advertisement


MQA

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rosewind said:
You are right that this is about lossy MQA and what it really is:
- lossy in that it cuts away and adds data in the "origami process" - as they really call it
- not consistently better sounding than lossless FLAC
- not smaller in file size than FLAC
- not easier load on streaming equipment
- not true "master quality" as it is indeed lossy
- an attempt at DRM from studio to end-user that threatens to corner music into a lossy format that is not an improvement over the lossless FLAC that we have now
- an extra cost (tax?) levied on the end user through the additioal cost of software and hardware encoding and decoding (that "origami" game they refer to as the MQA process)
- no benefit to the artists or end-users
- not open to testing and comparison with FLAC, so MQA is a closed and closeted format
- a refusal to discuss MQA in an open and informed way. Instead uses obfuscation, attack and disruption to any attempts at finding out what MQA really is and really does and really want

Any more questions?
Click to expand...

- a way to insert Bob Stuart as the middleman in every music transaction.
 
DimitryZ said:
A significant portion of audiophiles who actually listen to it.
Click to expand...
I think you're kidding yourself, there are bunch of outraged campaigners who would rather moan than listen to music, who like hearing their own voices. All this is so 5 years ago. A bit like the football super league but better thought out. Similarities between disgruntled football fans?

Everything has been said so so many times. The weather is more interesting. I'm speaking as an audiophile, well invested and enjoying the music. Z.
 
Tintinabulum said:
I think you're kidding yourself, there are bunch of outraged campaigners who would rather moan than listen to music, who like hearing their own voices. All this is so 5 years ago. A bit like the football super league but better thought out. Similarities between disgruntled football fans?

Everything has been said so so many times. The weather is more interesting. I'm speaking as an audiophile, well invested and enjoying the music. Z.
Click to expand...
If people didn't stream MQA on Tidal, it would not be there.
 
Tintinabulum said:
Well it would, there's the odd CD, plus downloads. It would still be there. Still doesn't make it more interesting than the weather. Wasn't it windy today?
Click to expand...
No, Tidal would still be there, of course... without MQA. It's there in Tidal only at its discretion. Some people like Tidal's catalogue better than Qobuz. For me Qobuz is more work, since they group Blues and Folk together, and PC app doesn't run on anything short of a very modern computer...but I subscribe anyway. Maybe I am a format hoarder.

It was windy and smelled of Roses.
 
My no.1 squeeze on Tidal is Diana Krall. I prefer the MQA files of her albums to the FLACs. Yes the FLACs are possibly the more natural and unforced sounding but the MQAs have a nice “pop” to the mids and a silkiness which I enjoy for laid back listening. Sound like a good remix.
 
So Mater Quality Authenticated [MQA] sounds like a good remix!

Brilliant.

All I need is JS Bach remixed and I would be guaranteed to be in musical Nirvana!

Best wishes. Could not resist that. I thought I was out of this, but ....

Med glad hilsen, George
 
George J said:
So Mater Quality Authenticated [MQA] sounds like a good remix!

Brilliant.

All I need is JS Bach remixed and I would be guaranteed to be in musical Nirvana!

Best wishes. Could not resist that. I thought I was out of this, but ....

Med glad hilsen, George
Click to expand...
What Johnjo is describing on that and other good MQA discs (not all) is the quality I described as "performance specificity."

LPCM often (again not always) has all the right audiophile qualities, but fails to convince the listener. You are listening to good music through a good kit.

At its best, MQA can break out of that box. That's the reason it has a listener base. For example, in my recent comparisons of Gardot's "Sunset in the Blue," SQ preferences came out to MQA, LP and LPCM. In audiophile terms it does it by a significant margin - most of us (we are used to exaggerating sonic differences) will have no problem hearing this as a major difference. On music you know and have heard a few times on your own system, it's very easy to tell the difference. I honestly would kill this in a blind test (in my own system).

I will choose a system that can deliver the above experience more often than another approach every time.
 
DimitryZ said:
I guess I am an MQA part-time lover, as it shares my attention with LPCM! But I also listen to LP, CD, cassettes, 8-tracks, XM Sat, FM and watch concert videos on DVD, Blueray and VHS.
Click to expand...

Tried 360 Reality Audio yet ?
Also available on Tidal is Dolby Atmos.
You might be so blown away by these new formats that you ditch MQA, but as you keep telling us you need to listen to it, though keep avoiding the above.
 
misterdog said:
Tried 360 Reality Audio yet ?
Also available on Tidal is Dolby Atmos.
You might be so blown away by these new formats that you ditch MQA, but as you keep telling us you need to listen to it, though keep avoiding the above.
Click to expand...
I guess I can try. I have a completely separate system for home theater, since I think these are very different ways of using sound with different requirements.

I think for Atmos, one needs more speaker modules, that even my reasonably recent 7.1 film system doesn't have. I got all 6 of my HT speakers when RS put their nice cast enclosure two-ways with Linneum tweeters on sale at $50/piece. They also made the center speaker like that. I am all set, I feel, in the HT department.
 
Tintinabulum said:
Yes, who do you think is interested in the babel?
Click to expand...

Tintinabulum said:
I think you're kidding yourself, there are bunch of outraged campaigners who would rather moan than listen to music, who like hearing their own voices. All this is so 5 years ago. A bit like the football super league but better thought out. Similarities between disgruntled football fans?

Everything has been said so so many times. The weather is more interesting. I'm speaking as an audiophile, well invested and enjoying the music. Z.
Click to expand...

Where have you been all my life?
 
Just to clarify my position, some MQA content I enjoy more than the FLACs on Tidal, typically the 192khz files. I find them thoroughly enjoyable and they qualify along side my vinyl for serious listening sessions. Other MQA files can sound somewhat processed but still OK, though sometimes I prefer the “plainness” of the Tidal FLACs or those I have ripped from CD. My turntable is better at stage depth and dynamics and I have the comparative albums on vinyl but I still like to put on the MQAs for a different presentation sometimes. Having multiple formats and freedom of choice is the key here. If we were heading to an MQA only future then that would be cause for concern but surely the market will be driven by demand?
 
misterdog said:
Tried 360 Reality Audio yet ?
Also available on Tidal is Dolby Atmos.
You might be so blown away by these new formats that you ditch MQA, but as you keep telling us you need to listen to it, though keep avoiding the above.
Click to expand...

Different things entirely, neither is 2 channel audio so you are consistently well wide of the mark I’m afraid and you’re trolling by continuously saying the same thing over and over and over and over again. And it’s incredibly childish behaviour.

mansr said:
Do NOT feed that troll.
Click to expand...


Rosewind said:
Thanks. Put on ignore.
Click to expand...

LOL:p

:rolleyes:
 
Re. artist payment -

In Denmark, the grocery chains decided to raise the price of milk and hand the price increase to the milk producers in order to stop the race to the bottom.

A similar thing could be deviced for artists so they are paid better for their music. For that MQA would still be a superfluous lossy format.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top