MQA Discussion Group

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 18783 times.

witchdoctor

Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #60 on: 9 Sep 2017, 12:49 pm »
This is politics 101, not SQ. As you see their are different opinions even among engineers:

http://www.mqa.co.uk/professional/for-content-producers

AmpDesigner333

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 1892
    • Digital Amplifier Company
Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #61 on: 9 Sep 2017, 01:02 pm »

witchdoctor

Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #62 on: 9 Sep 2017, 01:14 pm »
"MQA: No need to worry" thread:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=147977.0

Thanks, I don't know why this is such a hot button issue. You get a Tidal subscription for $20 a month (and a Bluesound Node for $500 if you want the full MQA unfold) and choose what type of track you prefer, FLAC or MQA. If you don't like MQA stream the FLAC file. If you like MQA stream the MQA file. Seems simple enough to me. BTW, MQA tracks are now snow balling. It seems every time I log into Tidal there are more availabl;e. It is a fun suprise whenever I see one of my favorite albums suddenly pops up in the MASTERS list. I didn't need to shop, spend, don't need to do nothing nothing except click and smile.That's what I call "No Need to Worry".

AmpDesigner333

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 1892
    • Digital Amplifier Company
Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #63 on: 9 Sep 2017, 01:18 pm »
Thanks, I don't know why this is such a hot button issue. You get a Tidal subscription for $20 a month (and a Bluesound Node for $500 if you want the full MQA unfold) and choose what type of track you prefer, FLAC or MQA. If you don't like MQA stream the FLAC file. If you like MQA stream the MQA file. Seems simple enough to me. BTW, MQA tracks are now snow balling. It seems every time I log into Tidal there are more availabl;e. It is a fun suprise whenever I see one of my favorite albums suddenly pops up in the MASTERS list. I didn't need to shop, spend, don't need to do nothing nothing except click and smile.That's what I call "No Need to Worry".
Did you read the thread?

witchdoctor

Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #64 on: 9 Sep 2017, 01:20 pm »
Did you read the thread?
Don't you see my posts in the thread?

James Tanner

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 16590
  • The Demo is Everything!
    • http://www.bryston.com
Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #65 on: 9 Sep 2017, 01:35 pm »

James you posted this? It seems to denigrate your customer base. Do you agree that we are all unobjective suckers spending money on your gear when all we really need are the original "source files"? You may as well toss out your cuurent DACs if that is the case.

Hi

As I have said many times - I am posting opinions of others to provide a forum for discussion - both sides of this story have to be presented if we as consumers and manufactures are to make intelligent desicions .

james

witchdoctor

Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #66 on: 9 Sep 2017, 01:38 pm »
OK, it certainly moved the conversation along, thanks :D

The A/B test that seems the most clear to me is when I listen to an MQA playlist for 30 minutes or more then go back to FLAC. Ouch! You get it immediately, MQA just seems more "right". Especially the bass in my system.

witchdoctor

Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #67 on: 9 Sep 2017, 01:39 pm »
OK, it certainly moved the conversation along, thanks :D

BTW, your gear is used in studios and I am sure you have plenty of "source files" sitting in your collection. Is it really all that?

James Tanner

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 16590
  • The Demo is Everything!
    • http://www.bryston.com
Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #68 on: 9 Sep 2017, 01:44 pm »
Food for Thought:

If MQA succeeds, it will essentially turn the audio industry into the video industry, where all of the decisions are made by two outside groups - HDMI and the BDA. I don't know what it is for Blu-ray, but for DVD it was about $150,000 up front for all of the licenses, another $50,000 for annual renewals, plus a stupidly high percentage on the royalty (around 8% of wholesale).

The royalty made sense for a $99 Japanese DVD player, but not for a multi-kilobuck US-made super player. The problem with the royalty being a percentage of the selling price is that the selling price is not necessarily based on the technology being licensed. If my DVD player cost 10x to build because it has more expensive power suppies, chassis, audio circuitry, video circuitry, clocks, DACs and so forth, none of those components are based upon the technology being licensed, so it makes zero sense to pay increased royalties on those parts from any standpoint.


CanadianMaestro

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1113
  • Skepticism is the engine of true progress
    • Hearing Everything That Nothing Can Measure
Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #69 on: 9 Sep 2017, 01:51 pm »
Thanks, I don't know why this is such a hot button issue. You get a Tidal subscription for $20 a month (and a Bluesound Node for $500 if you want the full MQA unfold) and choose what type of track you prefer, FLAC or MQA. If you don't like MQA stream the FLAC file. If you like MQA stream the MQA file. Seems simple enough to me. BTW, MQA tracks are now snow balling. It seems every time I log into Tidal there are more availabl;e. It is a fun suprise whenever I see one of my favorite albums suddenly pops up in the MASTERS list. I didn't need to shop, spend, don't need to do nothing nothing except click and smile.That's what I call "No Need to Worry".

Well, more MP3 files are available each day from places on iTunes. "Snow-balling". Does it mean it's all master-quality or even high-quality?

Each person makes their own value judgements, it's a free capitalist market. For many, 44/16 or 320kbps are sufficiently good-sounding to buy for them.

Nothing bad about buying whatever music suits you, in whatever format you like. But measurements are a good thing, and having these to ensure "master-quality" authenticity is a good thing, not something to be trivialized. Regardless of whether the file ends up being gratis or paid for.

Should humans start eating grass instead of supermarket food because grass is free of charge?

witchdoctor

Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #70 on: 9 Sep 2017, 01:51 pm »
I wish the audio industry becomes more like the video industry. In video we have gone from videotape, to DVD, to BRD and now to UHD... progress.
In audio we have gone from vinyl, to redbook, to MP3 and you don't even want to look at a graph of what has happened to sales in the music business.
SACD, DVD-A and Hi Rez PCM and DSD have been an attempt at a course correction that have crashed and burned for the most part with low adoption. Video on the other hand has seen steady improvement in quality.

witchdoctor

Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #71 on: 9 Sep 2017, 01:52 pm »
Well, more MP3 files are available each day from places on iTunes. "Snow-balling". Does it mean it's all master-quality or even high-quality?

Each person makes their own value judgements, it's a free capitalist market. For many, 44/16 or 320kbps are sufficiently good-sounding to buy for them.

Nothing bad about buying whatever music suits you, in whatever format you like. But measurements are a good thing, and having these to ensure "master-quality" authenticity is a good thing, not something to be trivialized. Regardless of whether the file ends up being gratis or paid for.

Should humans start eating grass instead of supermarket food because grass is free of charge?

In California and Colarado humans smoke grass, not eat it  :wink:

CanadianMaestro

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1113
  • Skepticism is the engine of true progress
    • Hearing Everything That Nothing Can Measure
Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #72 on: 9 Sep 2017, 01:58 pm »
In California and Colarado humans smoke grass, not eat it  :wink:

Nothing new there; here in Canada too....

My point was that simply because something may be available for free, doesn't bolster an argument that's it's superior quality and worthy of acquiring, and certainly not when there's a lack of convincing evidence that it's "lossless" and "master-quality".

witchdoctor

Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #73 on: 9 Sep 2017, 02:01 pm »
Nothing new there; here in Canada too....

My point was that simply because something may be available for free, doesn't bolster an argument that's it's superior quality and worthy of acquiring, and certainly not when there's a lack of convincing evidence that it's "lossless" and "master-quality".

Its not free, its $20 a month which is double the cost of the competition for the most part. For the $10 premium Tidal is raising the bar by adding MQA and not raising the subscription cost. All in all that is simply good customer service. Maestro we have gone back and forth on this before. Have you ever listened to a MASTERS playlist unfolded for 30 minutes or more uninterrupted? You know if you have I guess tastes in codecs is similar to tastes in music and our tastes are just different. If not you should try it sometime.

https://tidal.com/playlist/b2c94789-14d4-4a55-b6ee-33a96b952900


James Tanner

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 16590
  • The Demo is Everything!
    • http://www.bryston.com
Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #74 on: 9 Sep 2017, 02:11 pm »
I think the problem is that some folks say they prefer the sound of  a particular codec (MQA,SACD, AIFF,FLAC,WAVE, etc.) which is certainly OK but that does not take away from the fact that knowing what is going on under the cover technically is an important consideration - especially claims made by the marketing people and vested interest groups.

james

witchdoctor

Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #75 on: 9 Sep 2017, 02:24 pm »
I think the problem is that some folks say they prefer the sound of  a particular codec (MQA,SACD, AIFF,FLAC,WAVE, etc.) which is certainly OK but that does not take away from the fact that knowing what is going on under the cover technically is an important consideration - especially claims made by the marketing people and vested interest groups.

james

OK, but the same can be said for any company that makes speakers, amps, DAC's, etc and makes claims about their products. A "vested interest group" is called a company right? Every company has a vested interest in peddling their wares. Why single out codecs, the same can be said for hardware. How many companies claim that their proprietary wave guide, power supply, circuits or whatever provides blah, blah, blah. If we are going to discuss marketing claims you gotta look at the industry (new thread would be needed if we open that can of worms  :o)

jseymour

Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #76 on: 9 Sep 2017, 03:06 pm »
It is not the same thing for a manufacturer to incorporate proprietary technology into their product being sold versus MQA that requires licensing and royalties through the entire distribution chain beginning at the studio.  I won't bother at the moment getting into the technical details of how MQA is a sham. Many people have exposed that fact.

You made me laugh when you said "Playing Allman Brothers Live at the Fillmore in MQA, simply ridiculous streaming through my Bluesound Node> Parasound Z Components> JBL 230 speakers in my desktop system. Hard to get any work done."  Really? Low end desktop speakers?  You probably would prefer MP3s over 16/44.

I'll stick with my 2013 SHM Allman Brothers played on a good system, not a college dorm system.  Also, I want to own the music I love, not rent it.

CanadianMaestro

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1113
  • Skepticism is the engine of true progress
    • Hearing Everything That Nothing Can Measure
Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #77 on: 9 Sep 2017, 03:09 pm »
Maestro we have gone back and forth on this before. Have you ever listened to a MASTERS playlist unfolded for 30 minutes or more uninterrupted?

I am the type of consumer who enjoys trying diff things. In the case of MQA two things are factual.

1. There's a lot of publicity and claims about MQA (read: hype).
2. MQA's claims re. "master quality" are as yet unproven, using accepted scientific methods.

Given these two facts, I am not going to "try" this new format. Even if it's free/cheap. Because I value authenticity and "true to source" ethics -- that's why I have the system that I have. To play back music with max accuracy and fidelity to the recording.

Also, I find the attitudes of many pro-MQA execs not only disingenuous but also corrupt and unworthy of my patronage -- so far. That may change, but for now, I can only go with what data are out there.

CanadianMaestro

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1113
  • Skepticism is the engine of true progress
    • Hearing Everything That Nothing Can Measure
Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #78 on: 9 Sep 2017, 03:12 pm »
If we are going to discuss marketing claims you gotta look at the industry (new thread would be needed if we open that can of worms  :o)

We look at the data. Esp with hardware like amps, speakers, DACs. They don't tell the whole story re. performance, but they are objective measurements. Progress is achieved thru hard research and data collection, not word of mouth and spreading unproven claims on forums/audio shows.

CanadianMaestro

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1113
  • Skepticism is the engine of true progress
    • Hearing Everything That Nothing Can Measure
Re: MQA Discussion Group
« Reply #79 on: 9 Sep 2017, 03:13 pm »

I'll stick with my 2013 SHM Allman Brothers played on a good system, not a college dorm system.  Also, I want to own the music I love, not rent it.

That's right. Me too -- own. Not rent.  :thumb: