Search the Community

So, some questions and thoughts about the rights-holders of music, and what they can do with that music after the MQA "magic" has been applied... Can the record company have digital copies of the decompressed files? Or does the agreement with MQA not permit this? If it doesn't permit it, then it is (effectively, by legal agreement) DRM used against the labels themselves (ironic if true lmao). If they can have such decompressed digital copies, are they prevented by legal agreements from selling those directly? If they are prevented, it is again (effectively) a type of DRM against the labels. We have already seen many instances where fake HiRes files have been distributed, whether by mistake or deliberate intent. In this case, it would appear that a consumer would be downloading an actual 24/96 file (or whatever the decompressed resolution appears to be, even if only as a result of upsampling or whatever, just like if someone converts their own lossy MP3 rips to FLAC or WAV). This could be one way in which files tainted by the MQA process (tainted in the sense that they are not the masters at all, but might appear to be due to the apparent resolution of 24/96 etc) could end up in the wild, without customer awareness or choice. I imagine this is covered by NDA, so I don't know if anyone will be able to state definitively that a record label CANNOT do this with their own music. I am sure that wouldn't stop certain people from stating that "it has never been done and never will be," just as some continue to state that the conventional interpretation of DRM "has never and will never" be applied with MQA files. P.S. If anyone cares, here is a bit of background on why I am interested in any way in MQA: My interest in MQA began in the same way as my interest in DSD/SACD. I didn't have an opinion or preconceived notion one way or the other whether the format itself would be "better" objectively than existing formats, but I was interested as I always am by the idea of record companies revisiting session tapes in order to bring a better sounding release to the public. My experience as a music listener and consumer has taught me that the mastering or remastering is more important than the "numbers" involved in ultimate resolution between certain formats. I'm not too concerned, for example, if the DSD layer of an RCA Living Stereo SACD is "better" than the Red Book layer, as it is very clear that even the Red Book layer is vastly superior to the prior RCA releases of the same music, due to the fact that they actually went back to the 2- and 3-track session tapes, where in many cases before they had only gone to the 2nd or 3rd generation mixdown or whatever, and also due to the extreme care taken by SoundMirror in their work on the Living Stereo SACD project for Sony. As classical fans here are aware, Sony lost interest in that project, and ended it, leaving many legendary recordings undone. So I was excited at first by the possibility that something like this "MQA" process might reopen the vaults to a similarly careful and painstakingly meticulous revisiting of those remaining precious session tapes. I want the rest of Leontyne Price's opera recordings at RCA to be treated as lovingly as Madama Butterfly was. So, I read everything I could find about MQA. And here we are now, with me rambling on and on in what was going to be a very brief post hahahaha!