MQA is Vaporware

[Rt66indierock]

6 hours ago, ECL said:

 

 

At the end of the day, there's absolutely NO WAY and NO CHANCE IN HELL that MQA is taking over anything, nor replacing anything superior to itself. ANY talk on this subject comes from people with their head where the sun don't shine and completely ignorant of how music/recording industry works. So, after we put that to bed,

 

1. You have an ALMOST-lossless codec,

2. > 99% of what's lost is what's claimed as inaudible, such that it's ALMOST fair to call it lossless.

3. This codec allows transport of Hi-Res at bandwidth usage similar to 16/44.

4. If used properly and not merely for marketing hype, it could potentially satisfy artists AND consumers about authenticity. To clarify, NOT that the end-user is hearing a Master on the same kit it was produced with "as it sounded to the production team", which is silly and preposterous.... But rather, that the end-user is hearing something compressed, decoded, and unfolded in such a way that it is 1) guaranteed to be reasonably faithful to a Master, at least in the source data, and 2) isn't some counterfeit unapproved kooky crap that who knows which platforms you can't trust, would serve that stuff up.

 

If one can't think of how that's potentially useful, one has one's panties way too tightly wadded.

 

As I alluded to before, I believe a lot of the controversy is deservedly due to mis-marketing and overhyping of claims, combined with poor PR and proprietary secrecy. This has created a partisan atmosphere where it seems that nearly 100% of people who are politically anti-MQA think it also sounds worse, and nearly 100% of people who are politically pro-MQA also think it sounds better. Whereas we all know that if this were a cleanly conducted discussion, those two things should be independent variables.

 

Hear are a few things you can’t explain away.

1.      Bob Stuart told me at the Los Angeles Audio Show MQA changed the sound.

2.      Mike Jbara the CEO of MQA Ltd. told me the goal of MQA Ltd was to control music distribution.

3.      There is no evidence there is a market for hi-resolution streaming after Apple and Amazon killed any incentive offer it since you can’t charge more for it.

4.      This thread was created to counter the audiophile press and their promotion of MQA. It was never intended to be fair.

[Rt66indierock]

8 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

Interesting!

Two extensive postings promoting MQA with the same old BS MQA talking points, all the while insulting those that counter the BS talking points with logic and facts. This, after stating:

"I am here mostly for the classifieds so if I'm ever in danger of being banned for what I say, please just delete my post give me a warning."

Let's see. New poster hiding behind a VPN.

Do you think any one here would be surprised at the identity of this poster?

 

I'm always up for a good shill hunt.

[Rt66indierock]

2 hours ago, KeenObserver said:

Well.

To start with you could analyze the words used and how they are put together. See if the pattern matches previous postings here or elsewhere.

This person uses a VPN to cover his tracks, so he may have used a newly created email address to also cover his tracks. Email addresses are one way financial institution use to confirm someones identity.

The fact that someone went through this much effort while claiming that they were just here for the "classifieds" is a tell.

 

 I have my own suspicions, but I don't have any substantiation, so I will keep it to myself.

 

I'm hoping it is somebody from Sonical after I said we would welcome a challenge to MQA on your turf or Andy Schaub he was fun to play with.

[Rt66indierock]

4 hours ago, RichardSF said:

Tidal have skin in the game and I think it's a definite possibility. It wouldn't be Tidal itself purchasing MQA, but Tidal's owner Block Inc. Block (Square) paid $300M for Tidal and they can easily purchase MQA.

 

Buy Tidal Music and you can hangout with JayZ. Buy MQA to hang out with Bob Stuart?

[Rt66indierock]

23 hours ago, botrytis said:

 

He was the gent pushing MS to be more closed system with their audio codec. 

 

The old phrase, what has he done lately.

 

Amir has been retired for some time.

[Rt66indierock]

17 minutes ago, Stereo said:

Anyone interested should ask Tidal about it's future with MQA: 

 

 

 

Somebody should about Tidal's Q1 2023 revenue.

 

Why haven't they filed their 2021 reports with Companies House.

 

And then ask them about the future of the hifi tier with MQA in it.

[Rt66indierock]

On the AMA chat with Jesse said there will be high resolution FLAC soon.

[Rt66indierock]

32 minutes ago, JoeWhip said:

Is that Jesse from Tidal?

 

 

Yes

[Rt66indierock]

10 hours ago, RichardSF said:

Tidal was acquired by Block Inc in April 2021 for 233M USD. Block have not reported separate financial numbers for Tidal (they are not obligated to), but you can find comments about Tidal in Block's quarterly and annual reports: https://investors.block.xyz/financials

 

 

RichardSF I normally like your posts, but you just defined one the biggest problems with audiophiles. The gotcha mentality.  As I’m writing this Companies House expects 2021 financial statements and considers them overdue. Block will need to file financial statements for Tidal until they file paperwork to remove them from the UK system or Tidal is liquidated.

 

Please read Dear Jim Austin and Hey Jim Austin, Audio Asylum Critics Corner. And note the dates.

[Rt66indierock]

7 hours ago, Vinyl Rules said:

https://www.musicbusinessworldwide....technology company,the US and other countries.

The financials are eye-opening. Annual revenue never exceeded £700,000 while administrative expenses exceeded £4,000,000 for 2020 and 2021!

Does anyone think Bob Stuart took this much money out of the company?

Wow. So MQA has become another Dolby FM technology. But then, many in the industry thought MQA was a scam.😎

 

I’ve looked at all the MQA LTD and publicly available financials for Meridian. Not a chance Bob Stuart took a large amount of money out of MQA Ltd. Did he spend it wisely is the question.

[Rt66indierock]

26 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Every topic is fair game here. It just needs to be done in the appropriate place. 

 

Thank you now back to the rock and roll that gets me through tax season.

[Rt66indierock]

Dead certain, look at the restated 2016 and 2017 Statement of Cash Flows. They document the services contributed by the labels in exchange for their stock.

[Rt66indierock]

9 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Doesn’t that mean mQa paid the labels?

 

You can acquire stock by contributing cash, property, or services for stock.

[Rt66indierock]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

My point is that the labels don’t have much into mQa. 

 

I consider $9.4 million to be significant. And the auditor BDO signed off on it.

[Rt66indierock]

11 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

No money changed hands. They created a big number in services. 

 

It probably costs a few bucks to prepare music files for MQA Processing. And labels had to pay for the costs of the people providing the services.

[Rt66indierock]

12 hours ago, Jud said:

 

Always costs less to the company to provide the services than the number that gets invoiced, to account for overhead and profit. Let's say around $6 million just spitballing. The last house a label CEO bought was very likely worth more.

 

Jud what do think the basis of say Warner Music's MQA stock is? Mark up the invoice and report that as income is what you are suggesting. Otherwise the debits and credits don't match. 

[Rt66indierock]

28 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

The point I’m trying to make is that the labels have a “rounding error” of “money” spent on mqa, in the big picture. Their marketing budgets are much higher in a single year. Back in the good ole days, some of the executive expense accounts were higher. 

 

And the point I’m making is the services contributed are significant to MQA Ltd. They make up about 20% of the General and Administrative Expenses of the company from inception to 12/21/21.

 

If it’s a rounding error why was a Warner Music employee still pushing MQA two years ago? See Mark Waldrep’s  April 15, 2021 post on RealHD Audio.

[Rt66indierock]

11 hours ago, Archimago said:

 

Interesting that this is already happening at just 1 month into the announcement. Again, if this is true, looks like it's not "business as usual" for MQA.

 

If there is money being exchanged - for example, Tidal needing to send $$$ to MQA for use of encoded content - then I can see why they might want to cut off that overhead expenditure as soon as possible. Another sign might be if Roon or Audirvana turn off the ability to decode MQA in software if they too have to send royalties to MQA for decoding streams! Already, Roon turned off default MQA decoding last year I think.

 

Once all the players accept that there is no future in MQA, maybe it's not unexpected that the amount of content will collapse quite quickly especially if there is still $$$ being exchanged for the use of this dead product.

 

It is possible the contract between Tidal Music and MQA Ltd. contains a termination for an insolvency event paragraph. This kind of language would be standard.

[Rt66indierock]

On 4/30/2023 at 6:14 PM, Archimago said:

 

With the gradual dissolution of the directorship and I see the lack of any further social media engagement (no updates on the MQA Twitter and FaceBook feeds) since around April 3rd for example, clearly this is not business as usual which seems to be the euphemistic hopeful outlook being presented by Darko/Lavorgna.

 

As usual, I think Darko is being coy about much of this because I think he's a lot smarter than what he portrays; can't say the same of Lavorgna who seems to have difficulty expressing himself in speech. I'm sure they've read a lot of what has been written and understand the untenable position of the MQA apologists but have to hold back because their incomes depend on being in the good graces of the audiophile industry as spokesmen. They have to look like the "good guys" and therefore project the idea of "extremists" upon folks like us nay-sayers.

 

What is at issue here is not "us vs. them" (Darko/Lavorgna are purposely creating an immature split by getting "personal" as if the lines are that easily defined). Rather it's about "honesty vs. hype", "full master quality vs. degradation", and "freedom vs. corporate control"; it's not about the people who take sides but rather why there is opposition among audiophiles.

 

As far as I can tell, for the most part, audiophiles who know about MQA have mostly rejected it once they understood the implicit dishonesty when we look at the forum posts here and elsewhere. Funny that the duo gave a shout out to Peter Veth though - birds of a feather? 😄

 

Doubtful John Darko is smarter than he seems. I’ve met him and exchanged a few emails. He made some rude comments about me and challenged me to come to RMAF. When I said here I am John after a seminar, he said I don’t know what you are talking about.

 

Michael Lavorgna said ugly things about me too, but he apologized to me face to face.

 

And I doubt either of them read anything about MQA that didn’t mimic the party line.

[Rt66indierock]

1 hour ago, stefano_mbp said:

… but this is from their own site … legacy products

 

 

Somebody lied about MQA? Ask an easier question. Who was telling the truth about MQA?

 

Then ask yourself why you had to sign a nondisclosure agreement to buy one of these nearly nonexistent  ADCs?

[Rt66indierock]

5 hours ago, Archimago said:

 

LOL. What a mess.

 

I wonder why they couldn't concurrently had both "MASTER" (MQA) and "MAX" (hi-res FLAC)? They've already indicated that they prioritize the hi-res FLAC, so in time, the more "MAX", the better and I trust in a year, not many people will notice that "MASTER" albums continue to fade away and everyone's happy that they're getting "MAX" quality.

 

What kind of execs dream up these schemes?

 

Then again, maybe the vast majority of subscribers don't care so this is Tidal's way to just sever the MQA limb and have no links to MQA-type talk including the idea of "master" sound quality as they expunge MQA from behind the scenes with zero options to have the consumer choose whether they want to keep listening to MQA or not.

 

The kind of executives that want to be where the action is in Block Inc. not trying to keep an irrelevant sinking ship afloat.

 

I think the vast majority in the Max tier don’t care about MQA. If Tidal revenues don’t improve greatly then Block Inc. should shut Tidal Music down.

 

I’ve emailed Simon Cohn about his misunderstandings about MQA, Meridian and Tidal Music. He is happy this article is the top performing post on Digital Trends today. He is falling back on the old audio press standbys.  After he played the are you sure card about Meridian’s finances? He just played the why do you care and what’s your skin in the game cards?

[Rt66indierock]

7 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Is there a unit of measurement smaller than a baby step?

 

A Barbie step?

https://reason.com/2008/12/17/is-there-something-smaller-tha/

[Rt66indierock]

Is Peter Veth's mqa audio - development and reviews on FaceBook still up? Or did I get banned for saying if Block Inc's other revenue wasn't at least $70 million in Q2 2024 they might as well shut Tidal down and stop the earnings drag. It was $50 million so Tidal's growth has been flat since 2020.

[Rt66indierock]

52 minutes ago, Archimago said:

I still see it up on Facebook with 7 messages in the last day. Wonder what kind of 'developments' talking about today! I assume they're still trying to hock SCL6.

 

Good to know thanks. They can talk all they want but unless somebody steps up with some money time is running out. 

[Rt66indierock]

52 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Pretty soon MQA will be vaporware. 

 

Soon, I hope.  Will you miss Bob Stuart being vague?