Jump to content
IGNORED

MQA is Vaporware


Recommended Posts

In law and when conducting investigations there is a concept called " qui bono".  Who benefits.

Who benefits from MQA? Obviously MQA itself benefits.  MQA consists of a number of shareholders. Those include Bob Stuart and a number of personnel that work at MQA ( they have a vested interest in promoting MQA). Three large studios have shares ( including Warner). A number of other groups and individuals have shares.  The largest shareholder having a controlling interest is a Luxemborg LLC.  This holding company traces back to a South African family, a member of which is on the board of MQA Ltd.

The source of the family billions traces back to an ancestor who accumulated the bulk of the wealth during the time of apartheid.

If you read the Wikipedia biography of this gentleman, he is shown to be a true humanitarian who could walk on water.  The Wikipedia biography sounds like it was written by a PR firm.

If you dig deeper, you get a different story. A number of investigatory stories paint a very different picture.

I would suggest you research it yourself and see who is behind MQA.

The MQA actions at RMAF 2018 was a tell.

Warner's attempt to ram MQA down the throats of music consumers is a tell.

Boycott Warner

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've not been here for a while, apologies for being late to the party, but, I just read about WMG and MQA, and I'm more perturbed by the fact that many of these albums are not and have never before been available to purchase as "hi-res" files at any of the common retailers.
 
In fact, in some cases (I searched for Faith No More), the original version of the album is no longer available to even stream at all.
 
Is this the start of a new reality for those of us who still enjoy purchasing digital files?  Will these eventually be made available to buy in their original, unmolested 24/44 form, or will they continue to be trapped behind streaming paywalls and crackpot compression schemes?
Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of BS, let's hope this crypto DRM pseudo hi-res format never becomes the norm:

image.png.fbc62085b18f8f4539dcc6d8fddda884.png

Using the flawed "GO LISTEN" argument (just ignore science, go listen, buy that MQA product, so I can keep influencing which is what I am _______ for to keep repeating this BS).

Rejecting all the research of the independent researchers
Making absurd claims about PCM and mastering

MQA is not lossless, and it cannot reproduce the full recordable spectrum (e.g. 100 Khz content)

I'm seeing more and more tracks in Tidal which are in LMS visible as HiRes only. I cannot even search the normal non-MQA versions. Let's not hope this consumer rights depriving format does not become the norm.

MQA is lossy
None of the studio's use it as an archival format.

 

mqa-mutilation-freq-domain.png

Designer of the 432 EVO music server and Linux specialist

Discoverer of the independent open source sox based mqa playback method with optional one cycle postringing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, JoeWhip said:

With all due respect, Peter Veth sounds like a flat earther. Only trust your senses. I can hear the flat earther now, When I look out my window all I see is flat, so the earth must be flat. The math behind the globe earth calculator is wrong, it is pseudoscience based on the faulty assumption that the earth is a sphere, trust your senses, the world is flat. All those pictures, CGI, all the naysayers are shills for NASA and the global elite. It is really hard to read anything he says.


Talking to PV is like talking to a flat tard. Everytime you debunk them, they go offtopic or come up with some new youtube video with more BS. They keep repeating the same BS. When they lose the argument, they go into ad-hominem mode.

Which is what he did here some years ago (he called me a fraud several times, without providing proof) and then he was banned. He also used several fake accounts to come back here. Those were also banned. He also used fake accounts on Archimago's blog, and even was proud to announce in his little secret group, that he was to mock the discussion using his fake account (we have screenshots of this).

He could not debunk this little graph, and still has not debunked it.

MQA for sure is lossless ;)

mqa-mutilation-freq-domain.thumb.png.c41c43578945298d37a58b7feef77459.png
 

Designer of the 432 EVO music server and Linux specialist

Discoverer of the independent open source sox based mqa playback method with optional one cycle postringing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, UkPhil said:

It seem Hi Res Audio are also getting a little tired of MQA too

 

https://m.facebook.com/highresaudio/photos/a.177697382273382/3663166803726405/


MQA does not allow any QA:
 

Quote


Nevertheless, after all these years, we haven't received any tool to analyze and verify the MQA container to assure "What You Buy Is What You Hear Or Get".


You could run mqadec as written by @mansrand use it with an obtained .so file form a well known early MQA adopter (if you have the skills) and then analyze the output of that decoder. This tool reads an MQA encoded flac/wav file and decodes it to a PCM file. Then you can run any audio tools on those files.

But since this is reverse engineering, such tool cannot be sold or licensed. MQA does not release tools to decode MQA files, so there is no way to analyze the output of an MQA decoded file, except intercept the PCM in the OS or record the analog output of a DAC, or for those devices which expose the first unfold via SPDIF or HDMI, capture that digital signal and analyze it.

For a format that claims to be end-to-end, why then:

1. do we only have one MQA enabled ADC (some mytek ADC)
2. why are there no tools to verify the content of the MQA decoder output?

The fact that there is only one ADC should be the smoking gun

Designer of the 432 EVO music server and Linux specialist

Discoverer of the independent open source sox based mqa playback method with optional one cycle postringing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, FredericV said:


MQA does not allow any QA:
 


You could run mqadec as written by @mansrand use it with an obtained .so file form a well known early MQA adopter (if you have the skills) and then analyze the output of that decoder. This tool reads an MQA encoded flac/wav file and decodes it to a PCM file. Then you can run any audio tools on those files.

But since this is reverse engineering, such tool cannot be sold or licensed. MQA does not release tools to decode MQA files, so there is no way to analyze the output of an MQA decoded file, except intercept the PCM in the OS or record the analog output of a DAC, or for those devices which expose the first unfold via SPDIF or HDMI, capture that digital signal and analyze it.

For a format that claims to be end-to-end, why then:

1. do we only have one MQA enabled ADC (some mytek ADC)
2. why are there no tools to verify the content of the MQA decoder output?

The fact that there is only one ADC should be the smoking gun

My main concern is that the likes of Warners start shipping non PCM files to PCM streaming companies as FLAC containers "MQA by stealth" 

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

Let's look at the numbers. Hmmmm. 

 

Qobuz, no MQA - $12.49 per month

Amazon Music HD, no MQA - $12.99 (prime) / $14.99 (w/o Prime) per month

Deezer HiFi, no MQA - $14.99 per month

 

Tidal, full MQA - $19.99 per month. 

 

 


I use Tidal to preview music before I buy it. Because I don’t hear any difference between MQA and non-MQA encoded music I would not pay a premium to listen to it. The Tidal price you are quoting is the same price I was paying before they offered MQA so there’s no hit to my wallet that I’m aware of. With one exception, I don’t pay any attention to whether a file is MQA encoded or not. The exception is that I buy the music I enjoy listening to and I’ve discovered that if an album on Tidal is MQA encoded there’s a really high probability that HD Tracks will have a high resolution, non-MQA version of it. So MQA is good for that, at least. 😬

Link to post
Share on other sites
What used to be the original masters of Bowie's albums (the ones at 16/44) for example, now have the MQA logo , as well...Is this a new development?
 
Unless this is a temporary mistake from within Roon, many original masters are seemingly quickly disappearing.
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, daverich4 said:


I use Tidal to preview music before I buy it. Because I don’t hear any difference between MQA and non-MQA encoded music I would not pay a premium to listen to it. The Tidal price you are quoting is the same price I was paying before they offered MQA so there’s no hit to my wallet that I’m aware of. With one exception, I don’t pay any attention to whether a file is MQA encoded or not. The exception is that I buy the music I enjoy listening to and I’ve discovered that if an album on Tidal is MQA encoded there’s a really high probability that HD Tracks will have a high resolution, non-MQA version of it. So MQA is good for that, at least. 😬

 

37 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Perhaps the price would’ve been lowered, like Qobuz did, without MQA. 

 

Exactly, so why not just skip all of that MQA nonsense in the first place, pay less (for Qobuz), and arrive at the same result while simultaneously not supporting the rip off scheme.

 

You know... the "end-to-end" BS scheme that is entirely unfriendly to both artist and consumer?

no-mqa-sm.jpg

Boycott TIDAL

Boycott Warner Music Group

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, oneway23 said:
What used to be the original masters of Bowie's albums (the ones at 16/44) for example, now have the MQA logo , as well...Is this a new development?
 
Unless this is a temporary mistake from within Roon, many original masters are seemingly quickly disappearing.

I'm unable to stream Bowie's Space Oddity from Tidal through Roon in any other than MQA. All versions from 16/44.1 through the fake 24/192 are all MQA. I have the highest level set to HiFI, not MQA in the Roon settings for Tidal as well. It works this way whether I stream to an MQA enabled device or not. 

 

Through the Tidal app on macOS I can only see the MQA version, but when I click play Tidal says it's playing the HiFi version. I have Tidal set to play HiFi as the highest level, not MQA. 

 

Tidal respects this setting. Roon apparently doesn't, but I'll gladly accept configuration instructions to make Roon play non-MQA. 

Founder of Audiophile Style

Announcing Polestar | Quick Community Reviews and Ratings

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

I'm unable to stream Bowie's Space Oddity from Tidal through Roon in any other than MQA. All versions from 16/44.1 through the fake 24/192 are all MQA. I have the highest level set to HiFI, not MQA in the Roon settings for Tidal as well. It works this way whether I stream to an MQA enabled device or not. 

 

Through the Tidal app on macOS I can only see the MQA version, but when I click play Tidal says it's playing the HiFi version. I have Tidal set to play HiFi as the highest level, not MQA. 

 

Tidal respects this setting. Roon apparently doesn't, but I'll gladly accept configuration instructions to make Roon play non-MQA. 


This is how I do it...

56169F65-64A6-4BEF-AC77-89AEDD5150C2.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, oneway23 said:
What used to be the original masters of Bowie's albums (the ones at 16/44) for example, now have the MQA logo , as well...Is this a new development?
 
Unless this is a temporary mistake from within Roon, many original masters are seemingly quickly disappearing.

By "MQA standards" it now much improved version allegedly, unfortunately you are losing the ability to choose yourself on the Tidal platform now 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that update, Chris, I really appreciate you taking the time to write that reply.

 

I'm one of those dead-weight Roon lifers, so, I won't unhitch from Roon for this oversight.  It's unfortunate that a music first program for audiophiles would expose only MQA files while concealing readily-available non-MQA original masters, but, I know the Roon folks to be good people.  I'm hopeful that they will elect to respect user settings in a future update. 

 

As for Tidal, I've stuck with them against both my better judgement, and the wisdom of others, primarily because I have previously found a number of holes in Qobuz's catalog in terms of artists I enjoy after doing a head-to-head comparison to both my own library and that of my saved artists.  Perhaps it's time to give another look.

 

My fear is that I will open Roon one day soon to find Qobuz streaming these, as well.  After all, if WMG is intent on "shipping a single deliverable", there isn't too much any streaming provider could do, is there?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, oneway23 said:

see below.

 

 

25 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I'm unable to stream Bowie's Space Oddity from Tidal through Roon in any other than MQA. All versions from 16/44.1 through the fake 24/192 are all MQA. I have the highest level set to HiFI, not MQA in the Roon settings for Tidal as well. It works this way whether I stream to an MQA enabled device or not. 

 

Through the Tidal app on macOS I can only see the MQA version, but when I click play Tidal says it's playing the HiFi version. I have Tidal set to play HiFi as the highest level, not MQA. 

 

Tidal respects this setting. Roon apparently doesn't, but I'll gladly accept configuration instructions to make Roon play non-MQA. 

 

4 minutes ago, oneway23 said:

Thanks for that update, Chris, I really appreciate you taking the time to write that reply.

 

I'm one of those dead-weight Roon lifers, so, I won't unhitch from Roon for this oversight.  It's unfortunate that a music first program for audiophiles would expose only MQA files while concealing readily-available non-MQA original masters, but, I know the Roon folks to be good people.  I'm hopeful that they will elect to respect user settings in a future update. 

 

As for Tidal, I've stuck with them against both my better judgement, and the wisdom of others, primarily because I have previously found a number of holes in Qobuz's catalog in terms of artists I enjoy after doing a head-to-head comparison to both my own library and that of my saved artists.  Perhaps it's time to give another look.

 

My fear is that I will open Roon one day soon to find Qobuz streaming these, as well.  After all, if WMG is intent on "shipping a single deliverable", there isn't too much any streaming provider could do, is there?

 

The thing to do would be to take it up at the Roon forum. I don't think they'd be adverse to solving this issue if a solution is available.

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +_iFi  AC iPurifiers >Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Conditioning+Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Listening: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Matrix Element i Streamer/DAC (XLR)+Schiit Freya>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: RPi 3B+ running RoPieee to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, firedog said:

 

 

The thing to do would be to take it up at the Roon forum. I don't think they'd be adverse to solving this issue if a solution is available.

 

You're right, firedog.  You've been generous enough with your time to help me over there, as well, and I always appreciate hearing from you.

 

In this particular case, I'm just discovering all of this for the first time, I'm still wrapping my head around it, and I'm not really sure how to drop all of it into a cogent post just yet without it looking like a novella.

 

Let me throw something together and hop over there.  Thanks, fellas.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, oneway23 said:

 

You're right, firedog.  You've been generous enough with your time to help me over there, as well, and I always appreciate hearing from you.

 

In this particular case, I'm just discovering all of this for the first time, I'm still wrapping my head around it, and I'm not really sure how to drop all of it into a cogent post just yet without it looking like a novella.

 

Let me throw something together and hop over there.  Thanks, fellas.

I respectfully suggest that Chris take this one up. He will be able to write it up cogently in a jiffy, and I'd guess coming from him it will have a bit more impact. The rest of us don't run highly visible audiophile websites...

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +_iFi  AC iPurifiers >Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Conditioning+Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Listening: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Matrix Element i Streamer/DAC (XLR)+Schiit Freya>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: RPi 3B+ running RoPieee to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, oneway23 said:

I know the Roon folks to be good people.

 

Absolutely. Enno, Danny, Rob, Mike, Brian, etc.. are all really good people. Danny is someone who I frequently disagree with on public forums / Twitter, etc... but it's an enjoyable disagreement because we can both lay out our points of view and still respect each other once we've said our pieces. Roon has the most talented and smartest team in HiFi, and they have a business to run. I'll always respect their decisions because I respect them tremendously as people. But, I have no problems disagreeing with them and stating it. I wish all companies in the industry could accept criticism as well as the Roon team. 

 

 

6 minutes ago, oneway23 said:

My fear is that I will open Roon one day soon to find Qobuz streaming these, as well.  After all, if WMG is intent on "shipping a single deliverable", there isn't too much any streaming provider could do, is there?

 

The labels control the content. I've always said, if Warner wants you to only have MQA, you will only have MQA. It's that simple. We have the team at MQA ltd to thank for providing the technology that enabled consumer choice to be removed. 

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...