MQA is Vaporware

[Iving]

Whenever I come across mQa (only for the most part in this Forum's Activity Stream), some conditioned reflex prompts me to think of Harry Enfield's "I Saw You Coming" series of comedy sketches. In them Harry plays Marcus, the cynical proprietor of a Notting Hill emporium of overpriced tat for gullible London trendies. Today's victim is Fellatia, who falls for "Stupidlosophy", the shop's new range of greetings cards:

 

[Iving]

The banners/ads had nothing to do with it.

 

"Science" (most of which was ostensible) - even objectivity - had nothing to do with it.

 

The problem was antisocial behaviour - stifling free participation for all.

 

It was antisocial behaviour that got marginalised by Chris - in the end.

 

Nothing would have been marginalised but for antisocial behaviour.

[Iving]

Re: 22nd April 2022 just passed - in the immediate wake of  AXPONA ... #Earth Day

 

My main objection to mQa (and Tidal) is that it is a cynical and spurious project aimed solely at profiteering - by selling music and equipment all over - to people who already have access to good recorded music – together with boundless options when it comes to choosing satisfying replay gear. There is no SQ or other quid pro quo that justifies this proposed wholesale reorientation towards consumer musical enjoyment.

 

As an audiophile with a broad hobby, I spend a great deal of my time and money on music and equipment for its enjoyment. I have never seen the slightest incentive in mQa. Not even the smallest thing. I see nothing in mQa/Tidal cleaving to "just as it was recorded in the studio; an audio experience as the artist intended" etc. To me it's all blatant hogwash, and I wish people wouldn't fall for it.

 

My point/question for this post is about a particular mQa marketing strategy. I know that mQa has always argued that their folding "technology" is efficient in terms of music file sizes. I see on their own website, on Twitter and elsewhere e.g. Facebook, what looks like unjustifiable linkage to enviromnental issues under the guise of “sustainability”.

 

I am a member of Greenpeace. I love what Greenpeace stands for. I clicked mQa's ubiquitous reference to #Earth Day on Twitter and found myself, thrust as a catapult charge, to Greenpeace and its pure mission.

 

Sick to my stomach! wtf

 

Even the implicit abandonment of all our “old” black boxes [DACs etc] in favour of new mQa ones must involve some stupid, unnecessary and cavernous carbon footprint.

 

I searched this Forum/Thread for #Earth Day and found nothing. I hope folks vested in the respective causes (mQa; Environment) can enlighten me. Tell me why mQa's environmental boasts are just too much hot air.

 

[Iving]

2 hours ago, GregWormald said:

Simply—

It's an unneeded compression scheme that has problems with both hi-res and red book file integrity. Like most of their advertising the environmental boasts ARE just hot air that the atmosphere doesn't need.

 

30 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

Their desperate attempts to associate themselves with "sustainability", along with their performance at RMAF 2018, show the actual value of MQA.

mQa, like many modern corporations, are ready with plenty superficial environment buzz language that doesn't bear scutiny.

Here JBara says:

Today we are twice as polluting! We generate more than two times the greenhouse gas emissions as we did then [CD era] ... We’ve all grown up in an environment digitally where we forget that the cloud is made up of cables and servers and energy generation. A very non-green, non-clean environment, which is why we have to be stewards of even the data utilisation in the digital world, if we really want to have a positive impact.

 

Sounds great! But of course it's all PUFF.

 

I'm interested in the SUBSTANTIAL arguments (either way). I suggested myself, from a primitive starting point, that lots more/replacement black boxes with beguiling blue lights means future massive, unnecessary carbon footprint. Exactly how - and by exactly how much - does mQa (assuming its smaller file size claims are justified) reduce vs. enhance generic footprint of streaming or mQa CD play. Smaller HDDs and CDs with fewer bits - attributable to mQa - are going to save the planet? The footprint mitigation of fewer bits must be miniscule compared with the cost of running servers 24/7, the electricity powering CD players, manufacturing new mQa equipment, number-crunching digital masters into mQa format - the whole consumption gamut of the house-of-blue-lights show.

 

Here JBara appeals surreptitiously to Gen-Z. Of course it's demand-hype in disguise. I don't like it. It's creepy. I don't believe mQa should be allowed to use hashtag. #Earth Day.

[Iving]

3 hours ago, Confused said:

Quite so, although this is perhaps why my eyes need deblurring ....

 

well - honesty is a virtue!

[Iving]

Thanks for your post. Interesting read.

 

This bit is a joke - surely:

10 minutes ago, tmtomh said:

the fact that a good number of subjectivists actually do post there and do not get chased away

 

If not a joke, it's complete rubbish. The site to which you refer is far more an echo chamber than this Forum - even with its shortcomings. Far more a "religion". Far more a "cult". Far less wiggle room for intelligence (and science) to seep in.

 

Be well yourself. I notice your thoughtfulness in other places.

[Iving]

2 hours ago, jcbenten said:

Schiit, Ayre, Linn, maybe a couple of others, mentioned loud and clear just after MQA release that they were not interested.  No follow ups that I have read.

 

Pretty loud and clear: https://www.linn.co.uk/uk/blog/mqa-is-bad-for-music-heres-why (Jim Collinson, 2017)

[Iving]

17 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

All this time I thought Linn products supported MQA for some reason... 

 

afaik Linn have been consistently against from the off!

[Iving]

1 hour ago, Brahan Seer said:

Various rooms/stands with MQA kit, mentions, dems ... spotted other formats, too, including vinyl. 😉

 

mQa has presented in its own guise / right / as such / per se every Munich since 2015. see here

 

if mQa not at Munich as an exclusive presence that would be indicative in a good way to some of us.

 

bob stuart might be sporting a moustache or other disguise this year ...

 

[Iving]

1 hour ago, UkPhil said:

Planet Saving Quality.......

 

Truly sick [old meaning]

[Iving]

46 minutes ago, ARQuint said:

Beyond whether or not a specific technical claim is correct ... it would be helpful to understand why a fair number of recording professionals ... have a favorable, or at worst a neutral view of MQA.

 

... and I would like to read counterpoints from the recording and mastering field (e.g. Brian Lucey's rejoinders) to any such contributions. Probably we shan't have them.

 

It's true that many of us can't or won't take the trouble to fathom the technical depths. Personally, and as a mere hobbyist not particularly fascinated with how digits work, I am far more confident in what I read on this "toxic" thread than I am in Fremer's take in the review germane - which is patently superficial. Technical understanding is but one aspect.

 

Subjective listening experience is another. Pointless trying to deal with Expectation Bias in the mix - except to acknowledge it. Either way.

 

Commercial integrity and attached motives are an intrinsic aspect too. I wait to see e.g.:

(i) Jim Anderson qualify his "all is correct" banter with Fremer;

(ii) Fremer to develop an alternative stance, and

(iii) our own AS contributors (and others contradicting Fremer's review) to be objectively vindicated.

 

I loathe MQA and all it stands for. Not for its technical attributes. Nor its subjective fruit. But because it is a global land grab offering nothing to music, nothing to Artists, and nothing to Consumers. Too many people suck up what they are told by "authority figures". Dissimulating as such in order to make money in music - as distinct from creating and distributing music for music's sake - is what turns my stomach and persuades me to post here.

[Iving]

11 hours ago, Archimago said:

Maybe because MQA is also a "revolutionary" technology from Britain? Some kind of national pride also? 🤷‍♂️

 

British passport.
Hate MQA.

[Iving]

4 hours ago, KeenObserver said:

I see that Rupert resigned as Director.

Makes me think that MQA has lost its South African Financing.

 

56 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said:

Where/when did you see that?

 

If you mean Anthony Edward, resigned 17th March just gone ...

 

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/LNJGna3ocs9lQGm3IdiYx3hLV0c/appointment

[Iving]

6 hours ago, Peter Gunby said:

Footer on MQA's website-

The affairs, business and property of the Company are being managed by Philip David Reynolds and David Hudson who were appointed Joint Administrators on 3 April 2023. The Administrators act as agents of the Company and act without personal liability.

 

fantastic news 

[Iving]

55 minutes ago, Archimago said:

So, this is what (likely) "the end" looks like.

 

Hmmm, I wonder what Peter Veth and the Facebook group thinks about all this? Are they pissed off and blaming nay sayers? Or will he and the Facebook group just go silent because nobody's paying to promote any more?

 

Likewise, will those magazine reviews that hype up MQA content suddenly stop talking about it? Or would they continue and lament the demise of this amazing "format" that deblurred music with a sense of nostalgia about how great it was and how Bob Stuart should have been allowed to deliver audiophiles into the Promised Land?

 

Let's see how many "true believers" there really are. Will be interesting to see the price of MQA devices perhaps also drop since there will be little value to be had say between the Topping D90SE and D90LE. Will the Asian manufacturers continue to use the MQA logo on their devices?

 

Then there's the potential fallout with TIDAL. Will they continue to pursue MQA "Master" streaming or might they consider joining everyone else with superior lossless ALAC/FLAC/etc. if they still want to remain in the hi-res game?

 

Looks like we still have some interesting things to talk about and observe before getting back to the usual audiophile debates like cables. ;-)

 

This is Britain. Whether domestic or otherwise, remaining investor rats will desert the sinking ship ... and alternative speculators will (or properly should) fear the tarring of the same brush. Rupert must have parachuted fearing the sunk cost fallacy of just another penny. Enough hand wringing already. Press and media devotees will cross over to common sense as fast as rats up the metaphorical drainpipe. They cannot tolerate being on the losing side - where then their credibility with the spendthrift public? I feel sorry for the consumers whose hearts were won over and/or who bought blue-light hardware. Their wounds will want the healing afforded by time. What a Pig's Ear. All confined to the dustbin of history asap hopefully. I don't care to be proven right or wrong over due course. My remarks are excusably visionary.

[Iving]

24 minutes ago, sphinxsix said:

"Following the recent positive reception to MQA’s latest technology (SCL6), there has been increased international interest in buying MQA Ltd. At the same time, MQA’s main financial backer is seeking an exit. In order to be in the best position to pursue market opportunities and expedite this process, the company has undergone a restructuring initiative, which includes entering into administration and is comparable to Chapter 11 in the US.

During this process, MQA continues to trade as usual alongside its partners.

We won't be commenting further while negotiations take place."

 

Also according to What Hi-Fi wrt SCL6:

 

Up until recently, there has been a significant quality bottleneck, particularly when it comes to Bluetooth performance ... SCL6 is a way of packaging a file for transmission ... You need a source (say, a smartphone) and receiver (wireless headphones, for example) compatible with the codec ... MQA is in talks with a number of potential partners, including phone companies ... don’t be surprised to see announcements of SCL6-compatible products later in the year.

 

1. OK so SCL6 has legs?

 

2. It's not MQA as we know it (aided and abetted quasi-DRM and associated hardware leverage over impressionable consumers). A win as far as I'm concerned. MQA as such will be forgotten.

[Iving]

In case of any interest, a revealing contextual account of SCL6 for Audio Pros (scroll down to Editor's Desk):

 

https://myemail.constantcontact.com/The-Audio-Voice-414--The-Case-of-the-SCL6-Scalable-Codec--How-Much-Do-You-Want-Hi-Res-Audio-.html?soid=1104292817535&aid=6aJSuNESaAs

[Iving]

45 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

The eternal optimist. Next time I have a bad day, I should call Peter V. He could spin any tragedy into a can't lose, opportunity not to be missed. I have to give him credit. 

 

24 minutes ago, firedog said:

Classic cognitive dissonance. He's spent years vociferously defending it, no matter what.

What will he say when it actually fails and goes away?

 

More of same here: Post in thread 'Whither MQA' https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/whither-mqa.36636/post-868051

[Iving]

 

from another forum - memes are for sharing, right?

[Iving]

2 minutes ago, stefano_mbp said:

@Iving … ... too much honour, a mass grave would already be too much … 😉

 

What's interesting to me ... I reckon the internet response - mainly on music related forums - is overwhelmingly "favourable" about the latest developments. Plenty of "likes" on posts declaring Rupert resignation and Administration news. The meme i just posted my favourite of all posts. If there are any folks upset about it all, or nurturing an alternative point of view, they are keeping very quiet on MQA threads. Possible exception of likes of PV and LS as we have seen. Lots of people saying this is overdue - and they're right.

 

Yeah MQA is a dodo - and the honour equity is definitely negative.

[Iving]

11 minutes ago, firedog said:

https://www.ecoustics.com/news/mqa-bankruptcy/

 

Referred to above, I think it explains the situation well. 

SCL6 is seen as viable, MQA itself isn't. 

 

MQA itself may be kept alive on a limited basis. 

I think that even if it is, it's effectively dead. It can't make money and I predict manufacturers will stop adding it to new products. So even if it "survives", it will be a legacy product in a few years. 

 

This seems right to me.

 

MQA's and their investors' pipedream - absolutely coining it by reselling the back catalogues - monopolising and commercially exploiting the supply chain from artist to retailer - leveraging a new generation of hardware to boot - well I can't see how that's possible after Rupert withdrawal and MQA in administration. The viability of that objective has expired. I couldn't care about much else. Too much music already in the wild to enjoy.

 

Linn deserve a re-mention. Jim Collinson's 2017 piece: https://www.linn.co.uk/uk/blog/mqa-is-bad-for-music-heres-why

[Iving]

Well, provoked by @firedogand having denied he ever blew a gasket over people criticising BS or supported MQA himself, Amir just closed the "MQA entering into administration" thread on ASR on basis not allowed to talk about why MQA looks like it's going out of business (as in "What more do you want?"). Like elsewhere online, most ASR members react to MQA news with "Good riddance". Seems the pro-MQA crowd are more into authoritarian censorship of others than self-reflection. 

[Iving]

43 minutes ago, Archimago said:

It is interesting isn't it seeing the lack of news about MQA over the last few days at places like: Stereophile, The Absolute Sound, HiFi+, Darko Audio (usually happy to post any little press release), Twittering Machines, Positive Feedback... Maybe they'll say something ahead; would be even more fascinating if they say nothing at all because I'm sure posting on this topic would attract eyeballs on the page which is what they're all hoping to get, right? Maybe they're just off on Easter holiday.

 

Yes!

 

I think we'll see them come over one by one rather than publication by publication.

[Iving]

41 minutes ago, Archimago said:

I'm not sure it's "scientism" @Currawong. I guess it kind of depends on how one defines that term.

 

To me that's just aggressive devotion in the case of ASR to pure objectivism by some (or at least devotion to specific numbers like the SINAD perhaps). A subjectivist can also be very scientific and recognize that their subjective perceptions are still governed by science - in this case the complex science of psychoacoustics / psychological mechanisms which determine one's preferences. Subjectivists can be just as devoted to a feature with all its supposed scientific benefits like "deblurring" - for example Peter Veth and MQA!?

 

This is why I think we must remain scientific as audiophiles and embrace both sides, and never be exclusive. Science determines both the laws of the objectivist (physical sciences) and helps us understand the subjectivist (psychology, perceptual and cognitive sciences). Some folks on ASR sometimes (not always) tend toward the "left brain" engineering extreme. And I find that TAS and Stereophile reviewers tend toward the "right brain" artistic extreme into fanciful subjectivity (as exemplified by Herb Reichert's recent review).

 

Taking that middle ground is the hard part and that's where I think true enlightenment is to be achieved.

 

To be relevant to this MQA topic, that middle road of course doesn't mean we can't speak out about things that are just "objectively bad" and plain regressive for the hi-fi pursuit. This is why I think audiophiles of all stripes can agree that we just don't need MQA!

 

 

I suppose. The nice thing about headphones is that there are no room effects so the measurements can be seen as more directly relatable to sound quality. However, there are still all kinds of interesting subjective preferences to be had!

 

imo this is a wonderful, intelligent post - expounding the significance of both O and S approaches to our hobby (properly prosecuted). Don't think I have seen it all so less trivially encapsulated (unless I have forgotten some missive of my own).

 

Yes - Subjective experience can be approached scientifically. "Top down" reasoning is absolutely no less logical than "Bottom up". The experimental method can be applied to both.

 

Whatever you quite meant by "Some folks on ASR sometimes (not always) tend toward the "left brain" engineering extreme." I do very much agree that strong bias towards "left brain" vs. "right brain" can be more empirically (i.e. conceptually and measurably) expressed as a difference of personality - probably encompassed by Eysenck's P dimension aka tough- vs. tender- mindedness.

 

All the same, I quite agree with @Currawong. ASR is very much Scientism in that it embodies an evolved sociocultural movement characterised by ribaldry and machismo far more than it promulgates Science proper - meaning respect for that discipline's principles and methods. Anybody arriving suitably equipped on that Forum can be chased away if they don't sing from the established hymn book. ASR is definitely a personality cult. Amir is just as likely to jump into discussions with his proud (and defensive) self as much as he is an informed and thoughtful contribution (of which he is more than capable, if only he could restrain his superciliousness).

 

Yes indeed! I do very much think that we ought to be able to talk about things that are "regressive for the hi-fi pursuit" without being marginalised by ignorance and childishness. MQA should be a watershed for exactly that kind of permissiveness.

 

What a splendid and relevant post. Thank you

[Iving]

Just now, Currawong said:

I wonder why, given how much Universal and Warner were willing to put into it, why one of them hasn't just bought MQA, even before the announcement. The only reason I can think of is that the IP is worthless -- that beyond the folding tech and filtering, they were only doing a bit of compression or EQ on music, or not much beyond that. 

 

Yep

 

It's like when you give up smoking (or pick your vice). When you really let go - when it's really all over ... your head stops playing tricks with you - quits with the lies (it's just another $10 per pack - one won't hurt).

 

Now that the music and equipment lockdown is dust, what's the use in pretending?