MQA The Truth lies Somewhere in the Middle

[rickca]

MQA is like a sandwich.  The baloney is somewhere in the middle.  MQA is the mystery meat of high res.

[rickca]

56 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I’m out to provide information.

What's the format of your session?  Is it a presentation followed by Q&A, or a panel discussion or what?

[rickca]

30 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Just me and a microphone and a slide show. 

So how does Ken Forsythe participate?  Or did you just invite him to see the presentation?

[rickca]

34 minutes ago, austinpop said:

I asked exactly that question of Mike - does he and the labels view success of MQA as a future where MQA is the only high-res content purchasable? Because for many of us the fear is that our choice - of buying non-MQA hi-res PCM or DSD content - will be taken away.

 

He vehemently argued no. His argument was that they (MQA) do not have exclusive agreements with labels, nor would labels find that prudent business.

So then why are the labels doing MQA?  For those who think it sounds better?

 

I'm a lot more interested in your Day 3 report than in any further discussion about Chris's MQA session.  I think what needs to be said about it has now been said.  It is unfortunate but predictable that MQA supporters challenged the presentation in a manner that derailed it.  Chris wanted to be accommodating but it wasn't a mutual respect type of situation.

[rickca]

1 hour ago, barrows said:

there are a lot of customers out there who will not purchase a new DAC if it does not support MQA

Is there real evidence of this aside from anecdotal accounts?   I mean end user demand, not phone calls from distributors and dealers who have been lobbied by MQA business development people.

[rickca]

Just now, Brinkman Ship said:

no there is not....

Well, let's give @barrows a chance to back up what he claims.

[rickca]

2 hours ago, barrows said:

To oppose MQA, demand genuine, non-MQA, non compressed, high resolution, content from the content providers.  That is where  the real battle lies, as if MQA gains a strong hold with content providers, it may well do so at the exclusion of being able to purchase un-adulterated high resolution of our favorite musics.  Whether it be download, disc, or streamed, demand non MQA content.

I agree.  Our best opportunity may come if the labels try to make MQA the sole authorized distribution format for streaming/download services like Qobuz.  I would immediately cancel my subscription.  This is the right way (and probably the only way) of telling the labels we aren't going to accept MQA.  The only thing they understand is money.

 

I have to believe that the DAC manufacturers are being told that this is the plan.  I don't buy the customer demand story.

[rickca]

I'd love to hear what MQA pitches to the DAC manufacturers.  I bet it's a whopper of a story.

[rickca]

1 hour ago, hvbias said:

I think the real focus should be on the two known MQA reps, namely the CEO and the other rep in the brown blazer in the back row, far right. As representatives of a company their behavior was abhorrent. Their demands that Archimago be identified otherwise his evidence is not valid was a complete joke as Chris repeatedly stated the data is reproducible and that no one had come forward to refute it. This went in one ear and out the other with those two.

Whoever raised this issue said he wanted to know Archimago's identity because he might be developing something to compete with MQA.  In other words, he wants to discover an ulterior motive for Archimago's analysis.  This is laughable.  Who wants to compete with something pointless like MQA?

[rickca]

14 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

Chris is a good guy.  Mike is a good guy.  Ken is a good guy.

And now we all join hands and sing Kumbaya?

[rickca]

2 hours ago, kumakuma said:

He's only posting here to earn brownie points with his industry buddies.

And to generate interest in his next article.

[rickca]

9 minutes ago, senorx said:

The only question I have left is who goes under first, Tidal or MQA?

And yet more manufacturers sign up to implement MQA.  How does MQA convince these guys?

https://www.soundandvision.com/content/mqa-announces-new-products-and-partners

[rickca]

15 minutes ago, Shadders said:

It is just a slow migration to DRM for audio.

I agree this is the only answer that makes sense.  All the other technobabble about the merits of MQA is just misdirection.

 

DRM is the sole reason that MQA is an end to end solution.  As @mansr has shown, it certainly isn't because of any customized filters.

[rickca]

MQA is essentially running a political campaign.  It's got all the usual elements ... lobbyists, endorsements, messaging, discrediting your opponent and so on.  In politics, there is no middle ground.

[rickca]

17 minutes ago, Lee Scoggins said:

 

I don't think so based on conversations with music execs.  They tell me they need to sell a better product to get more interest.  I think they see hirez as an important value but they have an issue with doing that at scale, in real time on a streaming service.

So how come Apple can do this

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/apple-streaming-tv-service-to-be-free-for-device-users-report-2018-10-10

[rickca]

17 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

STOP REPEATING IT

You have to bang on the desk while you say that to get your point across.

[rickca]

I will not pay a premium for Master Quality Adulterated files.  So how is everyone in the ecosystem going to make money?

[rickca]

Where did MQA and its shills enthusiasts get the idea that CA is responsible for prejudicing its readers against MQA?  It is not.

 

I read the material MQA released including Bob's Q&A and some of the magazine articles.  Then I read the analysis done by guys like @Miska , @mansr and Charles Hansen.  Then I used my own judgment.  Archimago's article subsequently confirmed some of my conclusions.

 

It's so easy to simply dismiss the CA community as a mob mentality.  

 

 

 

[rickca]

@Lee Scoggins your virtuous cycle will happen only if there is real end user demand for MQA at sufficient scale.  Where's the proof that such demand exists (or can be stimulated)?  Have DAC sales gone through the roof because of MQA implementation?  Has TIDAL had a surge in HiFi subscribers?  If Qobuz lures a bunch of TIDAL HiFi subscribers away in the USA, what would that indicate?

[rickca]

Let's say I work for a consulting firm on an engagement for the record labels or MQA itself.  Could I then state that I have no financial interest in MQA and that I'm just an enthusiast?  I could say that I get no compensation from either MQA or the labels, right?

[rickca]

6 minutes ago, esldude said:

No Lee's job is to sing mqa praise and have the excuse to ignore technical questions as being unqualified to answer.  That's not by accident. Then of course those who could answer never do.  They have no intention of response.

Right.  This is precisely why MQA principals do not directly participate in this forum.  Lobbyists can just pretend to be obtuse and simply repeat your talking points. 

[rickca]

1 hour ago, mansr said:

I wonder how much they pay me just to shut up.

Maybe the MQA folks will start a GoFundMe page for you.

[rickca]

On 10/14/2018 at 4:15 PM, rickca said:

@Lee Scoggins your virtuous cycle will happen only if there is real end user demand for MQA at sufficient scale.  Where's the proof that such demand exists (or can be stimulated)?  Have DAC sales gone through the roof because of MQA implementation?  Has TIDAL had a surge in HiFi subscribers?  If Qobuz lures a bunch of TIDAL HiFi subscribers away in the USA, what would that indicate?

So @Lee Scoggins I think these are legitimate questions.  You never responded.

[rickca]

2 hours ago, Lee Scoggins said:

By all indications, Jay-Z is not doing a great job managing Tidal.

Oh, so Jay-Z is the problem.  Nothing to do with MQA.  If TIDAL were well managed, MQA would have really juiced the number HiFi subscriptions.  I'll let him know. 

 

If you're basing this assessment on financial performance, maybe MQA isn't so well managed either.

 

We're going to end up with a whole bunch of DAC manufacturers who feel stupid about their decision to implement MQA along with a bunch of audio journalists who have lost their credibility.

 

Keep telling everybody that New Coke tastes even better than the original.

[rickca]

20 minutes ago, Don Hills said:

That's a very clever piece of misdirection by "Stuart and team."

Maybe MQA should hire the Russian Internet Research Agency.  I hear they are great at this kind of stuff.