Are any normal audio fans REALLY EXCITED about MQA? Or just the Elites?
- Thread starter caesar
- Start date
SACD did not have great support in the general public, but was greeted enthusiastically by most audiophiles (with a few exceptions, like myself 
). It never rose above a niche format.
MQA does not even have great support among the audiophile community. Guess where it's going.
(Yeah, I know, streaming vs. physical disc and all that jazz...in the end, irrelevant; the question is always the same -- who's going to pay for it, one way or the other.)
). It never rose above a niche format.MQA does not even have great support among the audiophile community. Guess where it's going.
(Yeah, I know, streaming vs. physical disc and all that jazz...in the end, irrelevant; the question is always the same -- who's going to pay for it, one way or the other.)
My 5 year old Lumin A-1 was just updated via a free Lumin software download to be MQA certified. I have been sampling the Tidal Masters (MQA) offerings, and am very impressed with the improved SQ. Does this make me an elite?
Am I even an audiophile any more? I'm not sure.
Anyway, I heard an early dem of redbook vs MQA and I was certainly somewhat excited, but I don't think it's aimed at the "What's Best" viewpoint. I think at best it's a way of bringing better sound at a lower price to the "good enough" viewpoint.
Having relinquished my grip on any pretence of the high-end, I guess I'm somewhat excited, and this might be enough to change my streaming subscription from Spotify to Tidal, but I'm a niche player in all of this. I'm pretty convinced this will be of zero interest to the great unwashed, zero interest to the elite high end, and even if it sounds better (and I think it does) it needs to capture a significant amount of imagination to be a success, which I'm not sure I see happening.
Honestly, for the "good enough" crew like myself, red book properly done is still pretty damn good.
Anyway, I heard an early dem of redbook vs MQA and I was certainly somewhat excited, but I don't think it's aimed at the "What's Best" viewpoint. I think at best it's a way of bringing better sound at a lower price to the "good enough" viewpoint.
Having relinquished my grip on any pretence of the high-end, I guess I'm somewhat excited, and this might be enough to change my streaming subscription from Spotify to Tidal, but I'm a niche player in all of this. I'm pretty convinced this will be of zero interest to the great unwashed, zero interest to the elite high end, and even if it sounds better (and I think it does) it needs to capture a significant amount of imagination to be a success, which I'm not sure I see happening.
Honestly, for the "good enough" crew like myself, red book properly done is still pretty damn good.
I am excited, maybe cautiously optimistic to be fair. Based on what I heard at the LA show, it seems like a good way to improve playback.
How do you get that idea, Bob? Many pros on Gearslutz hate its technical problems and its digital rights management (DRM) scheme, and want it to never gain traction.
It is already infiltrating DACs, computers, music servers, Tidal, Apple iPads and iPhones, iTunes, androids, Microsoft, Cortana, Google, etc. Al.
That's what I meant; it is here to stay...it just won't go away easily like that. It is already part of the audio world. It is mass universal consumption.
Only the audiophile niche market, less than 0.1%, will check it out to see if there is indeed any improvement with less data, more packing, different filtering, no scientific tests performed, ...all that new MQA audio revolution soup for the digits population. It is becoming...convenient, like the portable CD. We cannot kill the CD, it's impossible...there are simply too many out there...just like the LP.
But yes I agree with the experts from the music recording industry; MQA doesn't seem to add any new concrete quality sound advantage. What it does bring is financial gain to its creator and its supporters...the audio manufacturers. As for the music listeners, it just don't matter because we are free.
I think I am anyway, if I stay put on Terra Firma. My brain requires it.
It's a challenging world the one we all live in; MQA or not. I'm with the music record/mastering engineers on this one Al...I'm with you too...I'm also with free choice and free expression that is peaceful and doesn't hurt anyone. I respect that choice, I respect that freedom, the differentiation between right and wrong and the selection of the right side; a very easy choice here.
Last edited:
The only people who can slow down its evolution, its unnecessary progress, are the people who don't use it in their music recordings. But how many are they out there, and what kind of resistance are they facing from the dark side?
Yes, that's the state of the affairs we're in right now; a beautiful audio mess.
I'm free, MQA doesn't enslave me. It doesn't even excite me, really.
Did I try it, how can I compare it fairly, I have read the experts coordinations on it; it is sufficient.
I trust the people I worked with, the people I frequent, the people who are @ the avant-garde of solid audio benefits from the best concrete cement mix.
MQA ain't a mix, it's a fix.
Yes, that's the state of the affairs we're in right now; a beautiful audio mess.
I'm free, MQA doesn't enslave me. It doesn't even excite me, really.
Did I try it, how can I compare it fairly, I have read the experts coordinations on it; it is sufficient.
I trust the people I worked with, the people I frequent, the people who are @ the avant-garde of solid audio benefits from the best concrete cement mix.
MQA ain't a mix, it's a fix.
Last edited:
Evidence for your claim? I've heard from several sources that there were few questions about MQA from visitors at recent shows, suggesting that interest has died down. But perhaps you have special insights into the situation that you can share.
My personal opinion is, as audiophiles,
Why should we care about the motives and success/failure about every new development in our hobby?
We are all consumers and individuals. We are all free to follow our choices in this hobby.
I haven't heard a single song in MQA format. My Rossini will have an update soon so I'll try one in my system.
If it sounds more pleasing to my ears, I'll follow the MQA, if not I'll stay with my classic PCM files.
Why should I be PRO-MQA or ANTI-MQA? It's really irrelevant to choose a side unless I am a MQA representative or a competitor who'll get hurt by it. What's the point?
Also, our hobby is a hobby of niches. I would like to see every product to have a place and live in the community however small the followers are. It's good to have those reel to reel tape guys even if they are only a few, it's good have guys still listening and enjoying their HDCDs, tape casettes. It's enriching as a hobby to have guys that are into quantum tweaks, single driver systems, horns etc.
I believe you can only LOVE a part of our hobby. There should be no place for HATE.
For example;
You can LOVE how your cables elevate your musical pleasure but there is no place for HATE in the cable myth. Don't hate it don't buy those cables. They don't hurt you.
You can LOVE music in MQA format but you shouldn't HATE it since if you think it's a scam just don't get in the boat with it.
I hope none of my fellow forum members misunderstands me. I don't have a right to belittle or patronize anyone, I am just trying to express my point of view on the subject.
So if MQA works for me I'll follow it even if we are only a handful.
And I won't buy a single MQA file if I don't like it even if every single member in this forum is crazy about it.
Love and respect,
Cagdas
Why should we care about the motives and success/failure about every new development in our hobby?
We are all consumers and individuals. We are all free to follow our choices in this hobby.
I haven't heard a single song in MQA format. My Rossini will have an update soon so I'll try one in my system.
If it sounds more pleasing to my ears, I'll follow the MQA, if not I'll stay with my classic PCM files.
Why should I be PRO-MQA or ANTI-MQA? It's really irrelevant to choose a side unless I am a MQA representative or a competitor who'll get hurt by it. What's the point?
Also, our hobby is a hobby of niches. I would like to see every product to have a place and live in the community however small the followers are. It's good to have those reel to reel tape guys even if they are only a few, it's good have guys still listening and enjoying their HDCDs, tape casettes. It's enriching as a hobby to have guys that are into quantum tweaks, single driver systems, horns etc.
I believe you can only LOVE a part of our hobby. There should be no place for HATE.
For example;
You can LOVE how your cables elevate your musical pleasure but there is no place for HATE in the cable myth. Don't hate it don't buy those cables. They don't hurt you.
You can LOVE music in MQA format but you shouldn't HATE it since if you think it's a scam just don't get in the boat with it.
I hope none of my fellow forum members misunderstands me. I don't have a right to belittle or patronize anyone, I am just trying to express my point of view on the subject.
So if MQA works for me I'll follow it even if we are only a handful.
And I won't buy a single MQA file if I don't like it even if every single member in this forum is crazy about it.
Love and respect,
Cagdas
Your thoughts on love and hate, noble as they may be in themselves, may not be quite applicable to this topic.
This is not about free choice. It seems that MQA, with their digital rights management scheme which wants to control everything in the chain from beginning to end with rather questionable technology, have something different in mind.
Some comments somewhere in the last 15 pages in the long thread about MQA on Computer Audiophile, some comments on Gearslutz (I believe) or elsewhere. You can look it up yourself, if you are in the mood.
Essentially an internet fueled thread ...
Fortunately next weekend I will get unbiased direct opinions from Peter McGrath and Raveen Bawa of DCS.
Thanks for the reply Al M.
I really do not think they are/will be that powerful to dominate the industry as a whole and abolish our rights to own music on any other media format. Even if they become the major supply chain of music in the idustry we'll still have "the choice".
Yes I believe it is exactly about LOVE and HATE. Nothing else. It is same with every other topic in our societies. The concept of taking clear sides on every subject is very popular. I love the gray areas. Let's see what MQA is, how it will behave. My system sounds so good with plain old PCM files I really do not need MQA. But if it sounds better (whatever reason there is, remastering, equlization etc.) I'll pay the premium and jump on the MQA boat. At the end what matters is my enjoyment in the hobby. I am paying 30K for just a DAC I won't hesitate to give 10 cents premium for a song to MQA if it gives me more pleasure that what I have now. Infact good for them. I always envy people who find a way to enhance our enjoyment of life and get rich doing it.
BUT if MQA do not give what it is promising even on the short run it will stay as a niche and die in time.
The masses could care less about MQA. Crappy ear buds playing compressed music from their iPhones is their standard. And good for them. They are doing what many high enders claim: enjoying the music. Virtually ever niche product aimed at improving the sound (after the CD in the early 80's) has failed. DVD-A; SACD; etc !!!
I was reading this morning how album sales have continued to go due-south - and quickly - but streaming/song sales are strong. So streaming is the driving engine behind the development of MQA, regardless of what we are being told. I personally have no feeling about the alleged quality improvement of MQA over non-MQA since, while my streaming device can play it (Bluesound) my pre-amp doesn't support it.
So MQA could turn out to be different. Not because the masses care (they will never care), but because the developers have convinced the front end companies that it is good for them. When (if?) it becomes the standard for streaming services and the streaming services pay the fees (which they then pass to the consumers), and there are no other options (listen to MQA music or don't listen) MQA wins. In my opinion, what the high end folks think will have zero effect on the outcome. Contrary to what they are telling us, we are not the target market. We are (at best) the 1%.
I was reading this morning how album sales have continued to go due-south - and quickly - but streaming/song sales are strong. So streaming is the driving engine behind the development of MQA, regardless of what we are being told. I personally have no feeling about the alleged quality improvement of MQA over non-MQA since, while my streaming device can play it (Bluesound) my pre-amp doesn't support it.
So MQA could turn out to be different. Not because the masses care (they will never care), but because the developers have convinced the front end companies that it is good for them. When (if?) it becomes the standard for streaming services and the streaming services pay the fees (which they then pass to the consumers), and there are no other options (listen to MQA music or don't listen) MQA wins. In my opinion, what the high end folks think will have zero effect on the outcome. Contrary to what they are telling us, we are not the target market. We are (at best) the 1%.
Last edited:
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |