MQA Shill Steve Stone Provides a Good Laugh For a Friday...

[beetlemania]

2 hours ago, firedog said:

Where are the unsighted listening tests and comparisons of MQA SQ by the audio press? When many serious experienced home hobbyists and some industry professionals, e.g., Charles Hansen, and Paul McGowan, questioned the claims that MQA improved sound quality - where was the fair evaluation of those contrary claims? What some hear as an improvement, many others hear as a dulling of transients, a softening of the sound, a loss of micro detail, and an addition of artificial “air”, “space” and a sort of reverb that shouldn’t be there. Where has the mainstream audio press discussed this? Answer: it hasn’t, it’s been left to the forums.

 

Yep! Other than Soundstage (specifically, Doug Schneider) and now CA via Archimago's article, the audio media has completely failed the consumer on MQA. Stereophile and, especially, TAS have earned our scorn and derision.

[beetlemania]

14 minutes ago, emcdade said:

take any/all MQA discussion here with a giant grain of salt

 

There is a *lot* of well-researched, well-reasoned, and cogent information in this thread. Very little of this is available at Stereophile and you won't read *any* of it in the pages of TAS.

[beetlemania]

8 minutes ago, firedog said:

Roon will "do the right thing"

 

I'm new to Roon (<2 weeks) and nearly so to Tidal (<2 months). Help me be clear with what Roon is doing here. For Tidal MQA files, Roon does the first unfold for my non-MQA DAC? I don't have to do anything else? For non-MQA files, Roon does not apply MQA filters?

 

BTW, does Tidal even have hi-res content that is *not* MQA?

[beetlemania]

6 minutes ago, firedog said:

Your DAC will simply relate to it the same way it relates to any other 88 or 96k file.  

 

OK, thanks. I noticed that "96 kHz" MQA is interpreted as 48 kHz by my DAC. I just installed Roon 1.5 last night so will look again to see what is now displayed by my DAC.

 

BTW, I plan to switch to Qubuz if they offer true 24 bit PCM.

[beetlemania]

Sho’nuf! Roon 1.5 is now doing an unfold on Tidal MQA up to at least 96 kHz on my Ayer QB-9 (oh, the irony). I guess I can now do a “proper “ comparison other than I have no way to discern if the master is identical. 

 

Interesting that the price of Roon is unchanged. How is BS profiting from this. Is Roon subsidizing it’s users? 

 

Still, I much prefer to have real hi-res (24 bit PCM) and will probably switch to Qubuz when that becomes an option. 

[beetlemania]

2 hours ago, mansr said:

Maybe. It's also possible that MQA is giving steep discounts while they build up traction. If it becomes a must-have, they can then jack up the fees without losing licensees. At that point, subscription rates will also increase for the same reason. Let's hope they never make it there.

 

Someone should notify TAS and Herb Reichert that Roon just UN-obsoleted the Yggy.

 

This shifts (or can shift) the licensing burden from the DAC manufacturers to Roon. I wonder if Roon will have to make two versions (Tidal/MQA and Qubuz/PCM) to prevent outrage from customers (like me) who refuse to pay MQA licensing.

 

If Qubuz gets established in the US with 24 bit PCM and Roon doesn't make us pay MQA licensing fees, it will hardly matter if iPhone users are happy with their blue lights.

[beetlemania]

2 minutes ago, mav52 said:

You mean like non tidal users using Roon for their management of their music files on a NAS or a hard drive.

 

I would use Roon regardless of streaming. It's an awesome interface with unmatched ability to your explore your collection and learn just about everything there is to know about your favorite artists. Tidal is a nice bonus for me but I've read accounts of folks who've abandoned their own collections and gone solely to streaming. I don't see myself doing that especially knowing that Tidal's definition of hi-res is MQA. No thanks.