Jump to content

james45974

  • Content Count

    477
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About james45974

  • Rank
    Sophomore Member

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Yes, the fire aftermath has unwittingly made a mockery of MQA hasn't it!
  2. Where is the new editor?? Isn't it part of an editors job to correct things like this?
  3. Thanks John, I guess I'm not really sure of the value of MQA authentication then. I'm sorry if this is getting very basic, I thought I understood the general idea of MQA, but what does "Authentication" actually mean? Isn't there some sort of "authentication" going on with any master and subsequent vinyl pressing, CD, or streaming file already?
  4. I don't have an MQA capable DAC and frankly MQA doesn't interest me but I have a question. When you play MQA through Tidal for instance is there any kind of tag that shows who "authenticated" the files? I would think that to be somewhat of a "purist" that only tracks authenticated by the original ARTIST are truly authenticated. Anything else is somewhat of a bastardized version of "authentication". Who cares if the the engineer or producer or custodian "authenticated" the track.
  5. interesting editorial at Enjoy The Music .com http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/viewpoint/0219/Lossless_Streaming_Music_Welcome_To_20_Years_Ago.htm
  6. This whole MQA thing has been become very uninteresting. There is nothing but marketing puffery inflating minor steps as major advancements!
  7. I am not aware of the ins and outs of NDA's, would the MQA NDA be any different in general to what might be signed for a manufacturer to incorporate Dolby Atmos in their product line for instance? Seems like there is a lot of hiding behind the NDA.
  8. that is because MQA has nothing, always has, always will ?
  9. and all of them artist approved!
  10. what I find interesting is that MQA has become nothing more than an punch line. Maybe the question should be asked at the forum: "why should MQA be taken serously?"
  11. The point is to put MQA back in front of peoples eyes again, there had been waning interest, nothing more profound than that.
  12. There seems to be some cadence to these articles on MQA. Just when things have quieted down and gone silent all of a sudden a brand new article appears. They almost seem desperate to keep MQA in the public conscience.
  13. I gave up commercial TV about 7 years ago, have never looked back!
  14. Mitch, have you done any experimenting with near-field setups and Audiolense? I am thinking the process would be no different than with your setup but I was just wondering. Thanks!
×
×
  • Create New...