Jump to content
Rt66indierock

MQA is Vaporware

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I have many,many cd's. Some of them are absolutely terrible.  I also have others that are outstanding.  When cd's came out there were people throwing anything they could find on CD and pushed them out the door.  There were other people that understood the medium and knew how to make quality recordings.

I believe that if cd is pushed to the limits of its capabilities, it can produce outstanding results.

 

By the way, I briefly listened to your recordings on this computer, which uses its onboard sound.  Caveats apply.  The RIAA filtered recordings did sound a little less harsh.  When I have time I will listen more intently.  Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KeenObserver said:

I have many,many cd's. Some of them are absolutely terrible.  I also have others that are outstanding.  When cd's came out there were people throwing anything they could find on CD and pushed them out the door.  There were other people that understood the medium and knew how to make quality recordings.

I believe that if cd is pushed to the limits of its capabilities, it can produce outstanding results.

 

By the way, I briefly listened to your recordings on this computer, which uses its onboard sound.  Caveats apply.  The RIAA filtered recordings did sound a little less harsh.  When I have time I will listen more intently.  Thanks.

I 100% admit that some CDs were produced correctly.  It was/is a mishmash -- even premium stuff messed up.  'I've got the music in me' from Sheffield Labs esp egregious.  However, my data could be biased because I mostly listen to pop.   Listen to my *decoded' copies of the HDtracks download of Carpenter's singles -- the DolbyA encoding is continuing to happen!!! For the highest quality,, the Olivia Newton John recordings from the 48 singles from EMI also had to be decoded.   (BTW, I might have to 'disappear' the demos soon because of a bunch of music reviews that I am sharing soon.)   Sorry about them being mp3, I removed the flacs for space.  However, undecoded DolbyA is MUCH worse than anything that 256k+ mp3 can do:

 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/90pdyi084bofje7/AACrdifmkZfKfPUJRprWwYdGa?dl=0

 

 

 

Oddly (I have mentioned this before):  "Shake it Off' by Taylor Swift decodes very cleanly -- can even hear what they use for the background special effects.  In that case, they probably used one of those DolbyA encoding emulators for enhancment (not the same as for noise reduction.)

 

John

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I have to give kudos to HRA for the honesty and information provided to customers. Very well done. 

I also see that PSM has added an additional layer of "information" on their MQA titles..on the pull down menu, if you select MQA,

it says 24/48 or 24/44.1-"SOURCE"...24/96 etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, KeenObserver said:

The questions I have are:

 Is MQA Ltd a going concern?  Have they received further finance?

 

Is the MQA cabal capable of imposing MQA on the music industry?

 

I know there are people vehemently opposed to MQA.  They know what MQA is and what it is doing. But I believe there is a large mass of people out there who are blithely unaware of what MQA really is or believe the MQA BS.  They would blindly go forth paying out of their pocket to have MQA screw them.

I honestly fear for the future of quality music.  It is in the interest of the majors to put out a crippled recording.  This allows them to hold out the carrot in front of the music consumer that there is always a better version.

It seems the vast majority of music consumers are satisfied with MP3 quality music, and thus would be satisfied with MQA.

 

It is amazing how few people know or care about any resolution above CD quality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

What ever happened to 7digital shutting down? I just checked and they still have current releases in hires, also still no MQA.

 

Still limping along the stock can't fall much further, closing in in a 52 week low.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Daccord said:

 

Unfortunately, almost all the new releases on Prostudiomasters are available as MQA downloads. And in some cases, the MQA version is significantly more expensive than the 96/24 FLAC

 

If anyone actually visited the site it would be a problem.  But they don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

If MQA is forced upon them, they won't even care. That's scarier to me than anything. 

 

The people have spoken and $10.00 a month it is. Easily serviced by existing offerings Mp3 and AAC. We have heard nothing about Amazon HD subscriber numbers so I wonder about hi-res as a market.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crenca said:

 

@Cebolla, it's the opposite I believe.  The "Source" is indicating meta data/catalogue data/database data, and the "Signal Path" is Roon's actual software analysis displaying what the encoding of the file really is.  It is in the "Signal Path" that consumers discovered 2L was sending "MQA CD" files to Qobuz.  

 

It was the "Source" line in the Roon Signal Path pics posted in the "Qobuz streaming MQA CD's?" thread that indicated they were taken from suspected MQA CD FLAC file tracks, ie, displaying "FLAC 44.1kHz 16 bit 2ch, MQA". For example:

 

 

In other words, exactly the same as the pic you've posted - so similarly it too looks like an MQA CD track!


We are far more united and have far more in common with each other than things that divide us.

-- Jo Cox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MQA's resolutions have posted.

 

From my reading of it ( and I am not an expert on UK law) MQA Ltd is issuing new stock and the original preemptions  don't apply.  In other words, stock can be issued without regard for a parties right of first refusal?  If someone with knowledge of UK company law could enlighten us on this matter, it would be appreciated.

 

My fear is that MQA Ltd, and the studios that are vested in it, are going to try and use their influence to ram MQA down the throat of the music industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KeenObserver said:

MQA's resolutions have posted.

 

From my reading of it ( and I am not an expert on UK law) MQA Ltd is issuing new stock and the original preemptions  don't apply.  In other words, stock can be issued without regard for a parties right of first refusal?  If someone with knowledge of UK company law could enlighten us on this matter, it would be appreciated.

 

My fear is that MQA Ltd, and the studios that are vested in it, are going to try and use their influence to ram MQA down the throat of the music industry.

 

I looked at the resolutions and put them in the category of playing around with capital and having fun with warrants. MQA Ltd's influence? Wouldn't people actually have to visit the website?

 

As for trying to ram MQA down the throat of the music industry, they have been trying with little success.  Can you imagine anyone from MQA Ltd trucking up to Sand Point Idaho an talking with Forssell Technologies? I can't because they have nothing to offer a company that makes my favorite professional ADC, DAC  and ADC/DAC.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I am looking at is the fact that without an injection of money they will not be able to continue.  They indicated that they are a "going concern" because they expected to secure further funding by the end of November.  Have they in fact secured further funding?

If so, then MQA still poses a threat to the music consumer.

 

When MQA is truly dead and buried we can breathe a sigh of relief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My (probably inadequate) understanding of pre-emptive rights is that its purpose is to protect the share holders from having their stake diluted.  They have first option.  If they are eliminating that and issuing new securities it makes me think that someone is being squeezed and someone is increasing their stake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at their performance since inception,  It strikes me that no financial institution would "lend" MQA further funding. It strikes me that MQA would have to issue securities to bolster their funding.

I may not understand this correctly, but that is how it strikes me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KeenObserver said:

What I am looking at is the fact that without an injection of money they will not be able to continue.  They indicated that they are a "going concern" because they expected to secure further funding by the end of November.  Have they in fact secured further funding?

If so, then MQA still poses a threat to the music consumer.

 

When MQA is truly dead and buried we can breathe a sigh of relief.

 

Probably they have secured more funding but it doesn't change the fact they have a revenue problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KeenObserver said:

Looking at their performance since inception,  It strikes me that no financial institution would "lend" MQA further funding. It strikes me that MQA would have to issue securities to bolster their funding.

I may not understand this correctly, but that is how it strikes me.

 

This may all come down to what Reinet Investments thinks of their investment. They are the only ones who put in real money. The labels only contributed services.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

Does Reinet see a golden future for MQA?

 

They were convinced to invest in the idea of MQA. But at some point a start up stops being a start up and I think we are at that point. My MQA timeline shows a meeting with Craig Kallman of Atlantic Records in late 2011. 

 

Danny Dulia, Roon Labs COO noted MQA vision is not complete a week ago. Think about that after at least eight years there isn't a fully formed vision of MQA.

 

 

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...