MQA is Vaporware

[asdf1000]

3 hours ago, Sal1950 said:

talk about the real issue of DRM like attributes.

 

Hi Sal, what attributes does this refer to? If you don't mind me asking 

Many thanks

[asdf1000]

After around the 29 minute mark, is he talking about MQA? It's hard to know for sure. Great interview anyway.

 

https://www.sweetwater.com/insync/sweetwater-interviews-chuck-ainlay/

 

[asdf1000]

4 minutes ago, FredericV said:

So some of the claims of MQA must be quack.

 

Seems to be the gist of mansr's and Charles' and other's findings. Unfortunate.

[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. 

[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.

 

[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.

[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.

[asdf1000]

57 minutes ago, Jud said:

99% of the target market are kids listening to mp3 and AAC through earbuds, or Beats if they’re kewl.  

 

Exactly. And because of this, none of us matter (here on this thread, including myself) in the big picture, sadly. We are the 1%.

 

[asdf1000]

4 hours ago, tobes said:

I bet the average person would laugh in your face if you tried to demonstrate how it's 'better'.

 

Not only this, but linking to @Jud's earlier comment about the 99% vs us (1%), good luck convincing them (the 99% happy with Spotify and Apple Music) to pay double for their monthly streaming subscription.

[asdf1000]

I posted this in another thread but it probably belongs here.

 

I wonder if it's possible some of these manufacturers that are on board maybe surprisingly, are onboard because they've heard what recorded MQA (not converted) sounds like and like it?

 

So maybe they're preparing for what's coming next, after this initial wave of music that's been converted to MQA?

 

This is putting aside the potential for DRM features to be enabled later and the grab for money with licensing fees - both of which I don't like. So here I'm but just discussing the potential for better sound quality if recorded in MQA, as opposed to the current stuff which is just being slowly converted.

 

I ask this as a bit of a stupid person because I don't even know if there is a difference between recording in MQA and just converting to MQA. I've assumed there is a difference but could be very wrong and am happy to learn more.

 

[asdf1000]

1 hour ago, rickca said:

So 99% of what we can play today is just converted and only a poor approximation of what could be theoretically achieved.

 

This is what I was hinting at in my questions just above.

 

But from what I understand from @RichardSF's response above, what we have now is pretty much it's full capability? i.e. recording in 24/96 or whatever, and then encoding to MQA. 

 

Is that not what is already happening with the MQA releases now? 

 

Cheers in advance

 

[asdf1000]

5 hours ago, Archimago said:

Interesting program at the NYC AES tomorrow. Bob Katz and Ian Shepherd seem to be very reasonable guys who I'm sure will do a great job talking about good mastering.

 

Bob Stuart seems to be a little out of place in that discussion though!

 

Is anyone on this thread going? Would love to hear a report about interesting stuff discussed (regarding MQA).

 

 

[asdf1000]

1 hour ago, PeterSt said:

No Scientific Tests Were Done, Says MQA Founder

 

 

 

(I only quoted Bruno Putzeys)

 

"no scientific listening tests have been done so far"

 

I'm definitely not an MQA supporter. But what Is a scientific listening test?

 

Does this mean double blind testing with 1500 or more randomly selected people?

 

Are speakers and DACs designed that way?

 

[asdf1000]

3 minutes ago, firedog said:

NO most speakers and DACs aren't tested that way.

But they also aren't doing what MQA claims to :

a) claiming their product is revolutionary and sounds better than anything available today. Sayng your product is "really good" or "sounds great" isn't the same thing;

and b) aren't demanding the rest of the industry and consumers adopt a proprietary format.

 

I respectfully disagree with a) but definitely agree with b)

 

[asdf1000]

4 hours ago, sullis02 said:

An effect of the magnitude claimed by Meridian, if real,  would not need anywhere near 1500 subjects to demonstrate conclusively in a DBT, do you understand that?

 

I was quite happy with PeterSt's reply, given he has experience in design and manufacture of equipment.

 

[asdf1000]

1 hour ago, Brian Lucey said:

No.  the labels are doing what they want to do, as they own the material and someone in one division is making decisions for the team.

 

Cheers! Always nice to have it straight from the horses mouth.

[asdf1000]

39 minutes ago, mcgillroy said:

My feeling is they are dead.

 

I really hope MQA dies but not just for the sake of dying  - immediately on it's death (or sooner!) I want more streaming options (other than just Qobuz) at 24bit FLAC streaming (24bit 44k/48k/88k/96k etc etc)

 

I want what @Brian Lucey and his peers have mastered in the studio, exactly as they and the artists intended us to hear it ! Not how someone else at the label wanted us to hear it ! arrrgghhh it makes me angry.

[asdf1000]

10 minutes ago, Brian Lucey said:

Anyone else want to personally attack me and go off topic ?

 

There is clearly no moderation here.

 

lol

 

What a mess.

 

 

 

No, let's get back on topic. I really like having you here.

 

Have you heard anything from the inside about if the labels are talking about OTHER options like 24-bit FLAC streaming? Other than MQA.

 

Any whispers of that from the inside?

 

Or if the streaming companies themselves are considering non-MQA 24bit options? At the moment it's just Qobuz I think

 

And any whispers about Apple Music's plans and Spotify, regarding lossless? Or are you not allowed to say (probably the latter, but worth asking). I know Spotify are/were trialling CD quality recently. But whispers of Hi-Res from the biggest 2 streamers?

 

[asdf1000]

7 hours ago, Brian Lucey said:

MQA is very aggressive.   I'm hoping that Apple will say no to them and put an end to it.  If it's not more convenient then Apple is generally not a fan.

 

Thanks Brian. Interesting to hear that MQA Ltd are aggressive behind the scenes, behind what we see as the general public.

 

People seem to think that Apple's recent iOS support of FLAC is the first step to lossless streaming. Whether that's CD quality (not a bad thing at all) or Hi-Res, who knows. 

 

But as you pointed out, their Apple Music subscriber numbers continue to climb even with just 256k. And Spotify's numbers continue to climb with just MP3320k, so it's no wonder neither of those companies is in a rush for Hi-Res streaming.

 

The next 12 months will be interesting.

 

I expected the past 12 months to be interesting but it's been pretty quiet in terms of Hi-Res streaming gaining momentum.

 

[asdf1000]

4 minutes ago, synn said:

I really hope that Spotify and Apple start CD quality streaming very soon.

 

Spotify started a trial, limited to some lucky people, at the start of the year (~ March). But talk about it has been quiet the last few months.

 

https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/1/14776780/spotify-hi-fi-preparing-launch-lossless-audio-tier

 

[asdf1000]

2 minutes ago, synn said:

I really hope that the delay has to do with getting the licensing sorted out rather than because of a lack of interest from the test group.

 

Ha yeh i was (and still am) worried about the latter too.

[asdf1000]

6 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Spotify uses free Vorbis codec, not MP3...

 

 

Argh i learnt that long ago and keep making that mistake. Thanks for the reminder 

[asdf1000]

2 hours ago, Charente said:

unless we're missing something in our assumptions.

 

Actually Roon's COO said that Qobuz have plans to taken on Roon. 

 

Whether that means UI, DSP or multi zone / grouped zone playback, or all of the above, we'll have to wait and see.

 

But it appears they have big plans.

 

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/qobuz-news-and-correspondence/17536/8

 

[asdf1000]

5 minutes ago, Charente said:

 

Interesting ... I know very little about how these tie-ups work ... which way would the revenue stream work (i.e. who is the net beneficiary ) ? ... or is it a revenue neutral arrangement  and each partner in the arrangement maximises their offering and achieves opportunity that way ? Would a Roon tie-up mean that Qobuz would have to consider MQA in order to compete with Tidal on the same platform ?

 

All very good questions. But sadly unless something leaks from a credible source, we won't know anything until an official announcement from Qobuz.

 

But definitely interesting as you say.

 

[asdf1000]

20 minutes ago, Charente said:

 

Interesting ... I know very little about how these tie-ups work ... which way would the revenue stream work (i.e. who is the net beneficiary ) ? ... or is it a revenue neutral arrangement  and each partner in the arrangement maximises their offering and achieves opportunity that way ? Would a Roon tie-up mean that Qobuz would have to consider MQA in order to compete with Tidal on the same platform ?

 

Also when I say Qobuz plans to 'take on' Roon, I mean compete, not acquire.

 

That's how I interpret the Roon comment anyway: 

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/qobuz-news-and-correspondence/17536/8