile, where at least 2 dozen or so of us do it every day

 

Seriously, I have found the upsampling-to-DSD-via-HQPlayer/Roon crowd in various unexpected places around the web, so it does have an honest following in the niche of Audiophiledom.

 

Only Miska can confirm just how small (or large) the niche is by telling us his sales figures...

 

But this as compared to MQA is a non-starter, because MQA is not about SQ anyways...

 

Personally I'm not impressed with a user base that doesn't contain the word thousand.

 

I would never ask Miska his sales figures, that would be unprofessional.

[Rt66indierock]

this one?

 

 

 

Nope

[witchdoctor]

First thank you Chris for allowing this debate it had to be hard on you. For the record a process or format needs to be .25% of the population to be real enough to not be considered vaporware.

 

Vincent1234 some of your comments frighten me. Since they are not related to my original post I will address them in a separate thread. But your comments on MQA were helpful to the debate.

 

I wanted the debate about MQA to focus on the amount of music available and providence of the source used to create the MQA file. Special thanks to those who have added their knowledge.

 

Jason Victor Serinus at Stereophile on January 6, 2017 in his CES coverage dutifully reported that there are 15,000 albums available in hi-resolution and the potential market for premium music service is 12 million people. I believe both numbers and the reports that paid streaming services reached 100 million subscribers at the end of 2016. I don’t think it was intended to show 7 out of 8 paying subscribers don’t care about premium streaming services.

 

I am wondering three things. How many people will pay to stream those 15,000 hi-res albums currently available? How much of the catalog will have to be hi-res to interest those 12 million potential customers? And will MQA get a significant piece of this market?

 

That is the wrong question. The right question is with napster also bringing hirez streaming to the masses this summer will redbook go the way of the 8 track tape or the cathode tube TV?

[witchdoctor]

I see a lot of posts about bitrates. Remember the old saying, garbage in garbage out. The algorithm used to convert analog to digital bits is 40 years old. Putting lipstick on a pig by increasing bit rates does not change that its a pig. There is a device called aftermasterpro that claims to change the algorithm used by "remastering" the signal and then sending it to your device:

 

A/B some tracks and decide for yourself:

 

Listen | AfterMaster | Audio Labs

[barrows]

I see a lot of posts about bitrates. Remember the old saying, garbage in garbage out. The algorithm used to convert analog to digital bits is 40 years old. Putting lipstick on a pig by increasing bit rates does not change that its a pig. There is a device called aftermasterpro that claims to change the algorithm used by "remastering" the signal and then sending it to your device:

 

A/B some tracks and decide for yourself:

 

 

 

Listen | AfterMaster | Audio Labs

 

What? The algorithm used is to convert to digital is constantly being changed, many ADCs use something very different from each other, not sure what you are talking about.

[Vincent1234]

Well it is hear @ Computer Audiophile, where at least 2 dozen or so of us do it every day

 

Seriously, I have found the upsampling-to-DSD-via-HQPlayer/Roon crowd in various unexpected places around the web, so it does have an honest following in the niche of Audiophiledom.

 

Only Miska can confirm just how small (or large) the niche is by telling us his sales figures...

 

But this as compared to MQA is a non-starter, because MQA is not about SQ anyways...

 

dCS Can tell it to you too, as all of their DAC's support DSD upsampling and it really sounds fantastic. [emoji4]

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[Rt66indierock]

To answer your question about CDs going away the simple answer is no. There are 6.2 million CDs for sale on Amazon today. Indie (see username) bands sell CDs directly to their fans at shows. Too important of a revenue stream to go away without a replacement format. Mainstream music lovers are still buying enough CDs that Target and Walmart have power with record companies to dictate pricing. You have to move a lot units to have this power.

 

Since I can, I'm going to stop by the operations headquarters of Aftermaster and see what they are up to. And ask if they have solved their shipping problems. I'm dropping off two of my golf clubs about four blocks away to have some repairs done. But I must say the chip they using is not going to do what you say it will. I looked at the specifications.