MQA hype or not : tidal masters

[maro73]

The fact that you find that streaming MQA from Tidal equal to highres download shows that a Tidal subscription is good value.

I think that you and ZAP7 is forgetting the most requirements of MQA which is not about bit rate or the deblurring.

It is that it is encoded from the guarantied best master which also explains why MQA sounds better than normal loudness war CD quality.

Yeps
Forgot to mention that
Same stuff as hd tracks is it ?
Cheers

[Joe]

The only non-Chord DAC I fancy trying to give MQA a go is the Aurender A10 but I'm pretty sure MQA is marketing BS.

[davidf]

Get a listen to some MQA, it may change your mind!

[sunbeamgls]

Its still all entirely unnecessary. They should just stream the proper files.

[SAP7]

Exactly.

Devise a system to rip master files into smaller packages. At a time when speeds are rising and storage is cheap.

Hmmmmm. Just get the master audio.

[sunbeamgls]

My MQA listening has been pretty positive so far - comparing The Doors' L.A. Woman album sounds better than the hi-res remaster, albeit quite a lot smoother, maybe a tad too smooth for my preference. My listening earlier in the year to numerous albums that I'm pretty familiar with and/or use for demo fairly regularly all seemed to allow me to hear extra detail in the mix. I haven't followed that up yet, but it is the reason why I bought Kraftwerk's live The Catalogue on Bluray rather than CD.

Which is achievable without MQA. That's just a procedural issue, not a technology issue (and doubt has been raised about the record conpany compliance on this anyway).

We don't need MQA. It is a market grab resolving problems that don't need a new technology to fix. It fixes nothing. I suggest ignoring the hype and the bandwagon and look at the reality.

[Rune]

We don't need MQA. It is a market grab resolving problems that don't need a new technology to fix. It fixes nothing. I suggest ignoring the hype and the bandwagon and look at the reality.

Sounds like sour grapes or you are in the I want to have physical versions of my music.

I think that MQA is making a Tidal subscription even better value for money.

[sunbeamgls]

No. MQA is not making Tidal better value for money.

MQA is not necessary to deliver high res streaming. They can do it without MQA.

[SAP7]

MQA is just like mp3 in a way.

It is a version of an original file, not a better version. Just a smaller one.
MQA on tidal does improve tidal. You now have higher res files.
But... I’d prefer just the high res on there.

As said above the MQA stuff is all just a tie in similar to how apple force you to use their way only to do anything.
Eventually the high res masters will be available making this tech redundant with decent internet speeds.

MQA will tell you their coding makes you certain you have got THE proper master and not some upscaled version. The problem here is master audio is not well distributed and it’s still hard to decipher what you are actually buying. MQA doesn’t solve that it seeks to improve it and add a layer of commercial tie in to keep you buying devices paying in to their scheme

[Rune]

There is currently no HQ streaming alternative to MQA from anyone.

Is is ridiculous to use as an argument against MQA that it is technically possible to deliver rel HQ streaming when no one does it.

Tidal MQA is in my view a better than the alternative that is nothing. And it really does not matter if it will be replaced by another format in the future because the wonderful thing about streaming instead of buying music is that my collection will not be obsolete if MQA is replaced by something better in the future or Tidal go out of business then I can just switch to whatever streaming service exist.

Life is to short to being paranoid!

[davidf]

I've yet to try out Qobuz, but until someone brings genuine hi-res streaming to the public at an affordable price, I'm quite happy with TIDAL and MQA, and I'm always looking to see what new MQA stuff is cropping up as I find it interesting to listen to albums I know quite well.

I personally prefer physical media, and for me, that won't change, but MQA has my attention.

[sunbeamgls]

There is currently no HQ streaming alternative to MQA from anyone.

Is is ridiculous to use as an argument against MQA that it is technically possible to deliver rel HQ streaming when no one does it.

Tidal MQA is in my view a better than the alternative that is nothing. And it really does not matter if it will be replaced by another format in the future because the wonderful thing about streaming instead of buying music is that my collection will not be obsolete if MQA is replaced by something better in the future or Tidal go out of business then I can just switch to whatever streaming service exist.

Life is to short to being paranoid!

A couple of facts about the above:

- qobuz provide full high res streaming without MQA
- MQA restricts DAC design (or, from an internal component perspective, pre-DAC design) and as such, restricts the ability of designers to give you the best sound across all other formats.

That's without all the commercial and lock-in shananigans.

I don't call that paranoia. I call that a requirement to listen to music at highest quality or on any device I choose to use. Or both.

[Rune]

A couple of facts about the above:

- qobuz provide full high res streaming without MQA
- MQA restricts DAC design (or, from an internal component perspective, pre-DAC design) and as such, restricts the ability of designers to give you the best sound across all other formats.

That's without all the commercial and lock-in shananigans.

I don't call that paranoia. I call that a requirement to listen to music at highest quality or on any device I choose to use. Or both.

The "facts" about MQA you state sounds like "facts" from one manufacturer that do not want to support MQA.

If you ask manufacturers that support MQA they will tell you the opposite and that is has no effect or non MQA content quality. So who is right?

It could also be that it has more to do with a manufacturers own commercial interests that it is against MQA than design restrictions.

Ok you are right about qobuz streaming hi res, but at a considerably higher price than Tidal does MQA.

[sunbeamgls]

We can have our opinion, but the facts are the facts, if you don't like them that's entirely up to you.

Another one for you - multiple vendors don't want to implement MQA or have been conspicuous in their silence. They tend to be the ones that have done clever stuff and don't want to compromise.

You can choose to be sucked into MQA and live with the compromises it will bring, that's your choice.

[Rune]

They tend to be the ones that have done clever stuff and don't want to compromise.

That is a very subjective statement.

I can not see why one should exclude the other maybe they are not so clever after all.