MQA is Vaporware

[Ski Bum]

12 hours ago, Jud said:

 

Should include those as well as the White Album stuff to get a range.

 

But we’re getting ahead of ourselves, as no one’s volunteered either to provide the files, discuss what tests can and should be run, or run the tests.

Fair enough.  In the interim, I'll just listen to corresponding Tidal MQA versus Qobuz hi rez files back-to-back on Roon and come to my own (biased and placebo-infected, but not financially interested) views. 

 

I listened to the White Album.  Qobuz wins that one over Tidal, but the vinyl beats them both.  In the case of the Allman Brothers tracks, I think the MQA files sound best (even beating my vinyl, which is quite unusual).

 

I do not have measurement gear and do not purport to be testing with scientific rigor.

[mav52]

9 hours ago, Siltech817 said:

 

Last year's investment took the form of a loan, could be a sign of investment banker impatience.

It could also be to pay off all of their cheerleaders.😀

[Jud]

1 hour ago, beetlemania said:

I used "Oh Darling" (24/44) as a reference track while I built new crossovers for my Thiels (compared old and new XOs via mono listening).

 

I think this is a really nice technique when you can manage it. @pkane2001's DeltaWave software (still in beta but looking really good) makes this possible more often.  

 

[Rt66indierock]

4 hours ago, Jud said:

 

I saw that. We can try to read tea leaves, or wait and see.  I know I’m not smart enough to speculate, so that leaves wait and see.  

 

Reinet generally issues their Annual Report in late May for the year ending March 31. 

[Jud]

1 hour ago, Ski Bum said:

Fair enough.  In the interim, I'll just listen to corresponding Tidal MQA versus Qobuz hi rez files back-to-back on Roon and come to my own (biased and placebo-infected, but not financially interested) views. 

 

I listened to the White Album.  Qobuz wins that one over Tidal, but the vinyl beats them both.  In the case of the Allman Brothers tracks, I think the MQA files sound best (even beating my vinyl, which is quite unusual).

 

I do not have measurement gear and do not purport to be testing with scientific rigor.

 

There were MQA tracks I liked better as well, but they were obviously different masters.  This made me think of how the better masterings could sound if they hadn't gone through the process that made the MQA White Album sound worse to you.

 

Of course I don't know if the Allman Brothers albums are different masterings, outside of MQA processing.

[Paul R]

10 hours ago, Siltech817 said:

The only nasty thing that I can see there was your response. Maybe try to grow a thicker skin. You should practice what you've preached, and engage in a bit of self-reflection too.

Separately I do not wish to spend even one euro on MQA, beer money or otherwise.

You can amuse yourself on my ignore list.

 

Because, like a few others, you have an agenda here that leaves you accepting only one narrow rationalized viewpoint. I do not get the sense you are an internet troll, so why would I object to you having your viewpoint. Indeed, why would anyone object to someone liking the sound of MQA? Or vinyl? Or tape? Or streamed music? 

 

The only valid objections to MQA are:

  1. Technical lies they promulgated

  2. Possible DRM 

  3. Their behavior at RMAF, which mirrors the bad behavior in this thread. In fact, this thread has much worse examples. 

 

Only a very few here hold the moral high ground, and the people constantly trying to shout down anyone who dares to express an opinion other than the one they hold is - well I can not say what it is.

 

I know what it is not - it is not garnering respect for the hard work some few here have done to uncover and clearly document what MQA the company is up to. It is not welcoming of those they deem outsiders. It is not adult behavior. Is it not random. It is not compatible with reasoned conversation, even passionate reasoned conversation. It is not a way to make people successful. It is not enhancing the reputation of this place on the net. 

 

 

 

[Samuel T Cogley]

40 minutes ago, Paul R said:

I know what it is not - it is not garnering respect for the hard work some few here have done to uncover and clearly document what MQA the company is up to. It is not welcoming of those they deem outsiders. It is not adult behavior. Is it not random. It is not compatible with reasoned conversation, even passionate reasoned conversation. It is not a way to make people successful. It is not enhancing the reputation of this place on the net.

 

Hi Paul.  Regarding "reputation", I think it depends who you talk to.  I'm sure we agree MQA themselves would very much like to see this thread vanish.

 

I'll just offer that it's counterproductive to helplessly rail against what you see as incivility.  All any of us can do is check our own behavior.  Using pejoratives or ad hominem (or reacting to those people who do) does nothing to advance the discussion.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

48 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

Because, like a few others, you have an agenda here that leaves you accepting only one narrow rationalized viewpoint. I do not get the sense you are an internet troll, so why would I object to you having your viewpoint. Indeed, why would anyone object to someone liking the sound of MQA? Or vinyl? Or tape? Or streamed music? 

 

The only valid objections to MQA are:

  1. Technical lies they promulgated

  2. Possible DRM 

  3. Their behavior at RMAF, which mirrors the bad behavior in this thread. In fact, this thread has much worse examples. 

 

Only a very few here hold the moral high ground, and the people constantly trying to shout down anyone who dares to express an opinion other than the one they hold is - well I can not say what it is.

 

I know what it is not - it is not garnering respect for the hard work some few here have done to uncover and clearly document what MQA the company is up to. It is not welcoming of those they deem outsiders. It is not adult behavior. Is it not random. It is not compatible with reasoned conversation, even passionate reasoned conversation. It is not a way to make people successful. It is not enhancing the reputation of this place on the net. 

 

 

 

You forgot one major objection:

 

Marketing Lies: "Authentication", "Studio Master" quality, "Audibly Lossless"...and many more.

 

The fact you left this out, and these things have been in from of you over, and over, and over again, clearly shows

you have blinders on and why you continue to mischaracterize the people here whose goal is to eradicate MQA.

 

I am holding back on "disingenuous" and "intellectually dishonest", terms a poster used 50 pages back...to see if

you have an epiphany. 

[Paul R]

1 hour ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Hi Paul.  Regarding "reputation", I think it depends who you talk to.  I'm sure we agree MQA themselves would very much like to see this thread vanish.

 

I'll just offer that it's counterproductive to helplessly rail against what you see as incivility.  All any of us can do is check our own behavior.  Using pejoratives or ad hominem (or reacting to those people who do) does nothing to advance the discussion.

 

True, but - some things need to be opposed, within reason. I don’t agree with the ends here - “totally liquidate MQA”, and most certainly not the means being pursued to reach those ends. At least not in any perspective I can imagine.

 

“How many things are now called the worst evil, which are only twelve feet wide and three months long! But some day greater dragons will come into the world.

FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE, Thus Spoke Zarathustra”

 

 

[Shadders]

1 hour ago, Paul R said:

2. Possible DRM 

Hi,

If you examine what MQA is, in its current format, it is high resolution (pseudo high resolution).

 

If as per the MQA Ltd mission statement, they become the sole distribution format, then everything becomes MQA defined high resolution.

 

High resolution files are a premium - and MQA CD's imported into the UK are circa £50.

 

No one is going to pay either £18 for a download, or £50 for a single CD.

 

So, how will MQA Ltd manage those people who want a cheaper option like normal CD, or MP3 even ?

 

If MQA is the sole distribution format, then either they sell normal CD's etc., and MQA is NOT the sole distribution format - or they degrade the sound for MQA downloads or CD's for those who don't pay the premium - which is DRM.

 

MQA will be DRM.

 

Regards,

Shadders.

[John Dyson]

1 hour ago, Jud said:

 

There were MQA tracks I liked better as well, but they were obviously different masters.  This made me think of how the better masterings could sound if they hadn't gone through the process that made the MQA White Album sound worse to you.

 

In my opinion, even though MQA might not be a good thing -- the mastering problem is often worse when it comes to technical quality. (That is, ignoring the financal/political/licensing aspects.)   I sure hope that people don't really blame the mastering engineers either -- blame the beancounters that keep the engineers from doing their due diligence and spending the time needed to do a good job.

As far as I know, there is frustration about this matter on both sides of the mastering/consumer side of things.

 

John

[Paul R]

10 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

If you examine what MQA is, in its current format, it is high resolution (pseudo high resolution).

 

If as per the MQA Ltd mission statement, they become the sole distribution format, then everything becomes MQA defined high resolution.

 

High resolution files are a premium - and MQA CD's imported into the UK are circa £50.

 

No one is going to pay either £18 for a download, or £50 for a single CD.

 

So, how will MQA Ltd manage those people who want a cheaper option like normal CD, or MP3 even ?

 

If MQA is the sole distribution format, then either they sell normal CD's etc., and MQA is NOT the sole distribution format - or they degrade the sound for MQA downloads or CD's for those who don't pay the premium - which is DRM.

 

MQA will be DRM.

 

Regards,

Shadders.

 

MQA will never be the sole distribution method for music. It may become the only option for some releases.

[Paul R]

13 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

In my opinion, even though MQA might not be a good thing -- the mastering problem is often worse when it comes to technical quality. (That is, ignoring the financal/political/licensing aspects.)   I sure hope that people don't really blame the mastering engineers either -- blame the beancounters that keep the engineers from doing their due diligence and spending the time needed to do a good job.

As far as I know, there is frustration about this matter on both sides of the mastering/consumer side of things.

 

John

 

Wow - when you put it that way, it sounds like the start of the Second Loudness War! 

 

Maybe so...

[kumakuma]

8 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

MQA will never be the sole distribution method for music. It may become the only option for some releases.

 

Can you provide some statistics on how accurate your crystal ball has been in the past?

[mansr]

20 minutes ago, Paul R said:

MQA will never be the sole distribution method for music.

It will, if things go their way. Some of us are working to prevent this.

 

20 minutes ago, Paul R said:

It may become the only option for some releases.

It already has.

[Paul R]

16 minutes ago, mansr said:

It will, if things go their way. Some of us are working to prevent this.

 

I think you and a few others have already ensured that it never will be the sole distribution method. Facts are difficult to spin when the person with the facts refuses to spin along.

 

 

 

16 minutes ago, mansr said:

It already has.

 

I haven't found anything that is a MQA only release yet, but I have not been looking that hard or reading that carefully. Certainly not anything I have purchased is MQA only yet. 

I believe you though. 

 

 

[Paul R]

35 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

Can you provide some statistics on how accurate your crystal ball has been in the past?

 

What crystal ball?  Are you using a crystal ball to come to the opposite conclusion? 

 

Yours,

-Paul 

 

[kumakuma]

2 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

What crystal ball?  Are you using a crystal ball to come to the opposite conclusion? 

 

Yours,

-Paul 

 

 

No, I am against MQA because there is a risk that it will limit my access to music I want to listen to, in the format that I want to listen to it. The probability of this happening is irrelevant to the fact that this risk exists.

 

 

[mav52]

11 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

I haven't found anything that is a MQA only release yet, but I have not been looking that hard or reading that carefully. Certainly not anything I have purchased is MQA only yet. 

I believe you though. 

 

 

 Ok, Paul I really don't know if you use 2L or not, but their collected artist sold on their site used to be in all formats, but now its MQA.   ITS MQA on Tidal and its MQA on this site. https://www.highresaudio.com/en/label/view/e9303123-e18a-4694-bda5-2edd10004141/2l

 

You can still get their artist on HDTRACKS and Native DSD but some of that music was old.  

[John Dyson]

1 hour ago, mav52 said:

 Ok, Paul I really don't know if you use 2L or not, but their collected artist sold on their site used to be in all formats, but now its MQA.   ITS MQA on Tidal and its MQA on this site. https://www.highresaudio.com/en/label/view/e9303123-e18a-4694-bda5-2edd10004141/2l

 

You can still get their artist on HDTRACKS and Native DSD but some of that music was old.  

For me -- MQA highresaudio is zero res audio.  Might as well not be offered as a product as far as I am concerned.  They should just sell the undamaged product on appropriate medium -- much better alll around. 

 

John

[Paul R]

1 hour ago, kumakuma said:

 

No, I am against MQA because there is a risk that it will limit my access to music I want to listen to, in the format that I want to listen to it. The probability of this happening is irrelevant to the fact that this risk exists.

 

 

 

Just a minor disagreement there. If the risk is low enough, it doesn't make sense to worry about it. Like the risk of the sun burping and sterilizing the entire planet. It is a real risk, and even has a calculated probability. But it is about of the same order of magnitude as MQA taking "over the world."  IMNSHO, YMMV, etc. 

 

-Paul 

 

[Ralf11]

Your risk assessment is mere speculation.

 

A proper risk assessment has parameters of validity added, either by calculation or by expert judgement. 

[Paul R]

1 hour ago, mav52 said:

 Ok, Paul I really don't know if you use 2L or not, but their collected artist sold on their site used to be in all formats, but now its MQA.   ITS MQA on Tidal and its MQA on this site. https://www.highresaudio.com/en/label/view/e9303123-e18a-4694-bda5-2edd10004141/2l

 

You can still get their artist on HDTRACKS and Native DSD but some of that music was old.  

 

Hi Chis - that is certainly a bugaboo if you buy a lot of 2L, unless you can find what you want on NativeDSD or such. I don't buy a lot of 2L, so honestly, I don't pay much attention to them. 

 

My take is give them 12 months or so, and as sales drop off, they may decide to go back to normal hi-res formats. Or, unfortunately, they may be so successful with MQA that they continue on that path. To me, 2L is a small player, similar to the DSD shops and high-resolution music download shops. 

 

-Paul 

 

[Kal Rubinson]

2 hours ago, mav52 said:

 Ok, Paul I really don't know if you use 2L or not, but their collected artist sold on their site used to be in all formats, but now its MQA.   ITS MQA on Tidal and its MQA on this site. https://www.highresaudio.com/en/label/view/e9303123-e18a-4694-bda5-2edd10004141/2l

 

You can still get their artist on HDTRACKS and Native DSD but some of that music was old.  

I don't see anything at all sold on their site currently.  OTOH, the 2L physical releases contain all formats and HRA shows 2L downloads available in 

FLAC 176.4
FLAC 88.2
MQA
DSD 128
DSD 64

 

So, the apocalypse is still to come............................................

[Daccord]

Maybe no apocalypse yet, but there's definitely a red Tidal. Many new releases are now MQA only. I don't use the Tidal app for playback, and my DAC doesn't do MQA, so I am looking for CD-quality only. Tidal has quickly become very frustrating due to MQA. I hope whatever MQA Ltd is paying them makes up for lost subscriptions. Unfortunately, Qobuz isn't in Canada yet.