Jump to content

crenca

Members
  • Content Count

    3903
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About crenca

  • Rank
    Junior Objectivist

Recent Profile Visitors

7515 profile views
  1. I think there is a distinction that needs to be made between "High End" and "High Fidelity". The former is the luxury market (encompassing the consumer & the suppliers) and the latter is what guys like esldude, Archimago, and myself are interested in. No doubt for a host of reasons there is considerable overlap between these two, so much so that it at times is just about impossible to distinguish them. Still, it's a crucial distinction. I think Archi and esldude is on to something important: We appear to be at the point, and probably have been for a while, that most in "the industry" are actually existentially threatened by High Fidelity, because they are so $dependant$ upon High End. Stereophile, TAS, and many (most?) manufacturers are now really about High End, and (given the state of underlying audio tech) anti High Fidelity.
  2. It happened to me the last time I opened (and thus updated) my Tidal desktop app, about 3 weeks ago. Edit: I just now opened my Tidal desktop app, it asked to update, I did, and it reset itself to "Master"!
  3. To add to what @yahooboystates, you can set your app to 'hi-fi' but upon an update to Tidal's software (somewhat frequent), Tidal resets this option to 'master'. In other words, Tidal and MQA are too incestuous for the consumer to avoid MQA when using their service.
  4. Good will indeed - quoting Roon's COO Danny from (https://community.roonlabs.com/t/provenance-and-mqa/83875): "...Bob Stuart is trying to improve this world end-to-end with his vision of the solution..." "{referencing Bob Stuart}I can’t think of a more patient and persistent man to get it done..." Clearly, there is a strong (mentor?) relationship between Bob and Danny. I wonder who is conning who in it...
  5. I can't find the thread I started about this but here is one: https://community.roonlabs.com/t/prefer-tidal-flac-over-mqa-option/61904 crickets from Roon...
  6. @Cebolla, it's the opposite I believe. The "Source" is indicating meta data/catalogue data/database data, and the "Signal Path" is Roon's actual software analysis displaying what the encoding of the file really is. It is in the "Signal Path" that consumers discovered 2L was sending "MQA CD" files to Qobuz.
  7. Roon is claiming that through the miracle of big brother data mining of users which they give the marketing term "Valance", Roon radio was significantly improved in this latest release. I don't use it very much so I might not notice the difference... edit: https://blog.roonlabs.com/roon-1-7-valence/
  8. Well, yes but it appears that in least some instances your still saddled with an MQA adulterated experience: So the encoding that Tidal has is MQA, (so called "48/24" that magically unfolds to "192kHz"), but after setting my Tidal service to "HiFi" (reboot of Roon needed to take effect), the file now streams as "MQA 44.1kHz" and "MQA Studio 44.1". What does this mean? I suspect it means Tidal is either using the the standard "48/24" MQA as source and resampling it down to 44.1 (evidence being the file is still "24 bit") or they have a seperate "44.1/24" MQA file. Either way, you can't escape MQA because there is no real 16/44 source in Tidal's library...unless of course you play play the Qobuz version (actual 24/96) which is what I do 😋 Kudos to Roon for acurately revealing the MQA "provence".
  9. Yep, "HiFi" is Tidal's 16/44 tier and always has been.
  10. Chris's comment here is excellent: https://community.roonlabs.com/t/provenance-and-mqa/83875/153 I too am no longer 'ga ga' over the meta data and pretty-picture-presentation. I stream 75% of the time now probably. I still appreciate how Roon makes DSP easy (EQ, crossfeed, etc.) , but the fact is I can do the same thing in JRiver with a bit more effort.
  11. I sort of want to pat you on the head and say "your a good kid" 😋 Roon needs streaming more than they need just about anything else, or at least as much as they need anything. I am a lifer Roon customer, but I would not be if "all" it did (and yes, it does it very well) was handle my own catalog in a "Hi Fi" way. In any case, here is how I put it to Danny: https://community.roonlabs.com/t/provenance-and-mqa/83875/126 edit: Danny censured my post. Here it is in full: "...MQA is closer to an objectively better model of provenance than anyone before them..." This is not true. The boutique (most of them considered "audiophile") labels identified and "fixed" the province "problem" (such as it is) years ago, which itself is a subset of the "quality" problem. I am trying to figure out the substance your support of this "provence" angle of $selling$ MQA Danny, beyond your obvious and explicit admiration and respect for Bob Stuart. He does have my respect, though it is the respect I give all more or less successful con men. Here is one possible explanation: Roon is a niche "audiophile" product, though you would like it to be more. Streaming is important to Roon customers. With the uncertainty in streaming (Amazon being the most recent potential disruptor) you and your customers are "anxious" (to choose a word) with Roon's de facto lock-in with two of the smallest and nich streaming players, Tidal and Qobuz. I suspect that Amazon, Spotify, Apple, and the rest are not interested in Roon integration, not even a little bit. Market realities are such that Roon and "audiophiles" are not worth anything beyond token efforts. So how does Roon support Tidal? Well, you could argue that it and MQA "solves" a problem, such as your peculiar take on "provence". This is par for the course and right out of the MQA playbook and has been from the very beginning. MQA in all it's aspects is about control, control of the (digital) product and management of the (consumers) rights. Provence (like every other aspect of MQA - bandwidth and "green", so called "time domain" and filtering strategery, etc. etc).is just another sales attempt, another confidence angle, and for Roon specifically a way to support partners and excite customers by being able to claim Roon is not static/stale and is solving problems we did not even know we had.
  12. Survival, relevance, and hopefully a positive balance sheet of these 1% "audiophile" niche products such as Roon.
  13. Ah, now this makes sense. Roon was/is/will not able to convince the 99% (Amazon, Spotify, Apple, Pandora, etc.) to give them the time of day, so Danny/COO has decided his future lies in convincing the 1% (i.e. "audiophiles") that Tidal and Qobuz (he inexplicably argues that Qobuz is on board with MQA) and thus MQA are crucial to their musical enjoyment. I would call this desperation, but it's just another day in Audiophiledom.
  14. I'm only a 1/3 of the way through that thread but this assertion by Danny (COO of Roon) that man in the middle attacks are a problem in music is so strange. What's the motivation for anyone in the music delivery business or outside of it to slightly alter the end product? How does anyone make $money$, or achieve some other rational end (political?!??). It's another case of MQA solving problems that do not in fact exist. Roon normally attempts to play the "neutral" in the MQA debate but Danny/Roon here is showing his cards as an MQA insider and promoter. Fact is, MQA has been quite successful in winning Audiophile niche market insiders, influencers, and manufacturers (hard and soft) to their aims. Does anyone STILL believe there is not quid pro quo going on here?
×
×
  • Create New...