MQA The Truth lies Somewhere in the Middle

[Richard Dale]

24 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

You seem to not understand the MQA paradigm. There only a handful of MQA "downloads" available.  It is consumable mainly through a Tidal HiFi subscription for $20 a month so.

 

I do agree with you that he price of high resolution downloads are divorced from reality.  They are way out of whack.

Originally MQA was pitched as a download format that would possibly supersede all other download formats. If the backers of MQA have given up on that, then I think it is best to simply be indifferent about MQA. I don't mind streaming in any format including MQA or patent encumbered AAC, but I certainly want to choose what lossless formats my personal music collection is in.

[Brinkman Ship]

7 minutes ago, Richard Dale said:

Originally MQA was pitched as a download format that would possibly supersede all other download formats. If the backers of MQA have given up on that, then I think it is best to simply be indifferent about MQA. I don't mind streaming in any format including MQA or patent encumbered AAC, but I certainly want to choose what lossless formats my personal music collection is in.

Tidal is the where 99% of MQA albums can be found. I have only seen MQA "for sale" at Highresaudio.com in very snall numbers and a Japanese download site, which I think is e-onkyo. Of course there are the 100 "MQA CDs"...

[Richard Dale]

1 minute ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Tidal is the where 99% of MQA albums can be found. I have only seen MQA "for sale" at Highresaudio.com in very snall numbers and a Japanese download site, which I think is e-onkyo. Of course there are the 100 "MQA CDs"...

It's DOA as a download format then.

[Brinkman Ship]

7 minutes ago, wdw said:

 

Wonder if all North American Tidal subscribers should advise them they will be leaving as soon as Quboz  become available and this, in part, due to MQA.   

Not all Tidal subs will. Some have been bamboozled by MQA. And Tidal integration is pretty ubiquitous on most audiophile streamers.

[Hugo9000]

The marketing person at MQA has a degree in criminology lol

 

[FredericV]

20 hours ago, Sonicularity said:

Here is the link to the video.

 

 

 

Thanks for sharing. It's very clear MQA is on it's last legs. Last year they cancelled the RMAF panel, this year they send their little army. They went all the way trying to interrupt the presentation. You can easily see how desperate they are. They ignore all the facts, and try to debunk people like Archimago. They only play the ad-hominem route. Just like talking to the MQA key opinion makers, they get very angry when you debunk them.

In the past I did the PA for a 300+ audience. It was even televised on Belgian TV and the VRT camera crew would even put a little transmitter onto my mixing desk to capture the PA sound. So I would never allow anyone to take a mike and accept what happened in this video.

They clearly were prepared in trying to disrupt the presentation. The technical person who did such a bad PA job should be fired.

It's clear the MQA shills were prepared, and I recognize the tone while speaking with some very unpleasant MQA types, which have:

- threatened to expose me as the 432 Hz pope

(even though our involvement into the 432 Hz movement is very small, 432 Hz is much bigger than MQA)


- disrupt the X-FI show
- threaten to contact my reseller network
- calling me a fraud

Nothing new, and the video is well known territory.

[rn701]

2 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Tidal is the where 99% of MQA albums can be found. I have only seen MQA "for sale" at Highresaudio.com in very snall numbers and a Japanese download site, which I think is e-onkyo. Of course there are the 100 "MQA CDs"...

 

7Digital also has a few MQA downloads. If I'm not mistaken, Onkyo is rebranded 7 Digital. 

 

 

[Dr Tone]

39 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

You seem to not understand the MQA paradigm. There only a handful of MQA "downloads" available.  It is consumable mainly through a Tidal HiFi subscription for $20 a month so.

 

I do agree with you that he price of high resolution downloads are divorced from reality.  They are way out of whack.

 

You might have to expand your understanding, there are allot more than a handful unfortunately.  Go to onkyo music’s website.

[crenca]

 

18 hours ago, Archimago said:

 

Although I think @barrows and I would very much have disagreements in many ways ?, I agree with what he's saying. The hope as audiophiles desiring the "best possible" music for our enjoyment is to maintain the availability of lossless high-resolution and that one cannot beat that "studio master". MQA's propaganda to assert themselves as "exact" or "lossless" or "better" is the problem. Especially when they create this impression and expect to be further financially rewarded along the way.

 

I certainly hope folks would not shun good hardware simply because of MQA compatibility, just as they should not avoid MP3 compatibility advertised on a box. I know for a fact that some companies are incorporating MQA compatibility out of that perception of consumer pressure to tick off all the boxes. But the engineers behind the scenes are far from impressed by the "technology" itself. Remember that there are NDAs signed and many who are able to speak about MQA are not at liberty to divulge their opinions.

 

 

I don't normally disagree with Archimago but I will here.  MP3, AAC and the like are not the equivalent in the market for several reasons.  Manufacturers of DAC's are unfortunately in a bad position in that they are being leveraged by others in "the industry" into helping position MQA.  As a consumer, MQA is so bad for my interests and niche Audiophiledom as a whole, they can not be left off the hook as  innocent "victims" of market forces.  Don't get me wrong, I really believe they are "innocent", but they are casualties so to speak.  Don't blame consumers for rightly eschewing otherwise good products which happen to include the really bad "feature" of MQA.  

 

If other parts of "the industry" has leveraged you into signing an NDA and including functionality you know is garbage and bad for the consumer, well then that is on you - own it.  If you go out of business because of MQA, or in spite of it, well that is the dog-eat-dog of world of business and consumers have no obligation (moral or practical) to support you either way.

 

Consumers self interests and moral obligation is to a marketplace that supports their interests and needs and MQA is decidedly against that... 

[rickca]

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

[Brinkman Ship]

9 minutes ago, rn701 said:

 

7Digital also has a few MQA downloads. If I'm not mistaken, Onkyo is rebranded 7 Digital. 

 

 

Thanks for mentioning 7 Digital. I see actually e-onkyo.com still is valid, and their US an UK site is onkyomusic.com..

[Brinkman Ship]

10 minutes ago, Dr Tone said:

 

You might have to expand your understanding, there are allot more than a handful unfortunately.  Go to onkyo music’s website.

No I fully understand..I just did a search, I see no more than a few hundred..unless I am missing something. Their search function does not allow for an actual count.

[Ralf11]

11 hours ago, NoisyNarrowBandDevice said:

 

Can somebody please make a GIF of the guy banging the table - comedy gold!

 

 

Who was that little gnome?

 

I also enjoyed the guy sleeping nearby...

[rn701]

2 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Thanks for mentioning 7 Digital. I see actually e-onkyo.com still is valid, and their US an UK site is onkyomusic.com..

 

At onkyomusic.com, if you scroll down to the bottom of the page it says 'Service provided by ©7digital 2004-2018'.

 

Wonder if MQA made a blanket deal with 7Digital for them and all their rebranded outlets.

 

P.S. 7digital is UK based, so the MQA shills disrupting the presentation could say "no US based provider is selling MQA downloads" without technically lying.

[Brinkman Ship]

2 minutes ago, rn701 said:

 

At onkyomusic.com, if you scroll down to the bottom of the page it says 'Service provided by ©7digital 2004-2018'.

 

Wonder if MQA made a blanket deal with 7Digital for them and all their rebranded outlets.

 

P.S. 7digital is UK based, so the MQA shills disrupting the presentation could say "no US based provider is selling MQA downloads" without technically lying.

VERY interesting, thanks. Also 7D was going to back that crazy HDTracks planned MQA streaming service which thankfully was stillborn. The Cheskys embracing MQA was so disgraceful on so many levels.

[barrows]

17 hours ago, rickca said:

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.

I have seen plenty of forum posts from folks who say this.  Remember, people here at CA are only a very small portion of the audiophile public, and not everyone is anti MQA.  There are plenty of audiophile's who believe the hype, and demand MQA compatibility from manufacturers.  We hear this directly from (potential) customers at Sonore as well.

[Allan F]

18 hours ago, Brinkman Ship said:

"Please understand the pressure which customers are exerting on manufacturers: there are a lot of customers out there who will not purchase a new DAC if it does not support MQA"

 

...and who created this pressure? We KNOW who.

 

Sometimes NOT giving customers what they "want" is good business and serves the greater good.

 

Regardless of whether MQA is what it's creators claim or what its detractors assert, it is hard to imagine how losing sales because of lack of MQA compatibility can be good for a manufacturer's business.

[Brinkman Ship]

6 minutes ago, Allan F said:

 

Regardless of whether MQA is what it's creators claim or what its detractors assert, it is hard to imagine how losing sales because of lack of MQA compatibility can be good for a manufacturer's business.

You just reassert that avoiding manufacturers who back regressive features in fear instead of focusing on making excellent products and progressive technologies is the way to go.  I don't reward those who are lily livered and weak spined.

 

 

[Archimago]

23 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

 

I don't normally disagree with Archimago but I will here.  MP3, AAC and the like are not the equivalent in the market for several reasons.  Manufacturers of DAC's are unfortunately in a bad position in that they are being leveraged by others in "the industry" into helping position MQA.  As a consumer, MQA is so bad for my interests and niche Audiophiledom as a whole, they can not be left off the hook as  innocent "victims" of market forces.  Don't get me wrong, I really believe they are "innocent", but they are casualties so to speak.  Don't blame consumers for rightly eschewing otherwise good products which happen to include the really bad "feature" of MQA.  

 

If other parts of "the industry" has leveraged you into signing an NDA and including functionality you know is garbage and bad for the consumer, well then that is on you - own it.  If you go out of business because of MQA, or in spite of it, well that is the dog-eat-dog of world of business and consumers have no obligation (moral or practical) to support you either way.

 

Consumers self interests and moral obligation is to a marketplace that supports their interests and needs and MQA is decidedly against that... 

 

I certainly can appreciate that sentiment Crenca. There is something to be said about being part of the collateral damage by "virtue" of association.

 

31 minutes ago, Hugo9000 said:

The marketing person at MQA has a degree in criminology lol

 

 

Color me unsurprised... 

[Allan F]

7 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

You just reassert that avoiding manufacturers who back regressive features in fear instead of focusing on making excellent products and progressive technologies are to be avoided.  I don't reward those who are lily livered and weak spined.

 

You are begging the question by starting with the assumption that any manufacturer that includes MQA compatibility does not focus on making excellent products that employ progressive technologies. A logical fallacy. I am sure that manufacturers trying to make a fair profit couldn't give a rat's ass about your opinion or whom you reward. BTW, I have absolutely no interest in buying or playing MQA altered music.

[Brinkman Ship]

4 minutes ago, Allan F said:

 

You are begging the question by starting with the assumption that any manufacturer that includes MQA compatibility does not focus on making excellent products that employ progressive technologies. A logical fallacy. I am sure that manufacturers trying to make a fair profit couldn't give a rat's ass about your opinion or whom you reward.

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.

[barrows]

At Sonore, I believe Jesus decided not to bother supporting MQA.  But, we could get away with this approach because in the streamer, only the "first unfold" was available, and if one wants that for streaming they can get it through the player software while still using our Renderers.  DAC manufacturers have no such workaround available for those who demand MQA, so it is a much more difficult decision, and there is a lot more pressure on DAC manufacturers to support MQA.

[Allan F]

15 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.

 

I would expect that those companies do not accept the claims of MQA and made a business decision that the cost of including MQA compatibility exceeded the potential financial loss of potential sales. A perfectly reasonable approach. However, individual manufacturers should be allowed to make such decisions based on their particular situations and view of the market and not be the subject of proselytizing boycotts for doing so.

[Brinkman Ship]

3 minutes ago, barrows said:

At Sonore, I believe Jesus decided not to bother supporting MQA.  But, we could get away with this approach because in the streamer, only the "first unfold" was available, and if one wants that for streaming they can get it through the player software while still using our Renderers.  DAC manufacturers have no such workaround available for those who demand MQA, so it is a much more difficult decision, and there is a lot more pressure on DAC manufacturers to support MQA.

Thanks for your insight.

[hvbias]

Full marks to you Chris for sticking through that onslaught of grown men behaving like children.

 

The real upside I am seeing is the utter lack of success of MQA means it won't even be a footnote in audio history when Citi Bank (Universal) see the complete failure that it is. Then MQA can be relegated to the riveting audiophile music recording labels with a girl and her guitar.