How can an additional licensing cost lead to the licensees products or services being cheaper?
If more people use MQA streaming that stealing music...
How can an additional licensing cost lead to the licensees products or services being cheaper?
If more people use MQA streaming that stealing music...
You miss the point completely. Introducing any fee, even a penny for something what is for free now is very bad thing. If you do not understand that I am afraid I can not help you.
So people streaming MP3 and FLAC from Spotify and Tidal etc. are stealing music?
You miss the point completely. Introducing any fee, even a penny for something what is for free now is very bad thing.
How can an additional licensing cost lead to the licensees products or services being cheaper?
MQA is not going to appeal to the MP3 crowd.
It might however appeal to those who want FLAC level sound (or better). Let's face it, right now (assuming you believe that higher bitrate audio is worth the effort), then there's basically very little available in 24 bit (HDtracks), SACD or BD. MQA "might" result in a significantly larger music selection than all of the rest of those formats put together. And you don't need to buy to own, you can rent them.
I don't believe anyone titled a thread as such, however there was definitely a request made by another member to logically use one of the two existing threads for subjective discussions and the other for the technical side of things.
If your inferring MQA could lead to economies of scale for High res, that doesn't stack up. As others have already said on this thread, if there is a high demand for streaming high res audio, which is debatable, codecs already exist that can efficiently stream it without content owners/vendors and DAC manufacturers incurring a licensing fee. How does adding costs help grow the market vs no cost alternatives?
If the hardware maker/ streaming service pays x as a fee for a certain feature and that feature leads to an increase in revenue that exceeds the additional cost. Simples.
Ah, I see, so what I suggested didn't in fact happen. Why not try it? Because at the moment it looks like the "people are crapping all over our thread" line is just fiction.
Indeed, that argument is certainly 'Simple'
-The vast majority of the market for recorded music do not give a rats arse about MQA, High res or CD. Therefore it stands to reason that Dac sales will not increase as a result of MQA.
-The market for high res is tiny, again because demand is tiny, not because of a lack of availability as more would be available if the market demanded it. Again, it stands to reason that sales of high res will not increase due to MQA.
-If MQA sounds better, only a tiny few audiophiles will care and want it. How does this result in economies of scale?
If therefore MQA became the de facto digital format for streaming, let alone for physical media, the vast majority of consumers will be paying for something they don't need or want.
MQA files are smaller than 24/96 and much smaller than DXD or DSD 256 so there are savings in terms of delivery costs.
Gimme a break Rad. We don't use dial-up anymore when we connect to the Internet! We're talking about the costs to the consumer here. If raw material prices go up, the consumer always ends up paying. This is Economics 101.
You're assuming a lot. And even under your fragile assumptions you can't conclude much as you have no idea how small (or big) MQA fees actually are.
Delivery costs incurred by the streaming service...
Considering your contributions to this thread I'd be surprised if you really had any knowledge of basic economics albeit at a purely academic level. Do you?
MQA charges a license fee. Other technologies capable of bit stacking are free.
I have both an academic and practical comprehension of Economics after a career in the financial markets. You?
MQA charges a license fee. Other technologies capable of bit stacking are free.
I have both an academic and practical comprehension of Economics after a career in the financial markets. You?
Delivery costs incurred by the streaming service...
Funny enough there are lots of video delivery services with bandwidth requirements way higher than any audio format.