MQA Reviewed

anji12305 said:
If it becomes the standard, it degrades the performance on current gear - by design - hardly innocuous.

DRM in the form of ongoing fees to play files that have already been purchased is an intrusion that no one has asked for, and offers no benefit to consumers forced to adopt it as a "feature".

The marketplace should determine format changes, based on benefits to the users rather than the sellers.

This issue is far from trivial as it bears directly on privacy issues and ownership rights in a digital landscape.

https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/application_notes/163302855-is-mqa-doa





Sent from my HP 10 G2 Tablet using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It doesn't degrade the performance of my gear.

There is no DRM.

The marketplace will determine whether MQA is successful. Even the "not invented here" whining from some manufacturers will impact what the audio public decides.

Here we go with the Benchmark guys ramblings. If companies such as MSB and dCS , whose digital products are at the forefront of the industry, are willing to risk their reputations by supporting MQA, the rational audio enthusiast isn't concerned what Benchmark says.

Not sure which issue you are worrying about is trivial, MQA doesn't change any issues in the digital landscape.
 
There would be a potential "problem" if MQA files become the only way an album is available in "hi-resolution", something the major labels could decide to implement, although at this time it seems a bit unlikely
 
anji12305 said:
If I purchase a file, and must pay a subscription fee to play it
Click to expand...

This is not true for MQA. You can purchase a MQA file (instead of streaming from Tidal) and it will play for lifetime without subscription. You need a MQA decoder to have the full sound quality of MQA file just as you need a SACD player for SACD.

MQA is closed and proprietary - we can argue whether a closed format can survive, but it is not DRM (we don't regard SACD to be a form of DRM either).
 
still-one said:
It doesn't degrade the performance of my gear.

There is no DRM.

The marketplace will determine whether MQA is successful. Even the "not invented here" whining from some manufacturers will impact what the audio public decides.

Here we go with the Benchmark guys ramblings. If companies such as MSB and dCS , whose digital products are at the forefront of the industry, are willing to risk their reputations by supporting MQA, the rational audio enthusiast isn't concerned what Benchmark says.

Not sure which issue you are worrying about is trivial, MQA doesn't change any issues in the digital landscape.
Click to expand...

On playback, MQA encoded files have noise added (where the 'folded' data is transmitted).

If the authentication chain is disrupted, that noise is passed.

Authentication at every step that requires a current license is functionally no different than the original scheme for DRM, other than requiring MORE layers of verification.

It's commonplace to deride dissenting​ opinion​
as "irrational" when the salient points raised can't be refuted.

If anyone looking sideways at this is 'rambling' then it includes broadly admired and successful people like Paul McGowan.

http://www.psaudio.com/pauls-posts/mqa

Given that catalog holders are the first, and most enthusiastic adopters, it's clear who most stands to benefit - it's not the user, or recording artist. (Was it ever the artist making the cash?)

http://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-and-warner-real-scoop#ZMVyGK2BtQPlCRs8.97


Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
 
anji12305 said:
On playback, MQA encoded files have noise added (where the 'folded' data is transmitted).

If the authentication chain is disrupted, that noise is passed.

Authentication at every step that requires a current license is functionally no different than the original scheme for DRM, other than requiring MORE layers of verification.

It's commonplace to deride dissenting​ opinion​
as "irrational" when the salient points raised can't be refuted.

If anyone looking sideways at this is 'rambling' then it includes broadly admired and successful people like Paul McGowan.

http://www.psaudio.com/pauls-posts/mqa

Given that catalog holders are the first, and most enthusiastic adopters, it's clear who most stands to benefit - it's not the user, or recording artist. (Was it ever the artist making the cash?)

http://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-and-warner-real-scoop#ZMVyGK2BtQPlCRs8.97


Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If you don't like MQA, don't listen to it. Its really that simple. we get it your not a fan.
 
You're missing a key issue - streaming users may not have a choice in the matter. That isn't a marketplace decision - it's a forced roll out.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
 
anji12305 said:
You're missing a key issue - streaming users may not have a choice in the matter. That isn't a marketplace decision - it's a forced roll out.
Click to expand...

If MQA so cool decission on market, what it can become monopoly, very probably appear free alternative.

If I correctly understand, MQA provide about 1,5...2 times more compression than FLAC, but unknown exactly MQA is lossless or not.
 
anji12305 said:
You're missing a key issue - streaming users may not have a choice in the matter. That isn't a marketplace decision - it's a forced roll out.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

There is no forced roll out. A force roll out means you have NO choice but MQA. In this case you have a normal Tidal service and a Hi-Fi service if you chose. And with the Hi-Fi choice you still have a choice to try MQA or not via the masters selection. Not to mention from other streaming services you still have their streaming choices.
 
CPP said:
There is no forced roll out. A force roll out means you have NO choice but MQA. In this case you have a normal Tidal service and a Hi-Fi service if you chose. And with the Hi-Fi choice you still have a choice to try MQA or not via the masters selection.
Click to expand...

That's not what the principals at Tidal said.

See Pal Bratelund's post here:

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/mqa-tidal-to-launch-mqa-hi-res-audio-streaming-in-2016/5408/13
"To begin with it will be a rather limited offering of higher than redbook content, but eventually we will also run all our redbook content through..."

December, 2015


Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
 
After Benchmark, Schiit, PS Audio, there's a negative opinion from a Linn staff - although it is not company position, I suspect their company position wouldn't be much different, given their stance on DSD and non-open music format and protocol...
http://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread.php?tid=35624

This is the most negative article I've ever read on this subject (and I read a lot). I don't agree with this article, but I still think it's worthwhile to be shared.

Disclaimer: I have huge respect for Linn, and as part of my job I make sure our players/app and their players/apps are inter-operable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top