Jump to content
IGNORED

MQA is Vaporware


Recommended Posts

 

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 post
Share on other sites
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

Announcing Polestar | Quick Community Reviews and Ratings

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some some science genius at work:
b23c17d902b8079ac30f6bbb22f39faf.thumb.jpg.800de379aadb0946816bab3c079c0132.jpg

 

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 post
Share on other sites
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.

no-mqa-sm.jpg

Boycott TIDAL

Boycott Warner Music Group

Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

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

Founder of Audiophile Style

Announcing Polestar | Quick Community Reviews and Ratings

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...