bambadoo Posted November 11, 2020 Share Posted November 11, 2020 ASR reviewed it. (Unable to link to the review here for some reason) Quote Did ESS take out the other options or did Gustard? Either way, it is fine by me. I used L Fast for my testing by the way. Default is M Slow I think. Wonder if that is also the MQA filter? Link to comment
UkPhil Posted November 12, 2020 Share Posted November 12, 2020 I see the MQA sausage machine has been switched on again, Warners have given them the keys to their back catalogue for Xmas https://www.mqa.co.uk/newsroom/news/tidal-masters-adds-millions-of-master-quality-tracks Link to comment
Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted November 12, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted November 12, 2020 4 minutes ago, UkPhil said: I see the MQA sausage machine has been switched on again, Warners have given them the keys to their back catalogue for Xmas https://www.mqa.co.uk/newsroom/news/tidal-masters-adds-millions-of-master-quality-tracks This is a good one from that link, "TIDAL HiFi users now stream 40% more tracks in Master Quality than last year." While true, it's through all kinds of funny business. My wife uses Tidal, has no interest in MQA because she doesn't even know what it is, but every time she downloads an album or marks one as a favorite, it's the MQA version by default. She's on an iPhone with no MQA support and no external audio device. That's how MQA gets to the 40% more number. troubleahead, MikeyFresh, UkPhil and 1 other 3 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
UkPhil Posted November 12, 2020 Share Posted November 12, 2020 2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said: This is a good one from that link, "TIDAL HiFi users now stream 40% more tracks in Master Quality than last year." While true, it's through all kinds of funny business. My wife uses Tidal, has no interest in MQA because she doesn't even know what it is, but every time she downloads an album or marks one as a favorite, it's the MQA version by default. She's on an iPhone with no MQA support and no external audio device. That's how MQA gets to the 40% more number. It's all business Chris, I am sure the consumer is well down the food chain in it's decision, Warners are shareholders of MQA Ltd, their MD is ex Warners they need to keep pushing as Tidal is still their only vehicle after 4 years. Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted November 12, 2020 Share Posted November 12, 2020 6 minutes ago, UkPhil said: It's all business Chris, I am sure the consumer is well down the food chain in it's decision, Warners are shareholders of MQA Ltd, their MD is ex Warners they need to keep pushing as Tidal is still their only vehicle after 4 years. well said. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
DuckToller Posted November 12, 2020 Share Posted November 12, 2020 Here's some some science genius at work: And your wife doesn't bother to profit from the music origami? ;-) Proper and tidy pre-ringing, blurring & transient clean up ? You should - "seriously" - talk to her ... IMHO, too sad having this MQA marketing aspect of the Gustard unit dominating its sales proposal, the unit itself seems to have everything we would appreciate for the next best fully balanced DAC under 400 Euro in our systems (for a period lasting 9 -15 month, I would assume). Link to comment
KeenObserver Posted November 12, 2020 Share Posted November 12, 2020 Makes one wonder where else they are trying to slip MQA in the back door. Probably need to test the most recent additions to the download charts. MQA is like a disease that will not go away. Frankly, to be safe, I am going to avoid anything Warner from this day forward. MikeyFresh 1 Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
DuckToller Posted November 12, 2020 Share Posted November 12, 2020 "... to transport you to the original performance" ... with automated (filter) batch processing for millions of Tidal files, really ?? The Computer Audiophile 1 Link to comment
Popular Post KeenObserver Posted November 12, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted November 12, 2020 To my way of thinking, MQA processing damages the recording. Playing it through an MQA processor repairs the damage to a certain extent. If you play an MQA processed recording through a non MQA system, you are playing a damaged recording. MQA had MQA equipment makers sign non disclosure agreements. It was discovered ( here and at other sites ) that in some processors once MQA was initiated, it played all music through the MQA processors, thus damaging the music. This scheme, if fully implemented, would damage all music. And then MQA tells you that MQA makes the music "sound better". Rexp and John Dyson 2 Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
MikeyFresh Posted November 12, 2020 Share Posted November 12, 2020 36 minutes ago, KeenObserver said: Frankly, to be safe, I am going to avoid anything Warner from this day forward. Thats a good idea, much like avoiding TIDAL in general. I'm a satisfied Qobuz subscriber, but if that service were ever no longer available in the U.S. there is a zero % chance that I'd ever use TIDAL for anything. That link posted above by @UkPhil spews BS, all crap debunked now years ago, yet they state it like facts. Then if you click their link to a TIDAL landing page, more of the same, TIDAL themselves guilty of false advertising, a complete crock. troubleahead 1 Boycott HDtracks Boycott Lenbrook Boycott Warner Music Group Link to comment
KeenObserver Posted November 12, 2020 Share Posted November 12, 2020 I hope the cycle of BS does not start up again. I couldn't stand hearing about the MQA "ecosystem". MikeyFresh 1 Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted November 12, 2020 Share Posted November 12, 2020 53 minutes ago, KeenObserver said: MQA processing damages the recording. If it was better than the original, it would be THE archival format. The reality is that no content owner will use it for archival purposes. MikeyFresh 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
KeenObserver Posted November 12, 2020 Share Posted November 12, 2020 7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said: If it was better than the original, it would be THE archival format. The reality is that no content owner will use it for archival purposes. Precisely! None of the studios pushing MQA would ever think of archiving their music on MQA. Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted November 12, 2020 Share Posted November 12, 2020 The disinformation campaign continues. DuckToller 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Rexp Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Tidal used to offer both MQA and non MQA versions, now they're removing non MQA versions. This is all part of their evil plan I guess, not sure what the plan is though. Link to comment
Popular Post John Dyson Posted November 13, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted November 13, 2020 14 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said: If it was better than the original, it would be THE archival format. The reality is that no content owner will use it for archival purposes. The actual recordings are far better quality than we ever get to hear. It is so trivial to play a properly handled recording into a format where PERFECT CDs or downloads can be created in the 100's of thousands. Instead of doing the 'trivial' high quality thing, we get distorted/distracted/mushed up nonsense, and MQA does NOTHING to fix the problem. Making distribution copies is NOT a science project, remastering is mostly bogus. The ultimate remaster is simply doing the right thing, almost a straightforward as a file copy, along with appropriate EQ for vinyl, or a bit of HF EQ to correct for overly bright masters, or maybe artful dynamic range control when needed. Remaster and remix are two different things -- the 'Nat King Cole story', and the conversion from 3trk to stereo, that was a remix manipulation that was almost necessary. As long as there is the ongoing creation of poor quality distribution versions (note that I did NOT use the term 'copy'), there will be an 'ecosystem' for mastering that creates yet another bogus 'improvement'. The versions that we get on CDs and downloads are NOT copies from an original, but are distortions FROM the original. MQA is yet another layer of garbage on garbage. John bogi, The Computer Audiophile, KeenObserver and 1 other 3 1 Link to comment
JoeWhip Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Having had the opportunity to hear what is on some masters from the major labels vs. what is released to the masses, it is a shame we are getting bamboozled with MQA. Just give us the masters please. Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Here’s a good one. Amazon streams MQA if that’s what’s supplied by the label. sneaky. Just tested it with a known album. If anyone has a specific album they want me to test let me know. asdf1000 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
KeenObserver Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Amazon streams MQA? And they're not labeling it? Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
KeenObserver Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Seems like they're adamant about ramming MQA down the music consumers throat. The Computer Audiophile 1 Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
KeenObserver Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Right from the beginning MQA has been less than forthright if not completely misleading. This left people skeptical and led to careful analysis of the system. The claims made by MQA were shown to be less than what was claimed, if not outright lies. MQA is not lossless. It is a backdoor way of introducing DRM. MQA does not pass the smell test. MQA is a tax on the music consumer, a source of wealth for MQA, and a scheme to secure the control of the music distribution business for MQA. MQA is a pox on the music consumer. Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
UkPhil Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 13 minutes ago, KeenObserver said: Right from the beginning MQA has been less than forthright if not completely misleading. This left people skeptical and led to careful analysis of the system. The claims made by MQA were shown to be less than what was claimed, if not outright lies. MQA is not lossless. It is a backdoor way of introducing DRM. MQA does not pass the smell test. MQA is a tax on the music consumer, a source of wealth for MQA, and a scheme to secure the control of the music distribution business for MQA. MQA is a pox on the music consumer. Well if this the case, it could get very messy as Warners could start distributing MQA encoded FLAC files to the likes of Amazon and Qobuz to use for streaming so creating a two tier hi res system limping along with substandard playback on non compatible hardware Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 1 minute ago, UkPhil said: Well if this the case, it could get very messy as Warners could start distributing MQA encoded FLAC files to the likes of Amazon and Qobuz to use for streaming so creating a two tier hi res system limping along with substandard playback on a non compatible hardware Yep. MQA Ltd sold it to the labels that way (single deliverable) and now likes to wring its hands and say, well it’s up to the labels what they provide the streaming services. In other words, we invented the means to ruin music but we accept no responsibility when it’s actually used to ruin music. MikeyFresh 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post KeenObserver Posted November 13, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted November 13, 2020 I was hoping that MQA would go the way of other bad ideas and just die. But it seems like the parties involved are intent on ramming it down the consumers throats. MQA has lost well over 20 million pounds since its inception, which to us music consumers might seem like a lot of money, but to the multi billion financial giants that are underwriting this scheme, this is just seed money. Think of how much wealth they expect to reap from this scheme if they have been willing to loose this much money up to now. All of this will come out of the pockets of the music consumer. This tax on the music consumer comes with the "benefit" of getting damaged music. MikeyFresh and The Computer Audiophile 1 1 Boycott Warner Boycott Tidal Boycott Roon Boycott Lenbrook Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now