MQA The Truth lies Somewhere in the Middle

[daverich4]

44 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Tell that to Bryston, Schiit, Linn, Benchmark, Playback Designs, Audio Research, Sonore (who recently stopped supporting MQA if I an not mistaken) Exogal, and many more.

 

Maybe you should tell Audioquest, Aurender,  Bluesound, dCS, exaSound, Esoteric, iFi, Lumin, M2TECH, Mark Levinson, Moon, MSB, Mytek, NAD, Pro-Ject, PS Audio, & Teac that you won’t be buying any of their products. I’ll bet that would really put a damper on their next board meeting. 

[daverich4]

Not that it matters but I just noticed that Enjoythemusic.com says they sponsored the seminar that Chris put on? I was under the impression that he set it up. 

[daverich4]

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

That site sponsored a ton of stuff at the show. Heck, the elevators were sponsored by someone. Doesn't mean they had anything to do with elevating or lower people :~)

 

I wasn’t  being critical, just asking a question. 

 

[daverich4]

1 hour ago, Derek Hughes said:

Go to minute 33 and watch it again, the white cane is clearly visible. I've been in touch with Chris privately and I'll discuss his presentation with him privately if he wants to. As I said above, unless you were in the room you got about 10% of the audience participation.

Derek 

 

It must not have been as obvious as you thought because every single one of the posts you’re objecting to refers to the guy next to you as SLEEPING. Not making fun of someone who is blind. 

[daverich4]

On 10/14/2018 at 7:52 PM, crenca said:

TAS editor Robert Harley admitted this 2 1/2 years ago in "view from 10,000 feet" piece.  This piece tells you everything you need to know about these trade publications and where their loyalties are.  Even though Robert Harley admits that what the industry wants and needs from MQA is DRM, from the other side of his mouth he actually tries to convince the reader that MQA is not really DRM...  

 

The article is actually View From 30,000 Feet. Here’s a quote from that article where Mr. Harley admits MQA is about DRM. 

 

“It must be noted here that MQA has no form of copy protection or digital-rights management (DRM) whatsoever. Contrary to what some Internet posters think, MQA is not an evil scheme to institute DRM.”

[daverich4]

17 hours ago, crenca said:

 

Thanks for the correction of the article title.  The sentence you quote is one of his efforts to deny MQA is DRM.  This contradicts his longer argument (over several paragraphs) that the reason for MQA is that labels need DRM  - a way to protect the "crown jewels" from the consumer.

 

So his argument is a contradiction...except that it is not, MQA begins and ends with DRM just as he says, he is just part of Audiophiledom where the bald contradiction is par for the course...

 

You and I have done this two or three times in the past. Maybe even four times. You make up something that you claim he said in that article and I come back with a quote or two of what he ACTUALLY said. After that we go our separate ways. With that in mind, see you when it comes up again. 

[daverich4]

58 minutes ago, Sal1950 said:

Not being a Tidal sub I have to ask, is that a MQA tier, a HD tier, or the combined RB or better tier?

 

MQA and RB are available in a single tier for $20 a month. MQA is how they deliver their version of HD.