MQA is Vaporware

[kumakuma]

52 minutes ago, Allan F said:

 

No one was trying to correct your attitude towards racial issues or remotely suggesting that it needed correction. You misinterpreted my comment and became unnecessarily defensive. However, showing deference to sensitive issues has nothing to do with political correctness, notwithstanding your apparent view to the contrary. But, no worries.

 

Is that what you were talking about? 

 

I thought it was about Trump wanting to add his face to Mount Rushmore.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/10/politics/donald-trump-mt-rushmore-kristi-noem/index.html

[sphinxsix]

3 hours ago, Allan F said:

You misinterpreted my comment

 

I don't think so. Your comment:

 

19 hours ago, Allan F said:

I note that you are from The Netherlands. Nothing personal, but If you were aware of how sensitive the topic of monuments currently is in the US, I don't think that you would be referring to monuments in an audio forum.

 

My response:

 

8 hours ago, sphinxsix said:

I'm afraid I will have to disappoint you, my friend - I would have anyway   The reason for that is very simple - if I decided not to touch on topics which are 'sensitive' ones in some particular place or circles, I would probably not be able to speak, or post on any topic at all.

Including MQA.. 

 

This part OTOH is correct:

3 hours ago, Allan F said:

No one was trying to correct your attitude towards racial issues or remotely suggesting that it needed correction.

 

I proposed:

 

8 hours ago, sphinxsix said:

But we would have to go way out of topic to discuss it here 

 

but I understand you are interested in continuing the topic.

Let it be your way then..

 

You mention:

3 hours ago, Allan F said:

showing deference to sensitive issues

 

I hope you are aware that if it wasn't for ..let's say the 'lack of sensitivity' on the side of the early colonizers of America in regard to the Native Americans and also ..let's say again 'lack of sensitivity' in regard to the Black people (whose descendants later had been much later called African-Americans) brought by ships from Africa there would be no need to talk about the lack of sensitivity in regard to issues connected with objects which are just pieces of stone or metal (?).

Of course also citizens of European countries took part in the later practice but there are huge differences between Europe and the USA in later times as far as treating Black people is regarded, I hope you will agree with that.

I used to live in New York in the 90's so I am not completely unfamiliar with these issues.

From my personal point of view the whole big and painful part of the American history simply hasn't been touched upon in an adequate way in e.g. some nationwide discussion which would be able e.g. to change the general awareness of these issues to a sufficient degree and due to this many things connected with these historical facts remain 'sensitive'.

Please don't ask me for sensitivity in regard to some goddamn monuments and for respect for the sensitive issues like these in the context of what I just touched upon.

Just really solve your American problems, guys, it's high time!

 

I'll just repeat once again - I really don't think this is the right place for a discussion like this.

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

The team at MQA would love it if this thread turned into anything other than MQA. Please get back on topic. 

[sphinxsix]

@Ran The fact that the above discussion was OT is no discovery. The question is - in which moment did the OT process begin.. 

 

Let's go back to MQA.

 

[Allan F]

2 hours ago, sphinxsix said:

I'll just repeat once again - I really don't think this is the right place for a discussion like this.

 

Agreed. End of discussion.

[sphinxsix]

 

Came to my mind when I was driving back home from a supermarket..

More Questionable Audio.

 

[Archimago]

Hmmm, not much new on the MQA front.

 

I see they're releasing the MQA-enabled ESS low-power USB-C phone DACs now:

https://kawaraban.kibidango.com/?item=ztella&ui_medium=release&ui_source=kibidango&ui_campaign=ztella_c&fbclid=IwAR24Q8HAqkiuUM9byROclHkjwkEOcbW-qJ5tMiBKuzWCCzXx1V1w14VI9kE

 

Wonder how well those perform as a DAC...

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

8 minutes ago, Archimago said:

Hmmm, not much new on the MQA front.

 

I see they're releasing the MQA-enabled ESS low-power USB-C phone DACs now:

https://kawaraban.kibidango.com/?item=ztella&ui_medium=release&ui_source=kibidango&ui_campaign=ztella_c&fbclid=IwAR24Q8HAqkiuUM9byROclHkjwkEOcbW-qJ5tMiBKuzWCCzXx1V1w14VI9kE

 

Wonder how well those perform as a DAC...

 

Looks like a roughly $37 premium for the MQA version over the non MQA version.
 

$90 - NonMQA

$126.60 -MQA

[sphinxsix]

3 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Looks like a roughly $37 premium for the MQA version over the non MQA version.
 

$90 - NonMQA

$126.60 -MQA

 

In other words - 40% 

 

[Archimago]

5 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Looks like a roughly $37 premium for the MQA version over the non MQA version.
 

$90 - NonMQA

$126.60 -MQA

 

5 hours ago, sphinxsix said:

 

In other words - 40% 

 

 

Ouch! Now that's one heck of a non-value-added tax!

 

Thanks but no thanks Bob...

[sphinxsix]

On 8/16/2020 at 9:24 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

Looks like a roughly $37 premium for the MQA version over the non MQA version.
 

$90 - NonMQA

$126.60 -MQA

 

I wonder if in case of hi end gear this usually is also $37..

Or maybe the 'non-value-added' tax more often gravitates towards 40%.. 

This can make some difference.. 

 

[Archimago]

3 hours ago, sphinxsix said:

 

I wonder if in case of hi end gear this usually is also $37..

Or maybe the 'non-value-added' tax more often gravitates towards 40%.. 

This can make some difference.. 

 

 

I'm sure there must be some high level calculations involved. Maybe something like income tax brackets?

 

Audio Hardware Class                                MQA NVAT

El-Cheapo Plebeian Fi                    40% flat when less than $200

Consumer Fi                                   20% flat when over $200 to $1000

Normal Audiophool                         30% to $1000 + 5% over $1000

Hi-End Audiophool                          35% to $4000 + 10% over $4000

Supreme Ultra-Hi-End Phool          40% to $8000 + 20% over $8000

 

This will clearly dissuade Plebeian Fi products from competing with the more expensive, consumer gear of >$200. And of course if a company needs to play in the "Hi-End", they've got to pay the bucks for the privilege.

 

Should be able to pad the retirement fund like this I think...

 

On a more serious note... I see that the "normal" Ztella DAC uses a slightly lower performing ESS chip than the MQA version. So maybe it's more like a 30% NVAT... 😉

[GUTB]

So...it looks like MQA is succeeding in the marketplace. What's going on? Wasn't Tidal supposed to have gone bankrupt by now? Why are there still new MQA products showing up?

[botrytis]

5 minutes ago, GUTB said:

So...it looks like MQA is succeeding in the marketplace. What's going on? Wasn't Tidal supposed to have gone bankrupt by now? Why are there still new MQA products showing up?

 

Many companies will put it in, if it doesn't detract from other parts of the system. One more type of file, means maybe one more person will buy it. That is all.

[KeenObserver]

49 minutes ago, GUTB said:

So...it looks like MQA is succeeding in the marketplace. What's going on? Wasn't Tidal supposed to have gone bankrupt by now? Why are there still new MQA products showing up?

 

So, how is Tidal doing?

Did MQA give them the boost they needed?

[wdw]

13 hours ago, KeenObserver said:

 

So, how is Tidal doing?

Did MQA give them the boost they needed?

Wouldn’t place too much money on their survival, Tidal, and if gone MQA will certainly follow.....go to bed MQA!

i tried quite hard to be a customer of MQA but the obfuscation and general BS killed any further inclination.

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 hours ago, wdw said:

 

i tried quite hard to be a customer of MQA but the obfuscation and general BS killed any further inclination.

You and I both. 

[sphinxsix]

On 8/18/2020 at 2:22 AM, Archimago said:

 

I'm sure there must be some high level calculations involved. Maybe something like income tax brackets?

 

Audio Hardware Class                                MQA NVAT

El-Cheapo Plebeian Fi                    40% flat when less than $200

Consumer Fi                                   20% flat when over $200 to $1000

Normal Audiophool                         30% to $1000 + 5% over $1000

Hi-End Audiophool                          35% to $4000 + 10% over $4000

Supreme Ultra-Hi-End Phool          40% to $8000 + 20% over $8000

 

This will clearly dissuade Plebeian Fi products from competing with the more expensive, consumer gear of >$200. And of course if a company needs to play in the "Hi-End", they've got to pay the bucks for the privilege.

 

Should be able to pad the retirement fund like this I think...

 

On a more serious note... I see that the "normal" Ztella DAC uses a slightly lower performing ESS chip than the MQA version. So maybe it's more like a 30% NVAT... 😉

 

This clip is not only my comment on these nvat prices but also the expression of my expectations as for the final market position  of the More Questionable Audio clan. 

I have no personal interest in MQA, I use streaming only for checking out new music. My desktop speakers reproduce even mp3 in a, let's say, acceptable way.

For me this is rather a question of how far a corporate power, relying on lies and consumer ignorance, can reach in present days.

As far as I remember @The Computer Audiophile once expressed here the view that these may be not consumers who will decide on whether MQA will succeed or not. I choose to hope this is not so.. Maybe I'm wrong.. Anyway I'd be really quite surprised and much more (!) disappointed if a non-open source format like this succeeded in the 21st century, regardless of its factual or (more often in this particular case, of course) 'imagined' advantages..

 

 

 

[UkPhil]

https://www.mqa.co.uk/newsroom/opinions/tidal-vs-amazon-music-hd-sound-quality

 

"Unless your provider streams MQA, you can’t guarantee that you get the very best sound quality. MQA goes beyond losslessness. It is revolutionary in setting as its goal the much more challenging vision of perceptual losslessness"

 

Really not sure about that.........

 

[botrytis]

2 minutes ago, UkPhil said:

https://www.mqa.co.uk/newsroom/opinions/tidal-vs-amazon-music-hd-sound-quality

 

"Unless your provider streams MQA, you can’t guarantee that you get the very best sound quality. MQA goes beyond losslessness. It is revolutionary in setting as its goal the much more challenging vision of perceptual losslessness"

 

Really not sure about that.........

 

 

WOW..... SIGN ME UP!! *SARCASM OFF*

[The Computer Audiophile]

7 minutes ago, UkPhil said:

https://www.mqa.co.uk/newsroom/opinions/tidal-vs-amazon-music-hd-sound-quality

 

"Unless your provider streams MQA, you can’t guarantee that you get the very best sound quality. MQA goes beyond losslessness. It is revolutionary in setting as its goal the much more challenging vision of perceptual losslessness"

 

Really not sure about that.........

 

Wow, someone needs to take that whole advertorial apart. It's full of half truths and misleading statements. 

 

At least MQA categorizes it as opinion rather than fact. 

 

[JoeWhip]

At least they have given up the ghost that it is actually lossless. Kind of like a flat earther saying that yeah, while the earth is flat, space is actually real. One step at a time grasshopper.

[KeenObserver]

2 hours ago, UkPhil said:

https://www.mqa.co.uk/newsroom/opinions/tidal-vs-amazon-music-hd-sound-quality

 

"Unless your provider streams MQA, you can’t guarantee that you get the very best sound quality. MQA goes beyond losslessness. It is revolutionary in setting as its goal the much more challenging vision of perceptual losslessness"

 

Really not sure about that.........

 

 

Wow!  Just wow!

 

They're claiming a lossy compression scheme is superior to a lossless system?

 

People are streaming UHD movies now. The bandwidth train left the station years ago.

 

MQA is a concept the would have flown 20 years ago.  Today, it is just a scheme to tax the music consumer.  Bob Stuart is just lost in time and is desperate to reap profit from an idea whose time has passed.

[KeenObserver]

Watching MQA now is like sitting bedside at the Hospital listening to agonal breathing, waiting for the inevitable. Someone needs to make the decision to pull the plug.

 

They made a major effort to foist the scheme on the music consumer, but the truth came out.  It's time to let it go.

[FredericV]

These days, several hundreds of mbit up to gigabit is available in developed countries towards consumers.
In Belgium cable is typically 300 mbit to 1000 mbit, and the main DSL provider is now rolling out fiber - all the ISP products can do the bandwidth required for 24/192 which is a few megabit.

What a flawed argument from the MQA opinion makers .... "when there are network restraints"



For consumer products there are no SLA's, so not even 1 mbit can be assured. But these bottlenecks do not often occur.

Furthermore, I could upsample 64 kbit AAC to 24/384 and then claim AAC radio does 24/384 from 64 kbit and flac needs several mbits for this, and is therefore much more efficient than MQA and FLAC! This is their flawed reasoning. They don't realise MQA has about 17/96 of available audio entropy, upsampled to whatever the fake DAC or DISPLAY resolution indicator is telling them, with the blue light to assure them, this is the MASTER

It's not ....

The main argument of PV is that MQA is a cure for data caps imposed by ISP's. But data traffic keeps doubling every 1.5 years, and ISP's just keep up, so the shelf life of MQA now with 5G being rolled out .....