A decoded MQA is not less than a CD. It is more.@amirm That's like... his opinion. I don't believe in paying more and getting less, some may but not me, at least.
A decoded MQA is not less than a CD. It is more.@amirm That's like... his opinion. I don't believe in paying more and getting less, some may but not me, at least.
So give me an example of any music you purchased yourself that came in MQA instead of CD. Not "here is a CD in Japan." But any music you personally purchased. Is there anyone in this thread with such an experience?
It has been years since these dire predictions been made. Where is the exitance proof?
Record labels (studios are movies ), don't care about formats anymore. With physical media, they produced their own (CD, DVD, etc.). With digital distribution, they just hand out the digital bits and let the distributor decide what to do with it.The open source community created FLAC. We should adopt that.
All the studios should adopt that.
By who?We've been assured that this will NEVER happen!
OK?
Using what? Tidal player or Roon? If so, both of them decode MQA in software and give you higher technical quality than CD. How did you get cheated?I been streaming supposedly CD quality music from Tidal, now I'm learnt that some of if was in reality folded MQA. IDK is that qualifies as "purchased" but I certainly paid money for it.
As to MQA itself, it has an argument: it creates a single file that can be both "CD quality" and "high-res." And do so in a way that the file itself is in the open, i.e. PCM. This has some appeal as it did for Tidal. If this is not a real solution, then it won't get more adoption. If it is, then they will and that is that. The open source community needs to create its own alternative if it thinks this solution has legs. If it doesn't then go about your business and don't waste energy on arguments like this.
So give me an example of any music you purchased yourself that came in MQA instead of CD. Not "here is a CD in Japan." But any music you personally purchased. Is there anyone in this thread with such an experience?
It has been years since these dire predictions been made. Where is the exitance proof?
So give me an example of any music you purchased yourself that came in MQA instead of CD. Not "here is a CD in Japan." But any music you personally purchased. Is there anyone in this thread with such an experience?
It has been years since these dire predictions been made. Where is the exitance proof?
Your confidence in that matter is neither here, nor there. You don't have real information. Or any idea of such trend.1) I'm sure that, at least now, these CD quality flacs being in reality MQAs are not "mistakes"
No. The main point is that where MQA is heavily distributed is in Tidal and its App and Roon both decode it to "better than CD" technical specs.2) 44khz16bit MQA are NEITHER CD quality not high-res. And for me that's the main point.
That's correct. So you really have no basis to predict that MQA is going to die or succeed. Such prediction requires deep knowledge of the industry which you all completely lack. Your consumer instincts, fear of Armageddon, etc. has no place in such discussions. Get me a quote from major record label executive saying they are about to force MQA on the entire industry and then we can talk. Until then it is absurd to make arguments based on one's lay intuition.3) a solution being the best or "real" is not really historically correlates with it's success
Let them haveAustriaTidal. How bad could it be?
They will think that until the day the bank closes their doors. The best argument you all have for your fear of MQA is what you stated above: they are losing money and that ultimately will shut them down if they don't turn it around. Or turn it around enough to do an IPO.MQA has lost somewhere in the area of thirty million pounds since its inception. The logical move would be to give up and move on. They have not.
They have reason to believe that they will be in for a major payday in the future. What prompts this reasoning?
How did you get cheated?
So let's dispense with arguments such technology costing a lot, being proprietary, folks trying to take over the world, etc. Those are constants. It is Dolby's mission for example to tax every bit of audio distributed for video. And they have been quite successful at it.
Did you know that Dolby competed with MPEG audio for surround and beat the latter for standardization in DVD? They used their political power with studios to do that. MPEG-2 was picked for video but not for audio.
Dorsey did not invest in MQA. He invested in Tidal. Tidal could get rid of MQA overnight and switch to Flac high-res streaming the moment MQA tries to milk them for royalties. Indeed they are life and death for MQA. It would be incredibly foolish for MQA to make demands from them given the clear alternative they have.So far you are correct but Mr. Dorsey is a proven monopoly builder and is now in the game.
I hope you're right, but why should we afford them even a small chance of ruining audio?So bask in the confidence that there is much higher chance of MQA going out of business than it succeeding. I give them 2 out of 10 odds of making it.
Are we really equating MQA’s possible growth to what Germany and Hitler did to Austria and Poland? I can’t be reading this correct….
Can you please clarify if this claim applies to both 24-bit and 16-bit MQA encoding?A decoded MQA is not less than a CD. It is more.