MQA is Vaporware

[UkPhil]

58 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I know the person hired to write the plug-in. I can’t say more.  
 

If it was actually thing in real studios, you’d be able to add it to any Pro Tools DAW. 

I am assuming the studios would have to have an NDA in place and pay some money every time they to use it ? 

[UkPhil]

4 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

If it was actually the real deal, it would be the format for everything. Kind of like pure PCM.

I just cannot see it being part of a production system, even reading @FredericV PDF post about 2L they are more interested in Dolby Atmos deliveries in their studio setup. 
But in the end if MQA have all corners covered in the industry it may be difficult to stop this juggernaut ploughing through the consumer path 

[UkPhil]

16 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

Here is a nice example of how clueless the press is.

 

 

Michael Fremer, from Analog Planet-

 

"The TIDAL MQA streamed 96/24 version was like another recording altogether. The piano sounded more like a piano made of wood. The church space on the live performance was well-separated from the instrument and it was overall far more coherent and satisfying. I don’t understand those who are MQA resistant especially those who view it as a “plot” to control their recorded musical existence.  And, not surprising (to me at least), the extremely well mastered and flawlessly pressed vinyl record sounded very much like the MQA 96/24 stream.

 

https://www.analogplanet.com/content/lang-lang—-classical-music-superstar-critics-love-hate-hate-delivers-his-goldberg-variations

 

 

Fremer is playing safe, as if someone who’s detested digital for years suddenly will accept a proprietary consumer format, I will say it definitely confirms the marketing spin MQA has done on the industry, this juggernaut will take some derailing 

[UkPhil]

7 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said:

Everyone boycott Tidal, and Warner Music, and any vendor peddling MQA hardware products.

Seen as MQA is tiny when it comes to streaming if you take on board Spotify / Apple and behemoth Amazon, the issue isn’t Tidal the bigger issue is all the ground work has been done behind the scenes with the record companies buying into MQA ltd using Tidal as their test bench. If Tidal disappeared tomorrow I think the damage could already be done as the back catalogue could be processed as MQA and fed to all “lossless” companies as the only alternative keeping the revenue flowing. 

[UkPhil]

2 minutes ago, GUTB said:

MQA claims to dramatically improve time domain errors. What non-MQA process can do this? Record in DXD? Move back to master reels? 

If this was the case then all recordings studios would be using it, in professional terms it’s a non starter 

[UkPhil]

3 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

Yes, Please note that Paul Miller was the first print journalist to cast doubts on MQA and in fact

the first to print measurements that exposed MQA as lossy, and to show aliasing and other artifacts.

He also, if I am not mistaken, was to first to show that MQA is limited to 24/96.

Or even 17/96 if you wanted to just look at musical information 😜

[UkPhil]

42 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said:

Yes but that's just the 2nd unfold, after the 3rd unfold a revolution in digital audio occurs, and subsequently, whole new worlds are birthed.

 

I'm told BS is working on a new version of origami in which a 4th unfold transports you to an alternate universe, one in which you hear music with no air causing any time smear.

Come 2021 the 5th unfold could arrive whereby you could be consumed by a black hole to arrive at another non smeared timeline were you can get the original first master tape fingerprinted to suit MQA filters 🤪🤪

 

[UkPhil]

Wow just noticed this thread is 4 years old in 2 days, I would like to think it has had some influence on members to bring an alternative viewpoint of MQA as their isn’t much else in the media questioning the reason for its existence against free alternative solutions either lossless or lossy in 2020.
2021 is going to be interesting to see how the streaming services evolve and will MQA jump beyond the walls of Tidal 

[UkPhil]

33 minutes ago, Phil Baker said:

Neil Young removes his music from Tidal.

https://neilyoungarchives.com/news/1/article?id=Tidal-Misleading-Listeners

and refers to this forum

Cannot get link to work ? 

[UkPhil]

14 minutes ago, Phil Baker said:

Alternate link is www.neilyoungarchives.com

Thanks 

 

[UkPhil]

3 hours ago, lucretius said:

 

I downloaded all the 2L test files and set up each performance in Roon like this:

 

 

I am not able to reliably discern an audible difference among the formats.

 

Which questions the existence of MQA  for the consumer in 2021 ? 

[UkPhil]

17 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

@GUTB

Re the Joseph Haydn; String Quartet In D  --  DXD vs MQA-CD.  Still not hearing a difference.  If you are hearing a difference with this performance or others from the test bench, if you could, would you please note the time stamp where such differences are obvious and I will try to zero in on that.  Thanks.

This highlights that time domain accuracy is probably not an issue in the PCM files, I have listened to a fair few differing quality files purchased as standard PCM and the equivalent MQA version and I couldn’t hear no difference which created a night and day reaction that listeners seem to get from them 

[UkPhil]

13 minutes ago, Fast and Bulbous said:

Meanwhile.....    "Neil Young sells song rights in '$150m' deal"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55557633

 

I am assuming he still owns the master recordings though,  he just won’t get royalties if they use his music in the latest toilet roll advert 😊 

[UkPhil]

Re reading @Archimago article from 2018, this part even though hypothetical may now be echoing what’s happening since the replacement of 16bit PCM files with MQA versions on the Tidal platform by Warners with more to come allegedly from Universal and Sony.

 

 

“Imagine a world where MQA is wildly successful and the only new digital releases from the major labels are in MQA. You can stream MQA, you can buy the MQA files, and even CDs are MQA-CD (“Buy those unaffected CDs before they all become MQA-CD remasters!”) The unsuspecting music lover who has never come across a critical article on MQA might be impressed initially that these are supposedly “hi-res” 24/48 MQA files or told that the 16/44.1 MQA-CD contains some secret sauce that makes it sound amazing. Initially, the sound quality might be okay on all the equipment he/she owns. But over time, the encoding system starts to degrade the sound of the undecoded data. At some point, what if the undecoded file becomes something like only 10-bits resolution unless it’s played back through an MQA certified device?”

[UkPhil]

39 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

Time for an update since the 2019 financial statements of MQA Limited are now posted. MQA lost 4,176,743 in Pounds. Revenue was 492,291. Xiama Music will shut down on February 5, 2021 leaving only Tidal and nugs.net as the only music streaming services with MQA content. Neither has significant subscribers. Download services are sparse with only 2L, e-onkyo music, HiResAudio and nugs.net.

 

I don’t see enough MQA encoded music to drive demand for hardware and software able to decode MQA files especially in the United States.

Unless they get on board with a bigger streaming player or manage to have MQA files streamed on lossless sites as replacements to PCM I think it’s going to be a hard battle. 

[UkPhil]

On 1/8/2021 at 5:17 PM, Rt66indierock said:

Time for an update since the 2019 financial statements of MQA Limited are now posted. MQA lost 4,176,743 in Pounds. Revenue was 492,291. Xiama Music will shut down on February 5, 2021 leaving only Tidal and nugs.net as the only music streaming services with MQA content. Neither has significant subscribers. Download services are sparse with only 2L, e-onkyo music, HiResAudio and nugs.net.

 

I don’t see enough MQA encoded music to drive demand for hardware and software able to decode MQA files especially in the United States.

It looks like they have secured 10 million in two 5 million trenches to take then into 2022 its a big gamble because these companies will want a return of their investment, plus the MD took 400k out which won’t help the cause 

[UkPhil]

58 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

Since its inception MQA Ltd has lost somewhere in the order of thirty million pounds. While this may seem like small "seed" money to a multi billion investment firm, it is still big money to put out unless they expect substantial returns.

What leads them to expect the huge returns?

For them to expect substantial returns they would have to expect that MQA was going to become THE music distribution method.

For them to expect that MQA was going to become THE music distribution method, what promises have they extracted from the backing studios?

Have the studios promised MQA that they are going to force MQA on the music consumer?

This is their only viable route if they can pull it off 

[UkPhil]

12 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

This is truly amazing. As of December 4, 2020, MQA is still using the lossless term and at the same time suggesting its better than lossless. Wow, can we get just a tiny bit of honesty from this company. 

 

https://mqa.jp/article/is-mqa-lossless/

 

PCM 30 year old technology and ready to be put out to pasture, but strangely enough still used in most studios hmmmmm !!!!

[UkPhil]

7 minutes ago, Archimago said:

 

Absolutely. This was one of the early clues that there was something very wrong with MQA and its strongly hyped claims. The fact that they did not openly share, or even attempt some kind of A/B comparison at the audio shows using what should be their "reference" gear suggests that there was something they needed to hide.

 

At the 2016 Vancouver Audio Show, @mitchco and I specifically went early and grabbed some prime seats at the MQA demo to be treated to that kind of demo. Questions were specifically asked to perform even an open A/B comparison between RedBook and this so-called "hi-res" MQA audio. They simply would not do it. IMO, this is clearly no way to introduce new technology that's supposed to be better and worthy of consumer attention!

The same goes for erasing the 16bit PCM versions off Tidal and leaving the MQA equivalents only nobody could compare them 

[UkPhil]

2 hours ago, Confused said:

Having abondened my quest to find the Loch Ness Monster and Big Foot, I have found the third unfold! 

(and I thought an MQA renderer would do the first unfold?)

 

A new article from What Hi Fi:

 

iDSD Diablo is iFi's new flagship portable DAC/headphone amp | What Hi-Fi?

 

To quote:

 

MQA – the hi-res streaming codec used by Tidal’s ‘Masters’ tier – is also supported through the USB and S/PDIF inputs, with full decoding of MQA files up to 384kHz thanks to the processing power of that new 16-core XMOS chip. This means that the full ‘three unfold’ decoding process is performed internally, as opposed to only the final unfold in the manner of an MQA ‘renderer’. 

And does this take it even further, I need a lie down 

 

[UkPhil]

1 hour ago, Daccord said:

 

That wasn't my experience. What's your source for this claim?

I agree all items I have tried are now 16 bit MQA which was once red book 

[UkPhil]

1 hour ago, Confused said:

Who's this guy?

 

 

Don’t know but he’s bang on target with his claims 👍

[UkPhil]

Seems Mark Waldrep has gone to town with his latest posting

http://secure.campaigner.com/csb/Public/show/566i-2cn52b--t824c-e3eqqfj3

[UkPhil]

Nice to see that not everyone interviewed for the absolute sound is a fan 

 

“As for MQA compression, it has a tendency to time-shift transients to the nearest sample instead of rendering these transients with the proper timing. The effect is audible, and I do not like it. From a streaming bandwidth standpoint, MQA offers no advantages. There are lossless schemes that can achieve the same bit rate."

 

https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/benchmark-media-systems-la4-line-amplifier-and-dac3-b-digital-to-analog-converter

[UkPhil]

42 minutes ago, R1200CL said:

https://hsm.utimaco.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/MQA-Case-Study_vfinal_DIN-A4.pdf
 

“The motivation: improving the user experience while authenticating the artist’s work
MQA has chosen Utimaco to enable their revolutionary technology that delivers master quality audio in a file that is small enough to stream or download. MQA music guarantees the highest recording quality, as well as the provenance of the file. Utimaco’s role was to provide the hardware backend – the root of trust – in which the cryptographic keys, which are used to sign MQA audio streams, are generated and stored.“

 

“The solution: authentication to prove provenance and identify master recordings
To ensure the integrity of the artist’s music from the original source to the end listener, MQA needed a solution for securely signing the music file, to ensure cryptographically that what the listener hears is what the artist approved. Authentication is critical to MQA technology, which must work end-to-end, from the studio all the way to the music fan. An advanced cryptographic solution was the best option to verify the musical file. MQA turned to Utimaco, a leading manufacturer of hardware-based security solutions that provide the root of trust to keep cryptographic keys safe, secure critical digital infrastructures and authenticate high value data assets.”

Reading the pdf, and we have prove from both Dr. Axis and Niel Young, that they never signed anything, I would expect no artists ever signed anything.

It’s scary reading this pdf, when we know what is being stated, can’t be correct. 

“The implementation: hardware to authenticate the end-to-end process of music
recording
In the case of MQA, the Utimaco hardware module will be deployed at the encoding house, as well as at the mastering house where the mastering engineers finalize the product. Once the master recording is finalized, the artist and sound engineers sign off on the musical file and when it is downloaded to the decoder – the user’s playback device – an indicator lights up (e.g. an LED on hardware or an icon on-screen) as proof of the file’s provenance and to ensure that the sound is identical to that of the source material. Only by controlling this entire process can the optimal MQA performance be achieved; with Utimaco’s flexible solution, the integrity of the artist’s master recording can be maintained all the way from the studio to the listener.”

 

Find me a sound engineer that has signed, or artist 😀

(And who signed for the dead artist).
And a studio with the hardware module implemented. 
 

In addition there is a requirement to use the hardware module 2 places. As Chris has said, the encoding house is in the cloud. 

It’s very unclear how an artist can have an unique digital key that really only belong to him/her/the band. 
Here in Norway we have digital keys implemented in SIM cards. It’s used by banks and credit cards companies, as well as digital communications with official departments etc. 
You can read about it here. 
 

 

 

 

The majority of files are not classed as MQA Studio (Blue) no approval just batch converted so it’s all just marketing BS, those 16bit files are just upsampled with an apodizing filter selected maybe those keys are potentially there to downgrade the sound of the file in the future so you have to buy into the hardware to get the pseudo lossless version 

Maybe MQA’s long term goal is to have just one file for everybody