Jump to content

MQA is Vaporware


Rt66indierock
 Share

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Cebolla said:

 

Looks like the new Australian TIDAL HiFi tier has been tested and it is indeed poisoned:

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/tidal-hifi-plus-introduced/157461/15

With MQA Ltd involved, it just couldn’t have gone any other way. 

Founder of Audiophile Style

Announcing The Audiophile Style Podcast

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, StephenJK said:

That's a standard CD Redbook file.  The 16 bit/44.1 kHz sample rate gives you a 1,411 Kbps file - kilobits per second.  That, as compared to MP3, which at its highest rate is 320 Kbps

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=cd+kbps+rate&rlz=1C1OKWM_enCA906CA906&oq=cd+kbps+rate&aqs=chrome..69i57.6106j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

Ya, right!

Is that grape flavored?

Boycott Warner

Boycott Tidal

Boycott Roon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, firedog said:

 

And when they get fined, let me know....

They claimed MQA was lossless (still do, sometimes). Did anything happen?

 

Where are the audiophile lawyers when you need them?

 

The developers of FLAC should have a cease and desist letter issued to Tidal/MQA instructing them to stop marketing their garbage as FLAC.

 

FLAC's intent was to provide a free compression algorithm for PCM. It wasn't developed so that Tidal/MQA could mislead and lie to their customers, disguising MQA as FLAC and then (supposedly) profiting from it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Daren F said:

FLAC's intent was to provide a free compression algorithm for PCM. It wasn't developed so that Tidal/MQA could mislead and lie to their customers, disguising MQA as FLAC and then (supposedly) profiting from it.


MQA is encoded into PCM, which is then put into binary compressed FLAC container.

Roon Rock->Auralic Aria G2->Schiit Yggdrasil A2->McIntosh C47->McIntosh MC301 Monos->Wilson Audio Sabrinas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Dr Tone said:


MQA is encoded into PCM, which is then put into binary compressed FLAC container.

YES!

 

Please be clear that just because the source file is compressed using a lossless algorithm—in this case FLAC, (Wikipedia lists 17 common audio lossless algorithms!)—it DOES NOT MEAN that the source file is identical to the originally issued music file, or a downsampling to a 16/44.1 music file.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you had any doubt about what an absolute toole Darko is.,behold this laughably hypocritical rubbish---

 

"Despite some slippery marketing language that makes suggestions to the contrary, both Qualcomm’s aptX HD and Sony’s LDAC are lossy codecs: they discard data because their bandwidth is insufficient for CD-quality audio’s 1411kbps. These codecs’ claim to hi-res ‘support’ is a fingers-crossed-behind-your-back-because-you-hope-noone-will-notice type of fib."

 

https://darko.audio/2021/05/apple-rumours-cd-quality-streaming-bluetooth/

 

Let's correct it for him...substitute "MQA" for "aptX"...and he is spot on.

 

The sheer chutzpah.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, MikeyFresh said:

 

Actually if I'm not mistaken there is no slippery marketing language at all with aptX HD and LDAC, both admitted from the get go that they employ perceptual coding and so thats not deceptive at all, each one fully owned up to being lossy at certain high frequencies.

 

On the contrary, Darko's beloved MQA took something like 3 or more years to even grudgingly admit that when they said lossless they meant perceptually lossless, and their own slippery marketing speak as well as that of various of their manufacturing licensees still to this day claims lossless with no further definition or description whatsoever.

 

Neither Sony nor Qualcomm is claiming anything further, certainly nothing like "master quality" or "better than lossless", or any other such nonsense, and both had stated all along the goal was to improve on the dismal performance of the very lossy SBC codec while maintaining some reasonable battery stamina for portable devices, which seems like an honest and worthy tradeoff and design intent. Both LDAC and aptX HD are intended for use on portables such as mobile phones, tablets, or laptops.

 

Contrast that with the total BS being bandied about using MQA marketing speak, and Darko's claim is more fake news, and really seems disingenuous at best. He's taking a shot at something that actually provides a real solution to a real problem, that being the challenge of battery life on portable devices running wirelessly, while conveniently ignoring the false claims and non-solutions to non-problems as offered by Master Quality Adulterated.

Spot on. And shows just how shoddy Darko's "journalism" is...

 

No doubt he is projecting the sins of Master Quack Audio on to the the as advertised lossy Sony and Qualcomm codecs.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW:

if we're going by numbers, MQA should just be identified as having 2304kbps maximum (2.3Mbps / 24/48 equivalent bitrate), pretending that it can be the "lossless" equivalent of 18,432kbps (18.4Mbps / 24/384) when "unfolded". And calling that the "Master" quality - a word that Sony and Qualcomm would never dare claim for their lossy wireless device CODECs!

Archimago's Musings... A "more objective" audiophile blog.

Free The Music - No MQA!  :nomqa:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

There is not. 

The truly sad part of this is that there are people buying into this.

I suspect that some of them will follow MQA right over the cliff.

Boycott Warner

Boycott Tidal

Boycott Roon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KeenObserver said:

The truly sad part of this is that there are people buying into this.

I suspect that some of them will follow MQA right over the cliff.

Absolutely. 
 

When this much money is at stake, get your boots on to wade through all the BS, and watch people clamor to get on the bandwagon as it goes right over the cliff. 

Founder of Audiophile Style

Announcing The Audiophile Style Podcast

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is incredible. Since 2014 MQA has been hiding behind smoke and mirrors. They have time after time put out "suggestions" that have been analyzed and been found wanting. Their whole scheme has been shown to be deceptive and to be pure BS. And yet, there are people who follow.

I have to wonder how many of the posts of people supporting MQA are actual users.

The whole scheme is just so full of Bob Stuart.

Boycott Warner

Boycott Tidal

Boycott Roon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this world there are leaders and there are followers.

There are people that listen to unadulterated Hi-Rez PCM and there are people who listen to MQA.

There are people who rise up and there are people who accept the "Tot".

Boycott Warner

Boycott Tidal

Boycott Roon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With all this nonsense/fraud about MQA, how can anyone feel good about buying ANY PS Audio gear?

 

Qobuz is only $120/year...seems reasonable for what you get and can sample anything you can find before deciding to actually purchase a copy...

Link to comment
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
 Share



×
×
  • Create New...