Jump to content

yahooboy

  • Content Count

    35
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by yahooboy

  1. Peter, You forgot one thing...... All of the above is pure marketing regurgitation. 1. We have never seen evidence of this being the correct output 2. Please show that any "decoding is going on - i.e. that it's not just an upsampling 3.Well this does depend heavily on what's in the "embedded" flags - no All in all none of this has been shown beyond MQA marketing - which You are a part of.
  2. It seems that the world has caught on to all the ills of MQA so they have to hide them under the moniker "Master"
  3. Exactly what do You mean when saying "decompress", what software is used?
  4. You saved it on the last line. What they actually lie to us about is that they keep the frequencies up to 44k/48k, samples them at 88/96k (another lie)
  5. Well You have to remember that MQA has MAGIC they took a Madonna Album recorded in 14 bit, mixed it on an analog mixer digitized it in 24 bit. Hey presto we have a 24 bit master🤮
  6. Funny how they always want to do things on the phone. Have been in touch with them several times. As soon as they have to write ANYTHING that is beyond marketing script they either go silent or want to do it on the phone. Funnily they do not want You to record the conversation.
  7. We just need You to abandon googleapis (Google promises that they are not using their API's to track - and MQA is lossless🤮)
  8. They went out the toilet the day their customer"service" told Me that MQA was indeed lossless
  9. The xiph.org site states: FLAC should be lossless. This seems obvious but lossy compression seems to creep into every audio codec. This goal also means that flacshould stay archival quality and be truly lossless for all input. Testing of releases should be thorough. How can MQA then wrap a lossy file inside without xiph reacting ?
  10. Well it's out there in spades, licensees that keeps promoting the third unfold etc.
  11. Well we are all wrong MQA IS LOSSLESS (Well at least to MQA's marketing) We are just stupid not to accept Bob's "facts
  12. Well if You consider a result before taxes going from 264K NOK in 2015 declining to 49K in 2019 doing just fine, then You're right
  13. They not only promote it they also haven't found out it's not lossless, as of the 19th.2020. As a HiFi publication I find that a bit embarrassing MQA (hi-res): A lossless compression format that packages hi-res files for more efficient streaming. Used for Tidal Masters hi-res streaming. https://www.whathifi.com/advice/mp3-aac-wav-flac-all-the-audio-file-formats-explained
  14. Well I needed to know when the last possible version without MQA was available, so I could stop updating before MQA infested my system. I have written extensively with Damien regarding the inclusion of MQA. I have not bought the latter versions 3.x for precisely that reason. (Did the same with ROON as well as TIDAL) I don't want to support MQA therefore I don't support companies that support MQA ! My little contribution to putting MQA out of business
  15. The way I see it, including MQA in Your products equals endorsement. Anyone that endorses a fake product will not get a purchase from me. I mean why would I give money to someone that sell a product that includes a scam ?
  16. Well, not even glancing in that direction. Until MQA is not included
  17. Was just looking up the terms of using the FLAC container: What FLAC is not: Lossy. FLAC is intended for lossless compression only, as there are many good lossy formats already, such as Vorbis, MPC, and MP3 (see LAMEfor an excellent open-source implementation). DRM. There is no intention to add any copy prevention methods. Of course, we can't stop someone from encrypting a FLAC stream in another container (e.g. the way Apple encrypts AAC in MP4 with FairPlay), that is the choice of the user. Seems to me that someone has not read these terms. Have w
  18. Well I've noticed quite a few threads (mentioning MQA) that seem strangely incoherent, as if several posts are missing......
  19. Well they seem very defendant regarding MQA, had writings back and forth with them on several occasions. They either don't understand MQA (highly unlikely) or they are so much in bed with MQA that they have to/or feel they have to market a scam (probably a part of the contract.) They won't enable a sorting of MQA and non MQA files. They are deleting posts on their site that badmouths MQA, in general they do not like anyone questioning MQA I cancelled My sub due to their stand on MQA
  20. Not really, You've got to remember where ROON came from (Meridian) there might be very positive feelings toward the former employee
  21. Anyone having a recommendation for a car receiver ? 1DIN
  22. Sad, Had just ordered a Kenwood receiver, which is now cancelled. Have to start looking for another
×
×
  • Create New...