MQA is Vaporware

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, yahooboy said:

👍🏻

 

All gone Thank You

Thanks for letting me know. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, yahooboy said:

Funnily they do not want You to record the conversation.

 

Too bad for them. I did :~)

[The Computer Audiophile]

18 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

That’s quite the narrative, without regard for facts. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

I reached out to Tidal PR to see if I could ask someone there questions, but unsurprisingly I haven’t received a response. 
 

In my experience, companies with great products want all the press they can get. Companies with something to hide, want to pick and choose which outlets they talk to. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

5 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

attempting to clarify....

Or deblur as they say. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

25 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

MQA has built in authentication?  How, exactly do you build in authentication?

This should make everyone feel good. Not. 
 

[The Computer Audiophile]

10 minutes ago, sphinxsix said:

I'm waiting for MQA vinyl

We already have it :~(

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/recording-april-2018-fairytales-original-master-edition-mqa

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 hours ago, fas42 said:

Of course, MQA-CD is just another HDCD, in the sense of what's being done technically - I don't recall the music world collapsing back in 1995, because this new, 'enhanced' CD came onto the scene ...

Not even close. HDCD didn’t remove 3 bits. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

31 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

 

From that article, he seems to be talking about you guys ! You're all famous 😁

 

Bob kept telling me that for a long time. Saying @Miska and Mans were talking about high school level stuff and didn't understand what he was doing with MQA. It's a common tactic used by those hiding something. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

11 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

The audio community appears to be susceptable to 'high priests' with great intellectual dishonesty or true incompetence.

This is a human problem, not just audio. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

48 minutes ago, Cebolla said:

I'm primarily here for the daily MQA proverb.

You made my day :~)

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

When I send a PCM 24/96 file to my DAC and then stop play, the DAC still reads 24/94.  However, when I send an MQA 192 file to my DAC, during play the DAC reads 24/192 but as soon as I stop play, the DAC reads 24/48.  This leads me to believe that there is no upsampling done within the hardware. (Although, I could be wrong.)

 

It's a 24/48 file that the hardware is instructed to upsample by MQA indicators inside the file. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, lucretius said:

I know the theory 🙂.  But how can I be certain the DAC is really doing the upsampling?

MQA certification mandates the DAC upsample doesn't it?

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, lucretius said:

I don't know -- you are probably right.

There certainly are limits for such items like the DragonFly and the power it has to upsample and supported sample rates, but for the most part I believe a DAC must just look at the selected filter and final sample rate specified in the file and use it. Such a convoluted way of doing things. 

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, lucretius said:

Why aren't the labels releasing MQA 192 and MQA 96 (and MQA 88.2) files directly to the consumer and not just to streaming services?

Perhaps because only four people would buy it. 
 

Someday MQA will go away because no technology is around forever. Who wants to be stuck with crippled music? 

[The Computer Audiophile]

10 hours ago, lucretius said:

And yet they thought it was wise to release MQA-CD cds to the consumer (at least in Japan).

Let me correct that, “And yet they thought it would make money to release MQA-CD cds to the consumer ...”

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, MarkusBarkus said:

Interesting interview. They must have a tidy MQArmy to chase down the artists and master files to push out that much content so quickly.

"White glove treatment" feels

more like "blue glove treatment."

Or latex glove treatment. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Welcome to the lovely world of MQA. I'm old enough to remember when MQA Ltd. said MQA would remove all the uncertainty and ensure everyone receives perfect files. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

I’d sure like to be in the room when some suit from Warner’s tells Tim Cook what format music Apple is going to stream. 

Would be interesting but what’s Apple’s leverage? Record Kind of Bluish?

[The Computer Audiophile]

Let’s not forget MQA forces the listener to use very questionable filters. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, daverich4 said:

Turn it around. What’s Warner’s leverage? None of their music on Apple Music?

Without Warner’s catalog, Apple doesn’t have a real streaming service. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

I disagree. On their website, Apple claims they stream billions of songs to their various devices per day. Warner is going to kiss that off and count on a niche company like Tidal to keep them afloat? In any event, Warner’s is currently worth around 15 Billion and Apple is worth around 1.3 Trillion. If Tim Cook wants the Warner’s catalog without MQA he could buy them with the money he keeps in his sock drawer. 

Never happen. 
 

spotify is Apple’s competition. Who would sign up for Apple Music without millions of good songs if Spotify offers everything for the same price?

 

Just because Apple has the cash, doesn’t mean it’s a good move to purchase something. Why not purchase ARM? It didn’t make sense even though Apple’s business depends on ARM. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

That’s not been their business model so far. They have very specific requirements for how music is to be provided to them. They’re a big enough customer they can stipulate the terms of the sale. Just like Walmart tells the farmers that provide them with produce what they’ll grow, how it will be packaged, how it will be delivered and what they can charge for it. Don’t like the terms? Sell somewhere else. 
 

https://www.apple.com/itunes/docs/apple-digital-masters.pdf

 

This is vastly different from farmers. 

 

Apple provides requirements to help the labels and itself. If Taylor Swift provides apple a 320 Kbps MP3, they're taking the 320 Kbps MP3 and converting it to AAC. Without Taylor Swift, millions of people are moving to Spotify. It's the same for the labels. Apple isn't the only game in town. Plus, the labels own a big chunk of Spotify. It's better for them if Apple has problems because people will switch. Nobody is going back to piracy. They'll switch to Spotify and call it a day. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Also notice the word requirements isn't in Apple's document.