Yes. Morten Lindberg from 2L tested and fingerprinted hundreds of ADCs for this.
Lenbrook Acquires MQA!
- Thread starter Lee
- Start date
Apple Music does have an API and can be integrated into other services. However, it does not supply all of the information including data dumps that Roon requires to fully implement their experience.
Apple Music API | Apple Developer Documentation
Integrate streaming music with catalog and personal content.
Still didn’t answer my question. I believe I’m expressing myself correctly in clean English, let me know if that’s not the case.
If the master is in mqa, as was the intended final state of this endeavour, how do I have a choice? I know right now we do, for the most part, that’s not the point. I’m trying to show the dystopian world view of the business model of mqa.
Evangelist noun
evan·ge·list
: an enthusiastic advocate
an evangelist for physical fitness
I’m not sure why you took offense at my use of the term, that wasn’t my intention. In fact, Guy Kawasaki used to wear the title of Apple Evangelist as a badge of honor when he was promoting Apple many years ago. I think you fit the definition perfectly. You were advocating for MQA on the Steve Hoffman forums more than 5 years ago. You still are. That’s fine but what is the point? Just look at all the acrimony in the posts in this thread since you responded to my post last night. There really is nothing left to cover on the topic other than to give the members here something to fight over.
I am very sorry for my poor English....
The master is never in MQA.
The master is always PCM, sometimes in (native) DSD.
The PCM master is processed to become MQA. MQA is a distribution format, not a mastering one.
So, there is always a non-MQA version. However, it is the choice of the label (or the musician) what version is made available and distributed.
Even if the master is in 192k/32 bit for example, they can decide that they will not make it available only at 96k and in 44,1k. It is not the decision (generally) of the streaming service or yours. Labels make the decision.
Thanks for the correction. I know it as we were experimenting with it, as Apple developers, for our experimental streaming app. It is not the API, as you mention properly, that makes integration with Roon possible; this is why I said there is no API (the right one) from them.Apple Music does have an API and can be integrated into other services. However, it does not supply all of the information including data dumps that Roon requires to fully implement their experience.
Apple Music API | Apple Developer Documentation
Integrate streaming music with catalog and personal content.developer.apple.com
You know as well as I do that was not the business plan, and that it depended on global scaling monopoly style. You know as well as I do the idea was eventually to release only in mqa, hence the 'white glove' marketing piece. The 'archival format' marketing pieces. The 'master' marketing pieces. You know that the pressure was on the labels to do so, effectively removing the choice, given enough time. It just imploded before that could happen.
I truly believe that is the best thing that could have happened, and I hope the decaying corpse doesn't get resurrected.
I really wonder, how MQA Ltd (a very small company) could put pressure on giants like Warner Music, Universal Music or Sony Music?
I'm sure you don't lack the imagination.
That very small company managed to convince half the world on what we can all agree are objective lies, a major distribution channel to adopt an inferior but fee-based format, manufacturers to adopt hardware and software changes to their stuff out of fear to be left behind, and so on.
Even an ant can apply effective pressure, given the motivation.
I do not think so.
I am sure it is challenging to convince Warner, Universal, Sony, XMOS, AKM, ESS, etc to spend money, time on developing, applying something which is an "objective lie" as you say.
Are you sure they are as stupid as you try to show them?
I'm not trying to show anyone as stupid, on the contrary. The reason why this could have worked is because it is attractive to business. Not necessarily to the underlying art and art industry.
The people behind mqa did believe they could provide us with a stupidity certificate. Have I said any lie or mischaracterized anything about their claims along time? Lossess? Master? Archival format? Higher quality than the original master? Does this story inspire any confidence, at any level?
Can you put a name on "the people behind MQA"? The name I associate with it is Bob Stuart, someone I deeply respect in audio and has been pushing digital sound since long time.
We, end users, have no direct relationship with MQA Ltd.
Absolutely nothing,
So they did not have to "provide a stupidity certificate" as you say or to convince us.
They had to convince their industrial partners and potential technology partners.
As roughly 20 million tracks are processed and there are apps and hundreds of hardware decoders available (DACs and headphone amps from 100 USD and up) they could do it properly.
On the other hand, MQA's administration issue show clearly that they did not become rich because of this.
Yet MQA claimed that their "deblurring" technique designed to correct temporal errors was improving the audio.
And some people that many audiophiles respect said the same. As I am a Qobuz user I never had the motivation to listen to it, but a few friends that use TIDAL say it sounds very good and better than redbook.
Black Classical Music - Yussef Dayes released 8th Sept 2023 - shows only one version in Tidal for me - FLAC 48khz, 24bit MQA 48khz.
Sorry but I don't really waste brain cells on if something is produced via MQA or not. I really only care about the options I have when I select my music. This is no different than me not worrying about if something is produced in any format.
Republicoftexas69
Well-Known Member
MQA like Quadraphonic Stereo (oxymoron there) have just been a flash in my rearview mirror. I think the same will be said about ATMOS also.
Similar threads
