Jump to content
IGNORED

MQA is Vaporware


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Fast and Bulbous said:

When he says that "clearly, the pro-MQA and anti-MQA groups have some work to do if they are to convince others of their position" that feels like hitting the nail on the head. 

This sounds - and please excuse the exxxxageration, it is just for clarification & calibration - like the anti-MQA group had started a format war and pro -MQA group chimed in and now defends itself against the format communists in order to keep the free choice of format (1. Audiophile Amendment). Ergo, we are only looking at two different interest groups here. Easy, no?

Following the history of MQA for several years, I haven't seen precisely that happening, and I feel balancing out the different opinions like they both have their valid arguments and just different interests to follow for pleasing the same audience, is plain wrong, imho. This way of accepting narratives lead to these real life examples we have seen in the news reviews this week.

If you (not you personally) keep on making false claims again and again, you may get enough followers, and if these are "outspoken" enough you may control your stakeholders (GOP) by their fear of losing. Looking from Europe to America, I am wondering how quickly the Democrats (they are not even unionists ... they are zentrists by large) have been pushed into an extremist corner by the new beliefs of an important part of the US society. People - in earnest - have started to believe that an election was stolen because the loser has repeated it before, during and after the election he lost, using a media & marketing machine which is powered by and with weapons of modern psychological warfare. Obviously, it is far from impossible to manipulate a great number of people in a short time with strategies usually administered during warfares (->Cambridge Analytica -> Mercer/Koch).

At this point, this strategic policy of MQA marketing annoys me even more than the lossless sound quality.
Perhaps we need to accept that the modern society / marketing in technology nowadays only works like this, however this is not my cup of tea and I may throw up imaging that I need to teach this kind of propaganda strategies to my grandchildren as the outcome of Western Democracy after the Millenium.


@The Computer Audiophile
Chris, if you feel it is to much politics - just delete it ..

Link to post
Share on other sites

@DuckToller I agree in principle to your perspective, am not sure if Hypernormalisation is a familiar term here, but it describes it pretty well. That, combined with innovation adoption strategy savvy unpicks the approach MQA has and is taking. 

 

Yes there are multiple stakeholders in all of this, fully agree. Darko's point that the pro and anti MQA constituents have work to do is key here for me. WE have work to do. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Fast and Bulbous said:

@DuckToller I agree in principle to your perspective, am not sure if Hypernormalisation is a familiar term here, but it describes it pretty well. That, combined with innovation strategy adoption savvy unpicks the approach MQA has and is taking. 

 

Yes there are multiple stakeholders in all of this, fully agree. Darko's point the pro and anti MQA constituents have work to do is key here for me. WE have work to do. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation

@Fast and Bulbousgood & interesting point! Thank you for that!

Please don't forget, most of the extremists are working continuosly on that, just tools & organisation are way different to the MQA lobby. Lot's of people do present their knowledge about MQA in different FB audiophile groups, for example. However, these people aren't professional trained and paid marketeers ...  you may compare it to guerilla tactics because differences in ressources are real.
 

Plus, I would assume that most audiophile extremists (I may exclude Peter Veth here) would feel ashamed rambling uninvited about MQA in spaces where the uninformed majority find their pleasures .... Darko otoh connects obviously to all of them, the poles and the vast space in-between. This is why he seems to be a perfect vehicle for the industry. Everything he doesn't name correctly amplifies ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

What BS.

First off, to say that Linn does not support MQA because Linn does not incorporate MQA in their equipment is utter BS.

Linn does not support MQA because they can see what MQA is.  They have taken the ethical high road and have refused to buy into the MQA scheme. I believe that Linn posted their reasoning for not incorporating MQA.

The only time I watch that gentleman's videos is when someone posts them to make a point.  Frankly, they strike me as marketing BS.

A previous posting made the point that the " anti MQA" faction was not getting their point across. Perhaps that is true. There are a number of people that still believe the BS that MQA spews. They repeat it as if it were proven fact rather than debunked market BS. I don't know what the answer to that is except that we need to continue putting the truth out there.

People that care about the future of high quality music need to press the point.  MQA is no good for the music consumer.

 

Cancelling your subscription to Tidal will send a message.  It will tell them that they cannot force this MQA scheme on the music consumer.

Refusing to buy anything associated with MQA will send a message.

Refusing to buy anything from Warner or its subsidiaries will send a message

The bottom line is the bottom line. Money talks. If supporting MQA costs money without any return, it catches people attention.

Boycott Warner

Boycott Tidal

Boycott Roon

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

The only time I watch that gentleman's videos is when someone posts them to make a point.  Frankly, they strike me as marketing BS.

Same here, but I think he made an honest report: he doesn't really like MQA, but many customers expect it. If as many people wrote to say I would buy your gear if only it didn't have MQA stuff, one presumes he/they/others might abandon MQA. 
 

I do think it's possible that MQA may run it's course and fade, but it takes time. These things sometimes generate heat, but they can't burn money indefinitely if the numbers aren't there. 
 

It probably helps a little to keep banging the no-MQA drum, but they currently have the bigger megaphone.

 

39 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

MQA is no good for the music consumer.

...no good for some music consumers. It's just jargon or marketing to many/most, I would say. Most people don't understand it at all, and likely do not even recognize what it does. 

 

43 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

Cancelling your subscription to Tidal will send a message. 

I quit Tidal on Christmas day. I added a note in my cancellation screen, but I am not under the impression that someone read that note and thought: "We had better stop this MQA BS...even MarkusBarkus is mad. Get Jay-Z on the line."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if customers are not educated, the brands need to do it. I mean, the audio press is not doing it besides spreading nonsense (there are exceptions and welcome them).

 

Wehn I bought my first set of Audiophile speakers, I actually called the factory and talked to the designer. Even though he designed the speakers with bi-amp capability, he believed it didn't do anything. He put them in because customers wanted them. He basically talked me out of bi-amping the speakers and just use a good quality amp. We need more of this.

Current:  JRiver 24 on Win 10 PC (AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with 32 GB RAM) or Daphile on an I5-2500K with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590

Amplification - Pioneer M-22 (winter) - Sony TA-N55ES (summer)

Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers

Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and DiMarzio Interconnects

Link to post
Share on other sites

The audio mags would be huge, although the online world seems to be making a good run. 
 

I checked that distrokid link above a bit and there were a few pretty snide comments for the owner re: MQA, which I thought was hopeful. Not everyone is on the blue pill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are people that are intellectually lazy.  They don't have the ability and self discipline to apply logic and scientific principles to their decisions. They hear things over and over again and repeat them as gospel. They believe it makes them sound knowledgeable.  This is marketing.  This is what MQA is doing.

There are "reviewers" and bloggers that repeat the marketing propaganda and pose themselves as experts. The intellectually lazy follow them because it is easier than actually thinking it out for themselves.  They are easily led.

If MQA keeps putting out the same BS over and over again there will be those that follow them over the cliff.

Boycott Warner

Boycott Tidal

Boycott Roon

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

There is a whole mass of people that don't understand the full implications of implementing MQA.

That above all else is what needs to be communicated to the masses, if at all possible. It's not rocket science in that regard, doesn't need to be highly technical for those implications to be laid bare.

no-mqa-sm.jpg

Boycott Radio Paradise

Boycott TIDAL

Boycott Warner Music Group

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

What we need these days is a slick YouTube video production with animations to show people the perspectives and reasons from the "Thanks, but no thanks, MQA." side. :-) @Fast and Bulbous, know anyone who wants to do this?!

3Blue1Brown is a great YouTube channel for explaining math problems with animation.  But I doubt they'd be interested in this, unless their an audiophile😉

 

 https://www.youtube.com/c/3blue1brown/about, this is their about page on YouTube.

https://www.3blue1brown.com/

PC/NAS/JRiver/Roon - PS Audio P5 Regenerator - KEF LS50 Nocturne - Rel 328 subwoofer - PS Audio AC5 Power cables 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fast and Bulbous said:

The PS audio video... If credibility is important then knowing the A is for Authenticated not Assured would seem to be important. And that Qobuz do not use MQA - as far as I know.

 

Had the "customers want it" dialogue with Charley H and Neil - there was no budging from Charley's well informed position and Neil has maintained that integrity ever since. That kind of thing is what we need. Maybe there is energy there?

 

As for a Youtube video... the only video work I have done is for basic animations for use in consulting assigments. Nothing fancy, not slick, but OK. I have worked with graphic artists and video producers. And done voice over work and script preparation. Putting something together would need to be a team effort I feel - as there are many perspectives to incorporate. The objective would be for it to go viral.

 

Darko's comments about extremist was about extremist positions I think? And at each end of the distribution curve the positions are extreme: either "there is nothing good about MQA, at all, to "there is nothing bad about MQA, at all". Darko points out that each position has work to do. And time is moving along. MQA has some serious money behind it, a significant team, labels, hardware manufacturers, streaming with their investors, much of the press, strategy and comms advice that we may deride, but the path they are on is not born of a whim. It is the result of some serious thinking about how to sell this so that it becomes part of the standard infrastructure. Every move and goal is towards that end. Nothing else will do - otherwise it gets sidelined to a niche thing. Tech is one thing, relationships that MQA have and the vested interests they serve are something else. Some are explicit, some are not.

 

Tonight I am doing a webinar on technology/innovation adoption/diffusion strategy. Have not done one for a while. In prepping for it I looked afresh at MQA through that lens. Yep, it stacks up. Is how technically inferior innovations have won their space and beaten lesser tech. Often the best tech does not win, is a repeating pattern.

 

Do we know where and who are the other folks who are clear about the danger / deceit of MQA?

 

"If not now then when...." comes to mind.

 

 

 

 

A well thought out post. It points to the fact that there is substantial financial backing behind MQA and all the parties involved are intent on ramming this thing through. The South African financial backers and the studios have a history of doing what they need to to to further their ends, ethical considerations being of little importance.

As I said before, the bottom line is the bottom line. It would have to be financially bad for them to drop their plans to implement MQA. Look at what the South African billionaires did to acquire their billions.  Look at the past histories of the studios. The only way these people are going to reverse course is if the public relations effect costs them money. Are the music consumers that are being screwed by MQA rejecting it to the point that it is costing the studios?

Look at what happened when Sony implemented their root kit fiasco. When it was exposed Sony took a financial hit.

The thing with the Sony root kit fiasco is that it provoked widespread disdain.

With TAS and Stereophile and others prostituting themselves for MQA, it is difficult to educate the music consumer as to the full implications of implementing MQA.

Having a powerful public relations program is effective. Yellow journalism provoked the Spanish-American War.

Boycott Warner

Boycott Tidal

Boycott Roon

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think as Chris has stated, that if MQA becomes a standard, people will either pirate or not BUY ANY NEW MUSIC, only used records and CDs.

 

The Recording Industry wants total control. That is all they have ever wanted.

Current:  JRiver 24 on Win 10 PC (AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with 32 GB RAM) or Daphile on an I5-2500K with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590

Amplification - Pioneer M-22 (winter) - Sony TA-N55ES (summer)

Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers

Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and DiMarzio Interconnects

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, bambadoo said:

Do they pay extra if it is in MQA ? 😇 (Since MQA is supposed to be the artists best friend....)

https://themlc.com/press/mechanical-licensing-collective-receives-424-million-historical-unmatched-royalties-digital

 

If my reading skills are ok, these 424 millions are intended for the songwriters and publishing right holders, who aren't typically equal "the artists" performing the art.
Interesting part is the fact, that these are payments that are considered "as one of the conditions of eligibility for a specified limitation on liability for prior infringements" and will be controlled through the data supplied for distribution.
If I am not mistaken, the table provided with the document, is an indicator for the greatest infringements over the past (naturally led by the companies having the biggest customer base & the longest history mixed up with the companies having the worst payment behaviour). A liability limiting factor could be the problem to identify the correct rightsholder and arranging the transfer.

Looking at Tidal vs Qobuz, I would see some points to note:
A) According to Wikipedia "Tidal claims to pay the highest percentage of royalties to music artists and songwriters within the music streaming market."
B) Tidal has been accused of widely inflating subscriber numbers (also Wikipedia, citing TheVerge.com)
C) Qobuz "infringe" payment is the lowest of all "important" streaming services, Tidals payment however, even the company may have been around 3.5 times longer than Qobuz (2015 vs 05/2019), is at factor 65 compared to the 106k $ from Qobuz, assembled during a period of 22 month.

Taking into account factual information like A),B) and C), my tiny brain may conclude that A) can only be half the truth, because the royalities paid to songwriters have been obviously amassed in the past. No information about the artist gratifications were given, although A) is evidently correct when it comes to royalties paid to Beyonce and Kayne West.

Or is it MQA that inflated these infringments ???

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...