MQA is Vaporware

[crenca]

15 hours ago, Charles Hansen said:

 

Hi Crenca,

 

I don't think the fact that we don't currently understand everything about the universe in which we live is to blame for people falling for MQA. I believe there are two different things going on:

 

1) Reality is so complex that all we humans can do is tell stories about it. Math is one of those stories and digital audio is based on math. But it is important to keep in mind that even math is just a story. It's a more satisfying story than previous stories humans told (eg, "lightning happens when Zeus is angry and throws things at the other gods"), as it explains many more things. And in the end math is still just a made-up story. If you disagree, please show me where infinity exists outside of our imagination. Or zero. Or imaginary numbers. (Just to name a few.)

 

People become seduced by the beauty of the story of math precisely because it is so beautiful. But it is still just a story humans tell each other and not reality.

 

2) When it comes to audio, digital engineers (in general) are so steeped in the beautiful story of math that they begin to think that it actually describes the reality of audio. But it doesn't. One way to say this is that there is no such thing as digital audio in the real world. Another way to say this is that all the problems of digital audio are actually analog problems. Because there is no such "real thing" as mathematics nor digital audio. They are both imaginary constructs made up in our heads. That's not to say that they are not useful, simply that they cannot (and likely never will) explain everything about the universe in which we live.

 

Getting back to MQA, I think the reason that many people fell for it was one of the typical logical fallacies - eg, "appeal to authority" or whatever. Other reasons include outright bribery (especially when the bribed person justifies his actions because he is not smart enough to see through the fallacies of MQA's claims), "group think", fear of "rocking the boat", and any of a dozen other all-too-common human foibles.

 

Cheers,

Charles Hansen

 

Charles,

 

Thanks for your well stated reply.  I myself being essentially a Platonist, could not agree more:  The human condition is such that all we can do is tell stories and "witness" as any religious person worth their salt can tell you.

 

In this sense, I am not a modern(ist), materialist, nor "objectivist" by any stretch.  Yes, there is a foundational "gap" of knowledge even in the hard sciences.

 

That said, you will admit that there is a difference between telling a story and lie (as you made clear to Chris upstream).  My sense that underneath the logical fallacies, appeal to authority, bribery, group think in this industry - everything you mentioned in your last paragraph is a culture of toleration and acceptance of the lie.  It's not just that there is a rational acceptance of the unknown and unknowable - it is more in that there is also an acceptance of the charlatan, the snake oil salesman and the radical subjectivist who can claim anything (such as the one Michael L published a while back who argued that High Fidelity is figment of class warfare - Marxist theory applied to  High Fidelity!).  

 

So, I suppose I am not surprised (given the culture) that Bob S has been as successful as he has with MQA.  Was the industry suddenly going to becomes something it is not?  I have argued here that what is needed is a robust "consumerist" mentality/perspective.  I am not saying that the culture of the industry needs to change or is fixable - it is what it is and such things change very slowly if at all even under the best of circumstances.  What is needed is a rift between the consumer of audiophiledom and "the industry".  We as consumers need to form our own little culture off to the side so that we can gain perspective and see the culture for what it actually is.  To a large extant that is what forums such as this one are about and it is why "the industry" denigrates "the internet" and "the forums" as nothing but a pool of malcontents every chance they get - they are simply maintaining the status quo for their own benefit and they do this without even knowing why they do it.  In this context my own laments about (audiophile) press not doing their jobs is in vain because the simple fact is there is no real audiophile press, just a kind of trade writer who is fully ensconced in the culture...

[Shadders]

40 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

A possible reason (how probable I’ll leave for others to discuss) is legal protection.  Getting past copy protection is a big no-no under US copyright law, so even a little goes a long way in protecting your intellectual property.

 

It would be possible to employ the DRM in MQA for this purpose without regard to whether record labels or streaming services would want to use it exclusively in the market.

Hi Jud,

OK - thanks.

In the US, is copy protection mandatory ?, or could MQA be offered with copying allowed.

What you seem to be indicating is that MQA wants to stop copying, and so they implement DRM to meet US requirements on how to stop copying.

Surely, it is not the US Government stating you MUST have copy protection ?, regardless.

Regards,

Shadders.

[mcgillroy]

1 hour ago, Shadders said:

 

What we do know, is that DRM is in the MQA capability.

 

Let's imagine Amazon selling ebooks that you can freely copy but where the footnotes are only readable on devices which install an Amazon decryption key. For the right to do so Amazon is asking every eReader manufacturer to pay a per-device fee and provide usage data. You as a consumer won't notice unless you like to read footnotes but for the manufacturers it adds cost, complexity and a layer of dependency on a third party.

 

That is what MQA is doing.

 

DRM already is an active capability and the essence of MQA. It's deployed in all instances able to unfold it since day one.

 

Part of the genius of MQA-marketing is to have been able to frame DRM as copy-protection of files only. But copy protection is just one and a crude form of DRM, which encompasses all kinds means to control the access, use, modification, and distribution of copyrighted material in digital hard- and software.

 

MQA is a sophisticated form of DRM. It's used to control access to the high-resolution part of an audio-file. As Mansrs work has shown all MQA files contain a control bit that the MQA-DAC checks for and if present extracts a cryptographic key from, that in conjunction with a key locally stored on the device is used to decrypt the folded part of the spectrum.

 

That control bit has to go somewhere and MQA wastes a bit (pun intended) of dynamic resolution for it.

 

While consumers (so far) are relatively unaffected by this DRM it does shackle the DAC-vendor to MQA. Manufactures have to pay licensing fees for the right to include the MQA-DRM into their DACs and have to provide data not only about their designs but also about the usage of the devices. Essentially MQA is installing a toll-booth in every DAC and ADC that implements it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mcgillroy]

23 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi Jud,

OK - thanks.

In the US, is copy protection mandatory ?, or could MQA be offered with copying allowed.

What you seem to be indicating is that MQA wants to stop copying, and so they implement DRM to meet US requirements on how to stop copying.

Surely, it is not the US Government stating you MUST have copy protection ?, regardless.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

Look up DMCA.

 

Copy protection is not mandatory under US law and it's unlikely that it ever will. But under the DMCA messing with anything that has access control technologies implemented carries a huge legal risk. This extends to tools that could be used to tamper with the DRMed material in question..

 

What Jud is saying that in the US-legal environment having DRM present even when kept inactive is of strategic value. It adds another layer of protection to the intellectual property of MQA, including the audio-aspects of it.

 

 

[Shadders]

13 minutes ago, mcgillroy said:

 

Look up DMCA.

 

Copy protection is not mandatory under US law and it's unlikely that it ever will. But under the DMCA messing with anything that has access control technologies implemented carries a huge legal risk. This extends to tools that could be used to tamper with the DRMed material in question..

 

What Jud is saying that in the US-legal environment having DRM present even when kept inactive is of strategic value. It adds another layer of protection to the intellectual property of MQA, including the audio-aspects of it.

Hi,

This is my point - DRM is in MQA since MQA want control. DRM is not there to suffice the US Government.

As with anything DRM and copy protection, it relies upon the countries laws to enforce.

I understand that MQA may not be utilising DRM to its fullest extent, at the moment.

Regards,

Shadders.

[Shadders]

31 minutes ago, mcgillroy said:

While consumers (so far) are relatively unaffected by this DRM it does shackle the DAC-vendor to MQA. Manufactures have to pay licensing fees for the right to include the MQA-DRM into their DACs and have to provide data not only about their designs but also about the usage of the devices. Essentially MQA is installing a toll-booth in every DAC and ADC that implements it.

Hi,

Yes - i understand that MQA require each MQA capable DAC require a specific design.

What i am not sure about, is whether the requirements are a black box - an IC that the DAC manufacturer only has a limited understanding of, and is told how to interface and manage, and the internals are secret. Maybe something like a TPM in a PC - how it works is not known, but people know how to use it.

Any DAC manufacturer circumvention of the IC will be breaking the NDA agreement, with probable severe penalties.

Regards,

Shadders.

[wdw]

8 hours ago, Michael Lavorgna said:

 

10 minutes according to my clock. And here's something you may not know - you don't have to read what I post.

Michael,

 

I suspect I speak for a number of posters here in saying we are very glad to see you here and ask that you endure the "blue meanies" and continue to offer comment...your thoughts and opinions are, in my case, welcome although  I do agree with the opinions expressed above that the audio press could bring some greater rigour to their reviews of MQA.  

Suggest a series or articles on your site opening this debate up to the larger public with comments and discussion with mansr (if you're willing), C. Hanson, B. Stuart and others.  

It is not the issue of whether MQA may be an attractive method for streaming music delivery via Tidal or Deezer but a distinct possibility that most commercially available music could be funnelled through that lens.  This is not an alternate but a wholesale rewriting of the musical canon.

For this magnitude of a change a thorough and enlightened discussion is imperative.  In my view MQA has courted the audio press to the exclusion of the general public and this could suggest some skullduggery.  

When a Meridian spokesman was asked to AB the MQA song playing with the non-MQA file he flatly refused (Vancouver Audio Show)  I have heard of this behaviour from many others at differing shows.  He claimed that their main intention was to stop B. Stuart from simply giving the code away...a gift to the musical world .....HA!

 

The Tidal MQA version of Stevie Wonder's  Innervisions is a differing master to the 24/96 I have purchased from HDTracks...in many cases we never have been offered the opportunity to make direct comparisons.  I have great faith in the ears of JVS and others but the superlatives are concerning.

 

Warren

 

[Shadders]

Hi,

The end is nigh :

http://musically.com/2017/09/04/major-labels-hi-res-audio/

Regards,

Shadders.

[mav52]

8 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

The end is nigh :

http://musically.com/2017/09/04/major-labels-hi-res-audio/

Regards,

Shadders.

" Formats like MQA make it more portable, so it’s easier to have it yourself, in your car and outside the home. So I think that’s a great opportunity,” said Morvan Boury, VP of global digital development for Sony Music.   Yep they drank the cool aid and didn't ask to see the little fine print..

[Rt66indierock]

13 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

The end is nigh :

http://musically.com/2017/09/04/major-labels-hi-res-audio/

Regards,

Shadders.

 

You missed the word hope. 

[Jud]

7 minutes ago, mav52 said:

" Formats like MQA make it more portable, so it’s easier to have it yourself, in your car and outside the home. So I think that’s a great opportunity,” said Morvan Boury, VP of global digital development for Sony Music.   Yep they drank the cool aid and didn't ask to see the little fine print..

 

To the contrary - in these sorts of dealings, the record companies hold the economic power, and consequently they *write* the fine print.

[Shadders]

3 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

You missed the word hope. 

Hi,

OK - you have stumped me - why is hope missing ?

Regards,

Shadders.

[Bystander]

In a way, it's comforting to me how clueless they (once again) appear to be.

[Rt66indierock]

1 minute ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

OK - you have stumped me - why is hope missing ?

Regards,

Shadders.

 

They hope it will be more than a niche. There are many practical issues causing problems with all this marketing hype.

[Shadders]

2 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

They hope it will be more than a niche. There are many practical issues causing problems with all this marketing hype.

Hi,

Ok - thanks - i get it now.

If there is one file type to serve all streaming requirements, then it may be  fait accompli.

Regards,

Shadders.

[asdf1000]

Hi Michael L

 

Is there any chance you could get Bob S and Charles H in a room together for a video interview to hash out the technicals of MQA (or just ask questions to Bob)?

 

Maybe mansr could send in all of his work to Charles. The only reason I don't suggest mansr for the interview (since it's mostly his work) is Charles is a HiFi industry heavyweight.

 

A video interview would get huge ratings through your site, so that's what you could benefit.

 

If not a video interview then just 3 way phone call or something, again through your site.

 

Even Chris could maybe arrange this here?

 

Whether Bob agrees is another thing but someone should ask him at least. 

[Rt66indierock]

2 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

Ok - thanks - i get it now.

If there is one file type to serve all streaming requirements, then it may be  fait accompli.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

Highly unlikely there aren't enough hi-res files out there. Look for some evidence any of the people who have streaming market share caring about even CD quality. And of course there is the little problem of geographical restrictions requiring more than one file to cover the globe. 

[mansr]

4 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

Hi Michael L

 

Is there any chance you could get Bob S and Charles H in a room together for a video interview to hash out the technicals of MQA (or just ask questions to Bob)?

 

Maybe mansr could send in all of his work to Charles. The only reason I don't suggest mansr for the interview (since it's mostly his work) is Charles is a HiFi industry heavyweight.

 

A video interview would get huge ratings through your site, so that's what you could benefit.

 

If not a video interview then just 3 way phone call or something, again through your site.

 

Even Chris could maybe arrange this here?

 

Whether Bob agrees is another thing but someone should ask him at least. 

I'd be up for it, but I'm afraid anything actually published would be creatively edited to cast me as a fool in front of Saint Bob. Unless Mr Lavorgna radically changes his attitude, I'll have to politely decline any participation in what can only end up a farce. However, if someone is serious about writing a critical piece on MQA, I'll gladly help out in any way I can.

[asdf1000]

4 minutes ago, mansr said:

I'd be up for it, but I'm afraid anything actually published would be creatively edited to cast me as a fool in front of Saint Bob. Unless Mr Lavorgna radically changes his attitude, I'll have to politely decline any participation in what can only end up a farce. However, if someone is serious about writing a critical piece on MQA, I'll gladly help out in any way I can.

 

Great. If Michael L wasn't keen maybe Chris could co-ordinate a recorded and published 3-way phone call, for CA Forum? Either site would get increased traffic I'm guessing. Good for ads revenue?

 

I suggested Michael L in the first instance because I thought he may have greater ability in at least being able to reach Bob S, either by himself or via Stereophile contacts - whether Bob would be up for it is another thing altogether lol.

 

[Shadders]

7 minutes ago, mansr said:

I'd be up for it, but I'm afraid anything actually published would be creatively edited to cast me as a fool in front of Saint Bob. Unless Mr Lavorgna radically changes his attitude, I'll have to politely decline any participation in what can only end up a farce. However, if someone is serious about writing a critical piece on MQA, I'll gladly help out in any way I can.

Hi,

A written article which is also available here would stop any editing if it was presented on another website or web magazine.

For video or audio - editing can be an issue.

Regards,

Shadders.

[asdf1000]

I think any written responses may end up wishy washy, like previous Q&A's published.

 

I'd really love to hear all questions and responses in real time (like a recorded phone call), unedited, with all the natural pauses by all parties. Something different !

 

But anything is better than nothing. Would love to hear Michael L's or Chris C's thoughts.

[mansr]

9 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

I'd really love to hear all questions and responses in real time (like a recorded phone call), unedited, with all the natural pauses by all parties. Something different !

That's never going to happen, but not because of me.

[asdf1000]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

That's never going to happen, but not because of me.

 

Lol I fear this also. But I hope either Michael L or Chris C at least asks the question to Bob.

[lucretius]

1 hour ago, mav52 said:

" Formats like MQA make it more portable, so it’s easier to have it yourself, in your car and outside the home. So I think that’s a great opportunity,” said Morvan Boury, VP of global digital development for Sony Music.   Yep they drank the cool aid and didn't ask to see the little fine print..

 

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?

[wdw]

1 hour ago, mansr said:

I'd be up for it, but I'm afraid anything actually published would be creatively edited to cast me as a fool in front of Saint Bob. Unless Mr Lavorgna radically changes his attitude, I'll have to politely decline any participation in what can only end up a farce. However, if someone is serious about writing a critical piece on MQA, I'll gladly help out in any way I can.

Mansr,

You have a lot to offer this discussion and your particaption in an international debate would be welcome...just need to curb the aggression a tad...hey, we're with you!

wdw