What are the implications for manufacturers who have spent much resources supporting MQA?
support.tidal.com
Tidal ends support for MQA
- Thread starter godofwealth
- Start date
If the new streaming service by Lenbrook and HdTracks that will offer MQA files gains any traction, some manufacturers may still offer the MQA feature on their devices. To me it doesn't seem like this service would have the broader appeal of Tidal, but it's too soon to say how it will play out.
Republicoftexas69
Well-Known Member
Their platforms will evolve just as the automotive industry did with the evolution of fuel injection and companies like Rochester and Bing disappeared. MQA may have new life on Smaller scale and limited implementations.What are the implications for manufacturers who have spent much resources supporting MQA?
TIDAL Support
The time effort and money they spent on MQA was wasted.What are the implications for manufacturers who have spent much resources supporting MQA?
TIDAL Support
Tidal never had any broad appeal. Did you forget HDTracks has already failed to launch a streaming service?
I did not forget. But the service Lenbrook and HdTracks launch would seemingly be more niche than Tidal.
Bruce B
WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
You don't think there's a need to correct the many poor sounding digital releases out there?
Bruce B
WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
Not quite but it would be better, for example, if older analog recordings were transfered to digital competently in the first place. Why is it that a company like Sony can't convert A to D competently?
Bruce B
WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
Actually, Sony can, since they were one of the developers of DSD. Though it was "only" DSD64, it was a start. Early analog conversions were a crap shoot. Sony DASH recorders were crap.
MQA has absolutely nothing to do with this. If you think it does, then you don't understand what MQA is.
Yes but will they be sending new remastered FLAC files to Tidal to replace the MQA, I doubt it.
Below is one album that I used to listen to regularly when it was MQA but now don't after it changed to FLAC. I guess the MQA removed the digital edge.
This album was recorded in 2019 by Sony Classics. If there is any issue with the recording it is a people problem not a digital recording problem.
Why would this album need to be remastered? Would it ever recover the cost of remastering which was about $2,000 an album a decade ago.
I spent a lot of time and effort killing MQA Ltd because the changes to the sound were not an improvement. Lenbrook will not be able to bail the format out.
I spent a lot of time and effort killing MQA Ltd because the changes to the sound were not an improvement. Lenbrook will not be able to bail the format out.
Personal LG V60 Thin Q with AKG K371 headphones, iPhone 13 with various dongles and iPod Shuffle 4th generation. Office AR-4x modified speakers, Nikko NA-550 heavily modified, DACs various, Dell Vostro 7510. Home 1984 Klipsch Heresy speakers, NAD 3020 original restored, DACs various, HP military spec laptop. JRiver software and generic cables measured. Auto Bose
You made the choice to put active effort into killing MQA instead of using your time to pursue things you do like? OK, nothing wrong there. MQA remastered tracks in 24/48 and higher often did the job of opening up the soundstage to tracks previously hard sounding. As an alternative source I chose it over flac for sq nearly every time although the 16/44.1 didn't seem to offer any gains to redbook cd. That an alternative format that a lot of listeners preferred over hi rez flac is met with so much hatred baffles me? what am I missing, is it a personal assault on our freedom comparable to the latest supreme court?
Personal LG V60 Thin Q with AKG K371 headphones, iPhone 13 with various dongles and iPod Shuffle 4th generation. Office AR-4x modified speakers, Nikko NA-550 heavily modified, DACs various, Dell Vostro 7510. Home 1984 Klipsch Heresy speakers, NAD 3020 original restored, DACs various, HP military spec laptop. JRiver software and generic cables measured. Auto Bose
You made the choice to put active effort into killing MQA instead of using your time to pursue things you do like? OK, nothing wrong there. MQA remastered tracks in 24/48 and higher often did the job of opening up the soundstage to tracks previously hard sounding. As an alternative source I chose it over flac for sq nearly every time although the 16/44.1 didn't seem to offer any gains to redbook cd. That an alternative format that a lot of listeners preferred over hi rez flac is met with so much hatred baffles me? what am I missing, is it a personal assault on our freedom comparable to the latest supreme court?
I was asked by recording engineers, mastering engineers and several folks with high end audio companies to kill MQA. I had the right skill set to accomplish the task, so I did it.
You seem to have forgotten what I’ve said about MQA.
- MQA is a thought examination in high end audio, you like it you failed.
- MQA is bad for artists, bad for consumers and doesn’t sound better.
- If you can’t tell MQA is just DSP and a couple of tweaks, that’s your problem not mine.
- MQA defines the wrong side of the bell curve in high-end audio.
Steve, what you are missing is MQA was never intended to be an alternative. It was designed to create a proprietary encode / decode scheme, transparent Digital Rights Management. The investors and labels would not have invested over $70 million dollars for an alternative high-resolution format, the potential market is too small.
The anger was because the audiophile press tried their best to ignore concerns about MQA. So, they were shouted down and their hearing and expertise questioned.
Finally, we are protecting music for more than 700 million streaming subscribers. That it bothers a few audiophiles can be considered a bonus.
Similar threads
