MQA is Vaporware

[vmartell22]

14 hours ago, LarryMagoo said:

 I am a regular participant on many Roon's forum topics and really enjoy the camaraderie I've experienced there.   Sorry if your experience has not been otherwise excellent.   

 

That is the thing -  if you agree with the official line, in this case re: MQA, but is also true of many other topics, yes, it seems friendly. But hit anything that the moderators are a fan of, MQA yes, but also specific products, and you will be jumped on, moderators leading the charge. They are not neutral, nor do they really behave professionally; they are  just simple opinionated users at heart.

 

It is true, Roon does what it advertises, which is what I wanted - at least the part that allows you to easily setup remotes and the such - that is the reason I became a subscriber. Unfortunately I did not pay attention to the MQA issue - part of it is because of their strategy. While not completely shutting down MQA criticism, they do throttle it, so it doesn't bubble up. So if you don't get too deep in the forums, you probably won't see it.

 

I did not see that until I had invested in some infrastructure to implement the Roon system. And it took me a little bit longer to find out about how they are connected. If I had known, there is a great probability I would have stayed a JRiver user.

 

It does look like the forum is their only means of providing customer support - not sure if it's limited only to subscribers.  It feels like it is  - I know of no fellow MQA skeptics being banned. That makes sense if the forum is only for subscribers.  They do not want to alienate a paying customer, even if critical of the company - at  least I hope that is the case, I am not 100% sure.

 

But if so, therein lies the opportunity to keep hammering the point.  Every time an MQA defender points out how fantastic it sounds,  every time I respond  the defender is missing the point. This is not about sound.

 

This is about the consumer and its rights.

 

And plan to keep doing it. Every freaking time.

 

v

 

[Currawong]

2 hours ago, firedog said:

Roon insists on having the streaming service appear totally integrated into it's UI. Understandable, since the UI is sort of the main selling point. This means the streaming service has to give up it's branding/look and UI, and has to allow Roon full access to it's database.

 

So far only Tidal and Qobuz are willing. 

Amazon doesn't care. Roon said they didn't even respond to enquiries.

Spotify will never do it - their UI is their money maker, and Roon isn't big enough to matter to them.

Same for the others.

 

Maybe in the future Roon will compromise with a special window within it's UI for one or more of the streaming services - but don't hold your breath. They seem to be doing quite well appealing to their audience with just Tidal and Qobuz.

 

Deezer is updating their API this year to make integration possible, according to one of their staff.

 

3 minutes ago, vmartell22 said:

 

That is the thing -  if you agree with the official line, in this case re: MQA, but is also true of many other topics, yes, it seems friendly. But hit anything that the moderators are a fan of, MQA yes, but also specific products, and you will be jumped on, moderators leading the charge. They are not neutral, nor do they really behave professionally; they are  just simple opinionated users at heart.

 

 

From my interactions on the Roon forums, there is no problem posting negatively about MQA. The people who get jumped on are the ones who post personal attacks, even veiled ones. I've not been moderated at all on their forums, so if you are, maybe it is because what you post gets flagged as breaking the rules?

[vmartell22]

2 minutes ago, Currawong said:

 

 

From my interactions on the Roon forums, there is no problem posting negatively about MQA. The people who get jumped on are the ones who post personal attacks, even veiled ones. I've not been moderated at all on their forums, so if you are, maybe it is because what you post gets flagged as breaking the rules?

 

Every one breaks the rules - it is obvious from the selective enforcement what the moderators line is.  And like I said, is not that they do not allow negative posts and/or threads. They throttle them, so get shoved from the trending topics. Plus the MQA fans liberally use the very permissive flagging system to censor posts. And yes I know, flagging does not completely hide posts but still, very easy to censor. Check for the MQA vs PCM thread. Once the MQA skeptics started flagging stuff, the thread was closed.

 

Again, is not that they completely disallow criticism. They do seem to want to give the illusion of freedom. It is that the criticism gets push down and out by moderators and the pro MQA crowd, which, to be fair, seems to be a majority... 

 

v

[firedog]

54 minutes ago, Currawong said:

Deezer is updating their API this year to make integration possible, according to one of their staff.

Well, that would be great for both companies. 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

Fellows:

 

Let's take a step back. This is turning into a witch hunt. I hate MQA with a passion reserved for my mortal enemies,

but Roon is not the villain.  They came to market well before BS "birthed" the MQA scam. It is an excellent product

In fact, BS was too dumb to realize it was a good product.

 

The fact is if you do not subscribe to Tidal, MQA is not a factor with Roon.

 

STOP RENTING YOUR MUSIC. Period.

 

Roon has improved their product steadily for years now and it was one of the best investments I have made. They actually listen to feedback from their customer base. Was I happy they started to offer MQA decoding? No. But since 99% of their other improvements are remarkable, it is what it is. I use Roon with my local library, it is beats every other audio networking and library software by miles.

 

Let's focus on the real enemies.

[MikeyFresh]

1 hour ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

The fact is if you do not subscribe to Tidal, MQA is not a factor with Roon.

Thats right, and so Roon's offering of TIDAL would really only be super objectionable if for instance they steadfastly refused to offer any Qobuz integration, such a thing would be an example of them limiting customer choice and/or propping up MQA, but currently that's not a thing, and Deezer integration is said to be coming soon.

 

So the takeaway remains, with Roon or otherwise, don't subscribe to TIDAL and you are doing your part in not supporting the MQA scam. If you live in a region that offers the "fork" pricing on TIDAL such as Australia, make sure to downgrade from Masters, you will save yourself some money and cease supporting MQA, though by all accounts they will still force-feed you at least some MQA encoded tracks, you just won't be paying anything for it.

 

Best bet is dump TIDAL, I'd like to think that many in Australia already have with the recent roll-out of Qobuz there, and that still a bunch more TIDAL subscribers in Canada will do so when Qobuz finally rolls out their service in that region too.

[KeenObserver]

Since day one MQA has been all smoke and mirrors. It has perpetuated itself by illusion and self promotion. The carnival barkers at the publications sang its praises. The concept even appealed to me. Initially.

Until I looked behind the curtain.

The stink of this scheme became overwhelming to me.

There were equipment manufacturers that saw what affect this scheme would have on the future of the music business. To their credit they refused to become enablers for this scheme. They had ethical standards. That is the main reason that I bought my Benchmark Dac3.

There were other manufacturers that simply took the "give the customer what they want" attitude, whether they believed in MQA or not.

 

In essence, there are enablers of MQA, without whom MQA would have died the death the scheme should have.

 

I won't support anyone that enables MQA and allows them to continue pushing their scheme.

 

MQA is a pox on the music consumer.

[lamode]

There are laws in the UK against false and misleading advertising. ( see https://www.gov.uk/marketing-advertising-law/regulations-that-affect-advertising )

 

Maybe someone in the UK could start the process of reporting MQA to their local Trading Standards office?

[lucretius]

52 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

That is the main reason that I bought my Benchmark Dac3.

 

And a darn good DAC it is!

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

2 hours ago, KeenObserver said:

Since day one MQA has been all smoke and mirrors. It has perpetuated itself by illusion and self promotion. The carnival barkers at the publications sang its praises. The concept even appealed to me. Initially.

Until I looked behind the curtain.

The stink of this scheme became overwhelming to me.

There were equipment manufacturers that saw what affect this scheme would have on the future of the music business. To their credit they refused to become enablers for this scheme. They had ethical standards. That is the main reason that I bought my Benchmark Dac3.

There were other manufacturers that simply took the "give the customer what they want" attitude, whether they believed in MQA or not.

 

In essence, there are enablers of MQA, without whom MQA would have died the death the scheme should have.

 

I won't support anyone that enables MQA and allows them to continue pushing their scheme.

 

MQA is a pox on the music consumer.

I certainly agree with you. I have not given a penny to any company that has partnered with MQA. I had Roon well before, and all my gear was made by companies that rejected MQA.

 

At least Roon does not force MQA on you, except if you are a Tidal sub, where they supposedly prioritize MQA. Again, easy fix for all concerned parties, ditch Tidal.   We know that some DAC makers force the MQA filter on all data, and this is beyond unacceptable.  Anyone who buys such a product deserves what they get...lossy conversion.

[KeenObserver]

Today, they change your Redbook to MQA.

Tomorrow, they come for your Hi-Rez PCM.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

16 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

Today, they change your Redbook to MQA.

Tomorrow, they come for your Hi-Rez PCM.

Yes, I am sure that is the plan. But I own all mine. And unless they hack my NAS, I will have pure 24 PCM and DSD to listen too.

[Confused]

3 hours ago, lamode said:

There are laws in the UK against false and misleading advertising. ( see https://www.gov.uk/marketing-advertising-law/regulations-that-affect-advertising )

 

Maybe someone in the UK could start the process of reporting MQA to their local Trading Standards office?

It has been done.  It did not get the desired result though:

 

https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/mqa-ltd-a18-470395.html

[The Computer Audiophile]

[vmartell22]

22 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

ALAC as per the rumours !

 

v

[The Computer Audiophile]

24 minutes ago, vmartell22 said:

 

ALAC as per the rumours !

 

v

Hopefully without mQa inside like they do with FLAC. 

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

14 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Hopefully without mQa inside like they do with FLAC. 

This then begs the following questions-

 

-Will Apple allow integration with streaming devices and interfaces? Or the usual bullshit of keeping it closed in their ecosystem?

 

-Will Apple use their power to squash the other services...Qobuz, Deezer etc...as they did with Pono?

 

IMO, if they stay above board, Master Quack Audio will wither and die.

 

Also, I am sure everyone has assumed it is Redbook only. Also they can afford to be very aggressive with their pricing...their Family Plan is tough to beat.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

15 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Hopefully without mQa inside like they do with FLAC. 

The only way that could ever happen is if they bought MQA. Apple does not pay residual fees, they just acquire.  And either squash, or integrate.

[MikeyFresh]

17 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

-Will Apple allow integration with streaming devices and interfaces? Or the usual bullshit of keeping it closed in their ecosystem?

I'm guessing the latter, streaming via AirPlay2 equipped devices only if past history is instructive.

 

18 minutes ago, Ishmael Slapowitz said:

-Will Apple use their power to squash the other services...Qobuz, Deezer etc...as they did with Pono?

I think in the near term it's more Spotify they have their eye on, as Spotify did show substantial paid subscriber growth between 4Q20 and 1Q21, suggesting there is still more marketshare out there to be had, and it's likely not from any audiophile niche, but from Joe and Jane Mainstream that Spotify grew most recently.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

3 minutes ago, MikeyFresh said:

I'm guessing the latter, streaming via AirPlay2 equipped devices only if past history is instructive.

 

I think in the near term it's more Spotify they have their eye on, as Spotify did show substantial paid subscriber growth between 4Q20 and 1Q21, suggesting there is still more marketshare out there to be had, and it's likely not from any audiophile niche, but from Joe and Jane Mainstream that Spotify grew most recently.

Good points.

 

On the first...that would be a shame, as it would give people a reason to stay with Tidal..as the convenience of integration is hard to pass up. 

 

On the second, yes, Spotify is the monster, but lossy as of now...but things can change quickly as we are seeing.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Apple Music webpage source code indicates lossless and lossless high resolution. 
 

[MikeyFresh]

33 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Apple Music webpage source code indicates lossless and lossless high resolution. 
 

Dolby Atmos and Dolby Audio too.

[Currawong]

18 hours ago, vmartell22 said:

They do seem to want to give the illusion of freedom.

 

You don't have freedom on any forum. You're always at the will of the owner. That being said, the posts I saw as flagged were fairly pointless crap. I haven't seen a well-written post be flagged and hidden, especially if it was on-topic.

 

It's not a battle between people who like MQA and those that don't. If you treat it like one, then discussion will go that way, and it's clearly not something not wanted there.   

 

If you discuss ideas, rather than people, and it is on topic, there is no reason for someone to flag your posts. I see too much of people implying less than polite things about people who are positive towards MQA in any way. That kind of thing negates any arguments made. The best way to support pro-MQA arguments is to act abusive towards people who have written about MQA or who like MQA-encoded music. 

 

Anyway, if Apple releases high-res lossless, as it appears to be something they are about to do, TIDAL is finished as a business. It'll be relegated to serving a tiny minority of listeners. For Roon customers, Deezer will become available, and MQA will slowly fade out, as it has been at audio shows pre-COVID.

[vmartell22]

2 hours ago, Currawong said:

 

You don't have freedom on any forum. You're always at the will of the owner. That being said, the posts I saw as flagged were fairly pointless crap. I haven't seen a well-written post be flagged and hidden, especially if it was on-topic.

 

It's not a battle between people who like MQA and those that don't. If you treat it like one, then discussion will go that way, and it's clearly not something not wanted there.   

 

If you discuss ideas, rather than people, and it is on topic, there is no reason for someone to flag your posts. I see too much of people implying less than polite things about people who are positive towards MQA in any way. That kind of thing negates any arguments made. The best way to support pro-MQA arguments is to act abusive towards people who have written about MQA or who like MQA-encoded music. 

 

Anyway, if Apple releases high-res lossless, as it appears to be something they are about to do, TIDAL is finished as a business. It'll be relegated to serving a tiny minority of listeners. For Roon customers, Deezer will become available, and MQA will slowly fade out, as it has been at audio shows pre-COVID.

 

1.- True - to be fair, the forums are the private property of the owner -  the owner sets the rules. I always respectfully point out what I disagree with. I am very often careful to indicate that the owners have the right to decided what kind of forum they want.  I also respectfully ask, well, just have them be clear. If they don't want MQA polemics, it should make it a rule explicitly.   

 

2.- Disagree on what gets flagged.  It  looks like you are on the Roon forum. You know then, that the flagging is done by  users and in general ( again, I have to generalize - after all we are all talking about a trend ) the MQA believers are tremendously petty  - they use the flagging system as if it was a "disagree" button. 

 

3.- I also have to disagree, and it comes back to rules, focus of the forum, the image they want to project and their selective enforcement of the rules. I will say plainly, the less polite and abusive people on the forum, at least on those discussions are the MQA believers. And they get lots of tolerance. Or used to. I haven't read any MQA discussions there lately. I think they are still ongoing, but as I mentioned before, they get push down to the the bottom of the topic highlights. Don't have the energy to look for them anymore! :D

 

4.- Again, I know is my fault, but would love to get away from the Roon forums topic. I do agree - while is possible for ALAC files to contain MQA, I don't think that it will be the case. This is going as predicted.

 

And of course, this is not petty ill-will towards people. It is unfortunate that, if this affects Tidal and Meridian, it might also have an effect on real people as opposed to that entity known as "the corporation".

 

Yet - free markets are like that. Public opinion is a market force; we are free to disagree and free to campaign etc. 

 

v

 

[lamode]

11 hours ago, Confused said:

It has been done.  It did not get the desired result though:

 

https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/mqa-ltd-a18-470395.html

 

Interesting but I doubt that the ASA is the best forum for challenging MQA. MQA's response on that link was plain ridiculous:

 

Quote

MQA said the claim that their technology "reveals every detail of the original recording" was a statement of how listeners would perceive listening to a file created using their system, it was not a technical description of the file itself. They said their technology did not change the essential nature of any sound and that no part of the established human audio range was omitted or concealed. Being a new technology, they included lots of information on their website about how it worked.

 

That could just as easily describe MP3. What a joke. And no, they provided no useful information on their website about how it worked.