Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country


About Thuaveta

  • Rank
    Sophomore Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Nice car you have there, Chris. It's a pity you scratched it. You wouldn't want that to happen again, now would you ?
  2. Waitwaitwait... "the unified standards team that first developed lossless compression 30 years ago" ?!?!?! Anybody mind elaborating on that please ? (and yeah, MLP, I get it, but, still... if there's no nuance stripped in translation, a bit of a bold claim, no ?)
  3. Fish. Those things are called fish.
  4. i don't believe such a thing is possible...
  5. Of course it isn't a real problem, but it's one MQA fixes. Which'd make MQA's logic "let's degrade the signal, so that we can visually display that we're accurately transmitting a degraded signal". Birth of a new world, indeed.
  6. Since @The Computer Audiophile was saying there was remaining value in authenticating the transmission between a Tidal server and a receiving device, which I doubt, I was wondering how much loss a transmission between a Tidal server and a receiving device can take before it's audible, and will it be audible, or catastrophic ? (my instinct would be to say "none, because of SSL, it needs to be perfect anyway, so transport protocol error correction pretty much takes care of that")
  7. Ohnononono, I meant NON-MQA files, sorry I didn't make that clear enough... like, what would it take for the authentication to have any value on, say, a Qobuz stream...
  8. Would any of the more technically savvy members care to enlighten us on how big of an achievement this actually is, i.e, how much randomized uncorrected packet loss from a Tidal server would result in an inaudible alteration to a file once played back, and how much it'd take to make it audible ?
  9. I'd say it's less than a master, more than nothing at all: someone with "authority" authenticated the fact that what you're listening to is an official release, lossily recompressed in a way that they find to be either audibly transparent or at the very least acceptable for listening, as opposed to something that'd be officially released and unofficially recompressed in an audibly transparent manner. That they're even using the word "master" should tell everyone that it's a con, one that's marketing to emotions and not cold, hard reality, simply because like there is no such thing
  10. No: he has a problem with MQA, and he has a problem with Tidal selling MQA as the same thing / superior as / equivalent to his own masters.
  11. With all due respect, lack of journalism. period. Amen to all the rest, of course. The painfully biting irony of the MQA disinformation campaign is of course that Stuart's career was bankrolled by Boston Globe money...
  12. Do you want 10 zones for 5k, or do you have 10 zones and want to put 5k in that for something to run them ? If it's 10 zones for 5k, I'd like to remind you that you're asking for advice in a place where people spend more money on an interconnect cable... Anyway, given the budget, you're going to be tight if you want white gloves.
  13. Well, I'm not the one who recommended it, but yes, it's "just" software. You put it on a computer (or "server"), and it'll allow you to send music to devices connected to that computer over your network. Roon does the same, is much more expensive, but people tend to find it easier to use, and it is something you can have installed and hooked up to home automation systems for you by a dealer.
  14. Didn't know you had sadistic tendencies, @Kal Rubinson 😋
  • Create New...