Jump to content
IGNORED

MQA is Vaporware


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, MaxBuck said:

I still really don't understand the antipathy toward MQA, aside from the marketing babble its promoters use.

 

Doesn't it provide the opportunity to stream high-quality audio while minimizing data usage?  For that purpose alone it seems like a good idea.  Many people are somewhat data-limited, and the ability to lower their GB costs strikes me as a good thing.  But I'm sure I'm missing something here.  Bottom line: all the anti-MQA talk I've heard and read focuses purely on the "MQA = bad" canon without providing any reasons as to why it's bad.  (And don't cite that it "violates the creative output of the recording engineer."  I really couldn't care less what they might want.)

 

Seriously?

 

Is the cycle starting again? Apparently MQA is still promoting its scheme. When does the next shoe drop?

Boycott Warner

Boycott Tidal

Boycott Roon

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

I highly recommend you read up on mQa and watch @GoldenOne’s videos. 
 

MQA consumes more bandwidth than pure PCM when compared Apples to Apples. It chops off information, adds it’s own proprietary encryption, then resamples it up to where it was before it chopped it off. 
 

The big thing for me is it reduces consumer choice. Roon users in Canada only have Tidal as an option for streaming. Tidal removed tons of pure PCM content and replaced it with mQa. Try streaming Tracy Chapman’s self titled album without mQa on Tidal. You can’t. 
 

It’s lossy as well. 
 

If you want lossy perceptual encoding, use MP3 or AAC. 

Thanks; finally watched this video, though not in its entirety.

 

Frankly, my concern is far less with whether MQA is "lossless" (clearly it's not) than with the distortion that it apparently introduces.  Obviously not good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MaxBuck said:

I still really don't understand the antipathy toward MQA, aside from the marketing babble its promoters use.

 

Doesn't it provide the opportunity to stream high-quality audio while minimizing data usage?  For that purpose alone it seems like a good idea.  Many people are somewhat data-limited, and the ability to lower their GB costs strikes me as a good thing.  But I'm sure I'm missing something here.  Bottom line: all the anti-MQA talk I've heard and read focuses purely on the "MQA = bad" canon without providing any reasons as to why it's bad.  (And don't cite that it "violates the creative output of the recording engineer."  I really couldn't care less what they might want.)

 

1. Is lossy - they use semantics here

2. Adds ringing - been proven

3. adds Ultrasonic noise

4. DSP to be louder

5. Not from a master (there is no authentication).

6.Adding cost - pay for encoding, decoding, and the algorithm for MQA - doesn't add anything.

 

Want me to go on?

Current:  Daphile on an AMD A10-9500 with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590

Amplification - Benchmark AHB2 amplifier

Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers

Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and Blue Jean Cable Balanced Interconnects

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, botrytis said:

Want me to go on?

No, you provided discrete, objective reasons for avoiding MQA.  Appreciate that.

 

Apparently, simply asking the question here is enough for people to downvote one's posts.  Interesting phenomenon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, people here are used to 'ringers' coming in and hawking mQa. You might have got caught in that hunting...

Current:  Daphile on an AMD A10-9500 with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590

Amplification - Benchmark AHB2 amplifier

Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers

Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and Blue Jean Cable Balanced Interconnects

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Your post has been repeated dozens of times over the years and often the posts lead to pissing matches. We are just tired of BS. Don’t take it personally if you had good intentions. 

No problem. I'm not looking for validation here, just information. Appreciate when I get it. 🤓

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

Audioquest survey/sweepstakes. It includes a few questions as they want to know what you think of MQA. Good way of telling Audioquest what you think of MQA. Might want to fill it out soon as I thinks it ends at the end of July. https://www.headfonia.com/audioquest-giveaway-survey/

Oh, great.  Do I also get to provide my opinion on Audioquest and its snake-oil product line?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I would like to know: Is MQA still trying to foist this horrid scheme on the music consumer?

 

With all the recent examination is MQA conceding "We've been exposed".

                                   OR

Is MQA working still to implement their scheme?

Boycott Warner

Boycott Tidal

Boycott Roon

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KeenObserver said:

What I would like to know: Is MQA still trying to foist this horrid scheme on the music consumer?

 

With all the recent examination is MQA conceding "We've been exposed".

                                   OR

Is MQA working still to implement their scheme?

Bob Stuart won't give up until he runs out of money. The question is will the investors will notice MQA Ltd has no market share and not fund them for 2022.? Or notice that the maket is not interested in paying a premium for audio quality above AAC or 320k MP3? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

Bob Stuart won't give up until he runs out of money. The question is will the investors will notice MQA Ltd has no market share and not fund them for 2022.? Or notice that the maket is not interested in paying a premium for audio quality above AAC or 320k MP3? 

 

My reading of the last financials posted on Companies House is that they received funding to carry them into 2021, with the promise that more funding would be provided in 2021 to carry them into 2022.

I would expect that Mike Jbara and the crew at MQA Ltd would want to milk this for as long as possible. Jbara is getting a handy compensation package.

At this point. after dumping the tens of millions into the scheme, the underwriters would have to expect to make a HUGE killing in order to continue dumping money into the scheme. In order for that to happen they would have to have been promised by Jbara and the big studios that have a piece of of MQA that they were going to make MQA the de-facto standard. The studios would have to be arrogant enough to think that they could ram MQA down the throats of the music consumer whether they like it or not.

The underwriters are arrogant enough to think that they can ram MQA down the throats of the music consumer. They rammed "Tot" down the throats of the "Kaffirs".

Boycott Warner

Boycott Tidal

Boycott Roon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of Companies House, what does today's posting from MQA Ltd mean?

It basically says that whatever is supposed to be posted has been posted.

???

Boycott Warner

Boycott Tidal

Boycott Roon

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...