Jump to content
Rt66indierock

MQA is Vaporware

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

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.😀


The Truth Is Out There

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.  

 


One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> microRendu -> USPCB -> ISO Regen (powered by LPS-1) -> Ghent JSSG360 USB cable -> Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC ->

Spectral DMC-12 & DMA-150 -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.


One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> microRendu -> USPCB -> ISO Regen (powered by LPS-1) -> Ghent JSSG360 USB cable -> Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC ->

Spectral DMC-12 & DMA-150 -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

 

 

 


Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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”


 

 


Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.


Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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...


Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

 

 


Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 

 


Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.  


The Truth Is Out There

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 

 

Edited by Paul R
Dang typos, I really hate the little devils...

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 

 


Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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............................................


Kal Rubinson

Music in the Round

Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...