Jump to content
IGNORED

Article: MQA: A Review of controversies, concerns, and cautions


Recommended Posts

I second the "Bravo".  Thank you for your convictions, and the time you put into a rational evaluation, using real data. Kinda rare in upper end audiophilia.

[Home Digital] Bricasti M12 > DIY M2x Monoblocks > Daedalus Audio Muse Studio Speakers

[Home Analog] Technics SL-1200G > K&K Audio Phono Amp (Zu DL-103/Benz Glider-SL/Denon DL-301 II)

[Office] Laptop > Kitsune R2R lvl3 > Violectric V281 > Focal Utopia Headphones (balanced)

[beach/Travel] Laptop > DragonFly Red > Ether Headphones

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm equally interested in both the feelings and actions of creative artists, those who represent the source of all the music that gets recorded.  Will they band together and form a "United Artists" of music to take on those industry participants of MQA who wish to adulterate their art?

Steve Schaffer

Roon Nucleus/ dCS Vivaldi Upsampler - DAC - Clock / Spectral DMC-30SV preamp / Spectral Anniversary monoblocks / Wilson Audio Alexia 2 / Shunyata Everest / Shunyata interconnects & power cables & Ethernet / Uptone EtherREGEN switch / Cybershaft OP21A-D / Uptone JS2

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

You have to love footnote 10.

I *did* love the concluding sentence:

Quote

 

: the authority of double-blind testing becomes powerless in the presence of that uncon-
trollable urge to tap your foot

 

 

Roon ROCK (Roon 1.7; NUC7i3) > Ayre QB-9 Twenty > Ayre AX-5 Twenty > Thiel CS2.4SE (crossovers rebuilt with Clarity CSA and Multicap RTX caps, Mills MRA-12 resistors; ERSE and Jantzen coils; Cardas binding posts and hookup wire); Cardas and OEM power cables, interconnects, and speaker cables

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimately, remember that the music industry can be wrong, audiophile magazines can be wrong, as an individual, I can be wrong (and my wife says I often am!). But the consumer is always right – which is exactly why “we” call the shots. Let’s see how this goes...”

 

Absolutely correct. “We” call the shots with our pocketbooks. Always have and no different here. It will succeed or fail on that premise. 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

While I certainly wish "the consumer is always right", practical examples of consumer power are not as plentiful as this dogma would suggest.  Monopolies, oligopolies, and mostly unchecked corporate power have been steadily chipping away at the consumer's once formidable "power of the pocketbook".  The same record labels that scoff at audiophiles as insufficiently numerous to appreciably affect sales figures have all invested in MQA.  That single fact speaks volumes about what the labels believe MQA represents.  And because the labels are an oligopoly, consumers have no power to dissuade them from the folly of MQA.

 

IMHO, believing otherwise is demonstrably naive based on the well documented predation of the record labels and their seeming contempt for consumers of their product.

 

The labels haven't  invested a significant amount of money in MQA. How many times do I have repeat it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Any idea of how much?  Just trying to divine the threshold of "significant" investment.

 

Maybe Rt66 has numbers which would be interesting... But the investment Warner (a company with $700M+ in revenue yearly) made towards MQA was said to be "speculative" in nature a couple years back.

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

Free The Music - No MQA!  :nomqa:

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...