Tidal Misleading Listeners ??? (Neil Young on why he's no longer on Tidal)

Calvin

Calvin

Banned
Joined
Dec 6, 2019
Messages
785
Location
USA
This brief post below by Neil Young is alarming. There's also a link at the bottom page to some other interesting comments.

Glad I still collect and rip redbook CDs.

Neil Young Archives
 
Thanks. His statement is NOT about Tidal but rather it is about MQA.

Here is what Neil Young had to say about MQA:

"Mr. Young hears it in another way and has clear words about MQA: ‘I feel that my masters are in no way improved. They are degraded and manipulated. I made them. I know the difference. I can hear it’."
 
nicoff said:
Thanks. His statement is NOT about Tidal but rather it is about MQA.

Here is what Neil Young had to say about MQA:

"Mr. Young hears it in another way and has clear words about MQA: ‘I feel that my masters are in no way improved. They are degraded and manipulated. I made them. I know the difference. I can hear it’."
Click to expand...

Agree that he has a real problem with MQA now, but his post is entitled, “TIDAL MISLEADING LISTENERS”

TIDAL is calling their files of my songs Masters. But Tidal’s MQA files are not my masters. I make my masters - not TIDAL. I don’t need some hocus-pocus file manipulation that claims to improve my work. I made my masters the way I wanted them to sound. If TIDAL referred to their titles as TIDAL MASTERS, I would have no problem, but they don’t. They call them Masters. I had my music removed from that platform. They are not my masters.
 
I didn’t see from the linked thread where Tidal misled its subscribers.
 
asindc said:
I didn’t see from the linked thread where Tidal misled its subscribers.
Click to expand...

Are we reading the same article? At the top according to the article Neil Young says:

TIDAL is calling their files of my songs Masters. But Tidal’s MQA files are not my masters. I make my masters - not TIDAL. I don’t need some hocus-pocus file manipulation that claims to improve my work. I made my masters the way I wanted them to sound. If TIDAL referred to their titles as TIDAL MASTERS, I would have no problem, but they don’t. They call them Masters. I had my music removed from that platform. They are not my masters.

In the second paragraph it states, “Tidal’s master is a degradation of the original to make it fit in a box that collects royalties.”

This is Neil Young’s wording, not mine.

IMO this can pose a problem calling something the master - as it shows in the pics in the article - when it isn’t. This is TIDAL’s doing and responsibility.

TIDAL is replacing redbook CD recordings with their new MQA masters. Is this the wave of the future? Will this new format make its way into other streaming platforms? As of Nov 2020 Warner Music is making millions of MQA tracks for TIDAL. Will all their future CDs and vinyl be from the real masters or will they be fakes too? Lots of questions to ponder IMO.
 
asindc said:
I didn’t see from the linked thread where Tidal misled its subscribers.
Click to expand...

The reference to Tidal in the title is misleading. MQA has been claiming from the get go that they have ‘fixed’ or done whatever to the masters to get the original sound. And obviously Neil Young has a problem with that since HE created the masters and HE knows what they should sound like.
In my view, the creator of the original masters knows better than anyone else. So that alone would make me question what MQA is all about.
Tidal is caught in the middle here IMO. The real beef is with MQA not Tidal.
 
Mike said:
Misleading? One word: Pono.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

I agree Pono was misleading. But IMO so is TIDAL by saying saying that MQA files are masters (see pics on original article) when they aren’t!
 
Calvin said:
I agree Pono was misleading. But IMO so is TIDAL by saying saying that MQA files are masters (see pics on original article) when they aren’t!
Click to expand...

I wonder why exactly he feels they aren’t masters? What is changing exactly from the original recording?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
I have a Pono, it was not bad at the time. The store was great, for awhile.

I think NY is saying that Tidal converts his HiRez “masters” to MQA “masters” files, which, I guess he sees as adulteration. By Tidal calling these MQA files “Masters”, instead of “Tidal Masters”, is the issue.
 
Bones13 said:
I have a Pono, it was not bad at the time. The store was great, for awhile.

I think NY is saying that Tidal converts his HiRez “masters” to MQA “masters” files, which, I guess he sees as adulteration. By Tidal calling these MQA files “Masters”, instead of “Tidal Masters”, is the issue.
Click to expand...

I agree that is part of his problem. But he also says, “I made my masters the way I wanted them to sound” and “Tidal’s master is a degradation of the original ...” IMO he made the real master so he should know what they sound like.
 
Calvin said:
Are we reading the same article? At the top according to the article Neil Young says:

TIDAL is calling their files of my songs Masters. But Tidal’s MQA files are not my masters. I make my masters - not TIDAL. I don’t need some hocus-pocus file manipulation that claims to improve my work. I made my masters the way I wanted them to sound. If TIDAL referred to their titles as TIDAL MASTERS, I would have no problem, but they don’t. They call them Masters. I had my music removed from that platform. They are not my masters.

In the second paragraph it states, “Tidal’s master is a degradation of the original to make it fit in a box that collects royalties.”

This is Neil Young’s wording, not mine.

IMO this can pose a problem calling something the master - as it shows in the pics in the article - when it isn’t. This is TIDAL’s doing and responsibility.

TIDAL is replacing redbook CD recordings with their new MQA masters. Is this the wave of the future? Will this new format make its way into other streaming platforms? As of Nov 2020 Warner Music is making millions of MQA tracks for TIDAL. Will all their future CDs and vinyl be from the real masters or will they be fakes too? Lots of questions to ponder IMO.
Click to expand...

So the issue is with MQA, not Tidal. Got it.
 
I wonder if there was both NY's original 44.1k as well as the MQA version? If so I'd say let the listener choose. However, I can see the artistic purist view as well.

It's a bit of a pain but if I have a choice of versions I will listen to all then choose which one to continue with. It's not always MQA or highest res.

My Aurender will do the 1st unfold but my DAC isn't MQA, so from what I have come to understand I can get 96k if the file goes that high or higher but I'm limited to 96k.

I was listening to Bad Company's, Running With The Pack, their was a remastered 44.1k version and a MQA 96k version. I preferred the remaster, the 96k seemed a bit thin by comparison. I have to say this is more the rare occasion than norm though.

The point is when streaming check for your best source. Tidal's version of America's Greatest Hits is better than my CD rip. I suppose the Tida version is some type of remaster although it doesn't specifically say. And, I began playing B-Tribe tonight from Tidal and thought this doesn't sound so good, my CD rip was noticeably better.

I personally don't think the difference is large enough to warrant all the fuss, it's not like someone will turn on the MQA version and say, "what the He... is wrong with this". Why don't he pull his music from the radio? On rare occasion where I hear the radio the sound quality Is so bad from FM I used to know. Copressed files and other degragation make some songs sound quite different from how I know them.

So let's be consistent with this artistic hardline. I think FM and satellite radio does way more damage than MQA. AT least MQA's goal is good sound. I think.
 
Mr Peabody said:
I think FM and satellite radio does way more damage than MQA. AT least MQA's goal is good sound. I think.
Click to expand...
No disrespect, but it would seem that MQA's target is to generate new income from existing musical content.

The "good / master sound" argument looks more like a positioning, i.e. a selling proposition, than anything else!
Regards
 
I could careless about Pono. Tidal ls misleading its members , by using the word Masters. 'A master recording is the official original recording of a song, sound or performance. Also referred to as “masters”, it is the source from which all the later copies are made.' And Neil Young caught them on it. HE controls his masters and Tidal/MQA did not use them to create the MQA offerings of his music on Tidal. That is in fact misleading by Tidal. All Tidal has to do is call its MQA Stuff, 'MQA' and be done with it. And regarding these MQA noted "Masters" we do not know, if a CD was used and who knows which release of the CD it was, or a needle drop or an actual tape and then was the tape a copy of a copy or was it in fact the actual master tape. It appears we will never know.
 
Master is embedded in the name. Not sure just calling it MQA accomplishes anything. Master Quality Audio....hmmm.

I’m glad NY is speaking up. I wonder if MQA royalties get in the way of royalties paid to artists? Or are they over and above? I always look for economic motives when I hear something like this.

It would appear that Tidal would be at an economic disadvantage wrt other services if they are paying MQA royalties on top of artist’s royalties. I guess it doesn’t matter since that they are not making any money right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top