MQA is Vaporware

[bogi]

crenca, look at this

High-Res Audio Streaming Gets Underway | Twice

2 citations:

 

Other companies are also developing technologies to make high-res streaming practical, Napster/Rhapsody CEO Mike Davis told the Official CES Daily.

...

 

Other music services also spoke highly of high-res streaming during a Thursday press conference, including David Chesky, CEO of high-res download service HDTracks, but he didn’t say when his company would launch high-res streaming.

 

And in a written statement distributed by DEG at the show, Pandora CTO Chris Martin said, “Pandora has the platform to make this [high-res streaming] big!”

 

It looks that Napster/Rhapsody and Pandora are developing their own technology/platform for streaming.

 

Apple is known to develop their own technology too, see

Universal, Sony and Warner Music, Pandora, RIAA Announce Support for Hi-Res Audio Streaming | Billboard

 

Notably absent from today's announcement are streaming market leaders Spotify and Apple (the latter of which is reportedly developing their own high fidelity technology).

[mav52]

FYI

 

At a press conference, the Digital Entertainment Group announced that several other streaming services would offer “hi-res” streaming (including Pandora, HDtracks, Napster/Rhapsody). High-level executives from major record labels also stated their support for hi-res streaming, but inexplicably there was no mention of MQA and no opportunity for Q&A. I later learned that all these services will offer MQA streaming later this year. The MQA floodgates appear to have opened.

 

They never actually said they would offer MQA. If you have a link that notes they are offering MQA that would be appreciated

[bogi]

They never actually said they would offer MQA. If you have a link that notes they are offering MQA that would be appreciated

 

 

I already posted that link. http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/mqa-vaporware-31115/index63.html#post627347

 

It may be hoax ...

[crenca]

crenca, look at this

High-Res Audio Streaming Gets Underway | Twice

2 citations:

 

 

...

 

 

 

It looks that Napster/Rhapsody and Pandora are developing their own technology/platform for streaming.

 

Apple is known to develop their own technology too, see

Universal, Sony and Warner Music, Pandora, RIAA Announce Support for Hi-Res Audio Streaming | Billboard

 

All interesting Bogi. So what does this "technology" and "practicality" they are talking about imply? Merely a compression scheme? Again, I would expect it to be more than that - not that I know any actual "facts" around this but I do believe that is a kind of necessary condition the industry is expecting...

[bogi]

crenca, "developing technologies to make high-res streaming practical" doesn't look like streaming of ordinary hires FLAC. For FLAC streaming they don't need to develop technologies, it is already developed.

 

So I am very curious ...

[The Computer Audiophile]

They never actually said they would offer MQA. If you have a link that notes they are offering MQA that would be appreciated

 

I talked to Napster and tried the high res streaming. When asked about MQA I was told the company is looking at it. My guess for all the services is that they will stream what the labels offer. I believe the labels are taking back power because there isn't a single service they are beholden to.

[witchdoctor]

@witchdoctor: It is always good to mention information sources.

 

Music Industry and DEG Voice Support For Hi-Res Streaming - DEG

 

http://degonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/f_Stream-the-Studio.docx

 

No mention of MQA ... What's your source of information?

 

Its funny in another thread I posted a link and someone said its a PIA cause they don't want to read the article.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Its funny in another thread I posted a link and someone said its a PIA cause they don't want to read the article.

 

Let me guess, it was jbwhite. He came back as David B. before I banned him permanently.

[crenca]

I talked to Napster and tried the high res streaming. When asked about MQA I was told the company is looking at it. My guess for all the services is that they will stream what the labels offer. I believe the labels are taking back power because there isn't a single service they are beholden to.

 

Makes sense to me. Back when FM radio was much more of a market presence, it had "power" because if you were not getting air play, you most likely were not selling records at the rate you wish. Streaming is in one sense the current FM radio but without the "power", which has shifted to the consumer and their preferences. Tidal tried to recreate the "hit machine" with the atmosphere of their home page, emphasizing video, etc. but it is acknowledged (in everything I have read) that this effort at best had limited impact. So why wouldn't the labels roll out the "Hi Res" format that makes them the most comfortable? Question is, what will the consumer do? Will the "typical" consumer (even a minority) really notice or care about a proprietary/DRM standard? The Apple history seems to indicate that he will, but is that the norm or was that an exception to the norm - caused by a "strong" DRM that was heavy handed. I suspect that lessons were learned...

[mav52]

I talked to Napster and tried the high res streaming. When asked about MQA I was told the company is looking at it. My guess for all the services is that they will stream what the labels offer. I believe the labels are taking back power because there isn't a single service they are beholden to.

 

So that announcement tells us what , that Pandora, HDtracks, Napster/Rhapsody since they most likely get their music from a label so I would assume that, that their supporting labels are going to offer MQA files to them for download or they "might" also offer the same Warner Music MQA files for streaming. Hard to read between the line in that announcement. What I read on Billboard only noted Hi-rez files

[Rt66indierock]

As of now the business day has ended on the West Coast and its early evening in the Valley of the Sun. There is no rock, pop, r&b/hip hop or country music to download in the United States. MQA is still vaporware since I can’t buy it.

 

Similar to gamer's I consider the Tidal release on MQA to be a teaser release. Something that won’t get me to say it is available for sale to and no longer vaporware.

 

It is a bit frustrating to know that albums I would like to buy are available on Germany’s HiResAudio and I can’t buy them.

[witchdoctor]

As of now the business day has ended on the West Coast and its early evening in the Valley of the Sun. There is no rock, pop, r&b/hip hop or country music to download in the United States. MQA is still vaporware since I can’t buy it.

 

Similar to gamer's I consider the Tidal release on MQA to be a teaser release. Something that won’t get me to say it is available for sale to and no longer vaporware.

 

It is a bit frustrating to know that albums I would like to buy are available on Germany’s HiResAudio and I can’t buy them.

 

Maybe the studios see the sun rising on streaming and the sun setting on downloads. Maybe they like the fact that MQA albums they released on tidal can't be downloaded on piratebay

[Rt66indierock]

Maybe the studios see the sun rising on streaming and the sun setting on downloads. Maybe they like the fact that MQA albums they released on tidal can't be downloaded on piratebay

 

The most restrictive definition of vaporware is the product is not available for sale. I'm just being consistent with people who didn't like my insider definition of vaporware (I was there when the term was coined about a computer operating system Xenix) that is a little broader.

[witchdoctor]

The most restrictive definition of vaporware is the product is not available for sale. I'm just being consistent with people who didn't like my insider definition of vaporware (I was there when the term was coined about a computer operating system Xenix) that is a little broader.

 

But vapor sounds goood ...

and I didn't even have to spend an extra .99 cents at iTunes.

[crenca]

The most restrictive definition of vaporware is the product is not available for sale. I'm just being consistent with people who didn't like my insider definition of vaporware (I was there when the term was coined about a computer operating system Xenix) that is a little broader.

 

Duke Nukem Forever!!!! Long live the Duke!!!!

[Rt66indierock]

I think you misunderstand my point. Whether MQA is commercially viable is an entirely reasonable matter for debate, on which I have no view and less interest. But to discuss whether something which is freely available to buy today is vaporware is ridiculous and ultimately pointless. I'm sure we could all generate similar long and pointless threads on any topic if we too chose to egocentrically redefine common English usage.

 

Norton,

 

Thank you again for an interesting and teachable point. You are using the gamer’s definition of vaporware which is fine. There are no downloads available in the genera I listed in the original post available in the United States. So music is not freely available to me. I live in a town with 231,000 other people where the average household income of $134,500. Saturday I visited one of the best audio establishments in the world. They did not have an MQA DAC in the store and they are a Median dealer. So I disagree with your statement that MQA is freely available because in the United States it is not. And agree or not I consider the Tidal release to be the gamer equivalent of a teaser release. So under your definition MQA is vaporware in the United States. I can’t buy it.

 

You claimed I was using a definition of vaporware I made up. The definition I use was coined by two Microsoft engineers to describe Microsoft Xenix (UNIX) running on personal computers in 1982. They were saying Xenix was an insignificant part of the market even though other versions would be released and in the late eighties Xenix was the largest licensee of UNIX in the United States. So Xenix was available and still considered vaporware. Common usage in the eighties was we only sold X (a four digit number of a PC program) its vaporware. Using the original definition of vaporware and using data about PC operating systems in the eighties still covered by my current NDAs I converted Xenix licenses to a percentage of the population of PC operating systems in 1982 and rounded it. This is where my 10,000 album number came from for MQA not be vaporware.

 

A long as we’re doing a history of the term vaporware the first time it was referred to in print was by Esther Dyson “good ideas incompletely implemented” when I said I wouldn’t test MQA until eight of my nine reference albums are released in MQA versions, I was saying I need Universal and Sony records for MQA to be completely implemented. Since neither Sony nor Universal has announced they are licenses I’m saying MQA is incompletely implemented and vaporware by her definition.

 

My original post had a specific purpose and was telegraphed in June of 2016 at T.H.E. Show. I told the MQA representatives that I was going to say on January 2, 2017 that it was vaporware if there weren’t enough albums available on January 1, 2017 in the United States. It will be interesting to watch and see if I shaped the debate about MQA the way I intended.

 

There is one more definition of vaporware and I will address it with whose side are you on?

[The Computer Audiophile]

Norton,

 

Thank you again for an interesting and teachable point. You are using the gamer’s definition of vaporware which is fine. There are no downloads available in the genera I listed in the original post available in the United States. So music is not freely available to me. I live in a town with 231,000 other people where the average household income of $134,500. Saturday I visited one of the best audio establishments in the world. They did not have an MQA DAC in the store and they are a Median dealer. So I disagree with your statement that MQA is freely available because in the United States it is not. And agree or not I consider the Tidal release to be the gamer equivalent of a teaser release. So under your definition MQA is vaporware in the United States. I can’t buy it.

 

You claimed I was using a definition of vaporware I made up. The definition I use was coined by two Microsoft engineers to describe Microsoft Xenix (UNIX) running on personal computers in 1982. They were saying Xenix was an insignificant part of the market even though other versions would be released and in the late eighties Xenix was the largest licensee of UNIX in the United States. So Xenix was available and still considered vaporware. Common usage in the eighties was we only sold X (a four digit number of a PC program) its vaporware. Using the original definition of vaporware and using data about PC operating systems in the eighties still covered by my current NDAs I converted Xenix licenses to a percentage of the population of PC operating systems in 1982 and rounded it. This is where my 10,000 album number came from for MQA not be vaporware.

 

A long as we’re doing a history of the term vaporware the first time it was referred to in print was by Esther Dyson “good ideas incompletely implemented” when I said I wouldn’t test MQA until eight of my nine reference albums are released in MQA versions, I was saying I need Universal and Sony records for MQA to be completely implemented. Since neither Sony nor Universal has announced they are licenses I’m saying MQA is incompletely implemented and vaporware by her definition.

 

My original post had a specific purpose and was telegraphed in June of 2016 at T.H.E. Show. I told the MQA representatives that I was going to say on January 2, 2017 that it was vaporware if there weren’t enough albums available on January 1, 2017 in the United States. It will be interesting to watch and see if I shaped the debate about MQA the way I intended.

 

There is one more definition of vaporware and I will address it with whose side are you on?

 

Thanks for your definition of vaporware. I find it a very strange definition that I would never use nor admit to using, but I appreciate your willingness to share. We have different opinions about the definition. Not that big of a deal when we can explain our comments further.

 

The fact that no downloads exist is pointless to me with respect to vaporware. Netflix in-house productions aren't available for purchased download, only streaming. Should these be considered vaporware? I can stream thousands of tracks right now from the most mainstream artists in many genres. Not vaporware to me.

 

The fact that one Meridian dealer didn't have an Ultra DAC or Explorer2 for MQA decoding is inconsequential. I know dealers who have several of each, in towns with more and less people and with higher and lower incomes. None of this matters with respect to vaporware.

 

My bet is you won't have to wait long for your Sony and Universal records. But, something tells me you won't be satisfied and that won't meet your definition.

 

 

With respect to your comment, "My original post had a specific purpose and was telegraphed in June of 2016 at T.H.E. Show. I told the MQA representatives that I was going to say on January 2, 2017 that it was vaporware if there weren’t enough albums available on January 1, 2017 in the United States. It will be interesting to watch and see if I shaped the debate about MQA the way I intended."

 

I'm willing to bet the MQA representative has no recollection of the conversation and that at the time s/he didn't really care that one guy who attended the show was going to declare the product vaporware on a future date. Thus, I don't think you've shaped any debate in that context. I'm willing to reconsider the effect you had on any debate, but I'll need a scintilla of evidence.

 

P.S. I mean no disrespect with my comments.

[pdickerson]

Vaporware?

I am streaming MQA on Tidal App to my DAC.

Finally we have music like it should have been. Game Over Checkmate!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[Ralf11]

how about a title change to:

 

"MQA is Vapidware"

[pdickerson]

how about a title change to:

 

"MQA is Vapidware"

 

You have not heard it have you Ralf?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[Rt66indierock]

Thanks for your definition of vaporware. I find it a very strange definition that I would never use nor admit to using, but I appreciate your willingness to share. We have different opinions about the definition. Not that big of a deal when we can explain our comments further.

 

The fact that no downloads exist is pointless to me with respect to vaporware. Netflix in-house productions aren't available for purchased download, only streaming. Should these be considered vaporware? I can stream thousands of tracks right now from the most mainstream artists in many genres. Not vaporware to me.

 

The fact that one Meridian dealer didn't have an Ultra DAC or Explorer2 for MQA decoding is inconsequential. I know dealers who have several of each, in towns with more and less people and with higher and lower incomes. None of this matters with respect to vaporware.

 

My bet is you won't have to wait long for your Sony and Universal records. But, something tells me you won't be satisfied and that won't meet your definition.

 

 

With respect to your comment, "My original post had a specific purpose and was telegraphed in June of 2016 at T.H.E. Show. I told the MQA representatives that I was going to say on January 2, 2017 that it was vaporware if there weren’t enough albums available on January 1, 2017 in the United States. It will be interesting to watch and see if I shaped the debate about MQA the way I intended."

 

I'm willing to bet the MQA representative has no recollection of the conversation and that at the time s/he didn't really care that one guy who attended the show was going to declare the product vaporware on a future date. Thus, I don't think you've shaped any debate in that context. I'm willing to reconsider the effect you had on any debate, but I'll need a scintilla of evidence.

 

P.S. I mean no disrespect with my comments.

 

Chris,

 

I guess we start with I remember 5 ¼” floppy disks do you? Two Microsoft engineers declared a shipping product vaporware in 1982. So I’m comfortable that a product can be shipping in small quantities and be considered vaporware. And I’m okay with you disagreeing with me.

 

Point two it does matter if I can’t get downloads because MQA said they would be available to download on their website. Sorry you don’t get to change the terms.

 

Point three I went to the MQA website to find a Meridian dealer with an MQA DAC and couldn’t find one in my town. I’ll know more this Saturday and let you know.

 

As far as your bet goes on Sony and Universal remember I already placed that bet. We’ll see how it comes out. The number of hi-res albums currently available is squishy but the consensus is it is less than 20,000. So I don’t think MQA can get to my number of albums stated earlier 10,001 to not be vaporware without Sony and Universal albums.

 

As far as the shaping the debate, go back to the first time an MQA representative or audio journalist stated they sometimes would use a CD as a master and let me know the date.

 

I’m willing to buy a Dragonfly Red when the MQA update is available because there are more than 15 MQA albums available in Germany I want. But I can’t buy them so they are not freely available as said in my response to Norton.

[Rt66indierock]

how about a title change to:

 

"MQA is Vapidware"

 

How about we keep it just as it is until I can download Foghat Live and Halestorm Into the Wild Live in the United States?

[Ralf11]

2 items determine if we can call it vaporware?

 

sure, that's fine with me

[Fyper]

Maybe the studios see the sun rising on streaming and the sun setting on downloads. Maybe they like the fact that MQA albums they released on tidal can't be downloaded on piratebay

They certainly do. But this creates a number of problems for some customers, even the honest ones:

- For quite a few people, listening to music is still about playing files not streaming them. I see no problem with streaming if the other

options still exists. I'd like to have the possibility to own and play music files without an internet connection, is it too much to ask?

 

- MQA may be a very good idea but if I don't buy the MQA gear (hard/soft), I won't be able to listen to anything but lossy streams. I

don't expect to be able to get the MQA magical sound for free, but I certainly do not expect to be punished if I don't pay. As long as a

DRM free lossless alternative exists I don't mind MQA, I might even consider paying extra for it, but if it is forced on me...

 

- Last but not least, if the studios force MQA down to the customer, you know what will happen : this will boost creativity on the illegal

streaming/download side. I bet it won't be long before ways to neutralize the DRM side and reverse engineer the MQA files

into standard PCM are found. And that is before F(ree)MQAC(odec) is created...

 

Today streaming is about to work as a business model with DRM free files, if I were them, I wouldn't take the risk to go through another crisis because they want to control what they can't. But I feel the industry might easily be blinded by the hope of making again the billions they were making back in the day. Well, if it comes to that, I know on which side I'll be.

[The Computer Audiophile]

They certainly do. But this creates a number of problems for some customers, even the honest ones:

- For quite a few people, listening to music is still about playing files not streaming them. I see no problem with streaming if the other options still exists. I'd like to have the possibility to own and play music files without an internet connection, is it too much to ask?

 

- MQA may be a very good idea but if I don't buy the MQA gear (hard/soft), I won't be able to listen to anything but lossy streams. I don't expect to be able to get the MQA magical sound for free, but I certainly do not expect to be punished if I don't pay. As long as a DRM free lossless alternative exists I don't mind MQA, I might even consider paying extra for it, but if it is forced on me...

 

- Last but not least, if the studios force MQA down to the customer, you know what will happen : this will boost creativity on the illegal streaming/download side. I bet it won't be long before ways to neutralize the DRM side and reverse engineer the MQA files into standard PCM are found. And that is before F(ree)MQAC(odec) is created...

 

Today streaming is about to work as a business model with DRM free files, if I were them, I wouldn't take the risk to go through another crisis because they want to control what they can't. But I feel the industry might easily be blinded by the hope of making again the billions they were making back in the day. Well, if it comes to that, I know on which side I'll be.

 

Hi Fyper - You raise some really good points. However, I get a sense of entitlement from the wording of your comments. I could be totally wrong. You seem entitled to have exactly what you want, despite the fact that the owner of the content may not want to sell you what you want. Again, I could be wrong and I mean no disrespect.

 

The movie business has already done much of what you say, yet I've never seen anyone complain. Dolby and DTS put their magic sauce into movies and if you don't have a decoder, you're out of luck. Plus, I don't believe I've ever heard of a lossless movie being released. No matter the format, even 4K Blu-ray, is lossy. We get what the owner of the content whats to deliver. This doesn't mean we have to like it or accept it, but I believe people seem a bit entitled to have what they want.

 

It will be interesting to see what happens with the pirating of music if MQA becomes the standard. I honestly don't think pirating will even matter. Streaming is way too easy and downloading torrents is a crapshoot. Those who do it will always do it, those who don't won't.

 

No matter what happens, I'm sure people are already trying to create an open source free version of MQA. It's how people operate.

 

Again, no disrespect to you or your opinions. This is just another angle.

 

P.S. I'm not trying to defend MQA, I'm just looking at this a little different and in a different context.