My understanding is that in the UK, "administration" can refer to both bankruptcy and reorganizations (termed a "solvent administration").
MQA Declares Bankruptcy
- Thread starter Vinyl Rules!
- Start date
My understanding is that in the UK, "administration" can refer to both bankruptcy and reorganizations (termed a "solvent administration").
Question for you…how do you know this situation is not what the UK calls a “solvent administration”?
I hate doing legal research.
Chapter 7 means usually you are insolvent and giving up the ghost. Chapter 11 means you need a respite from your creditors while you reorganize.,
if it is different in UK, perhaps you could give us some details. if you like.
Chapter 7 means usually you are insolvent and giving up the ghost. Chapter 11 means you need a respite from your creditors while you reorganize.,
if it is different in UK, perhaps you could give us some details. if you like.
https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/high-res-music-tech-company-mqa-enters-administration-in-the-uk/#:~:text=High-resolution music technology company,the US and other countries.
The financials are eye-opening. Annual revenue never exceeded £700,000 while administrative expenses exceeded £4,000,000 for 2020 and 2021!
Does anyone think Bob Stuart took this much money out of the company?
Wow. So MQA has become another Dolby FM technology. But then, many in the industry thought MQA was a scam.
That's a shame.
What's next, a grand jury and then indictments? The big question is, should anything go to trial would Harley and Atkinson be plaintiffs or defendants?About the only good news is, to this day I've yet to hear a single MQA recording.
Tidal is actually a minor streaming service. Source:
You might notice that Tidal is lumped in with "Others" at 10.2% market share.
So why did they go to bed with MQA? Rumour has it that they don't have to pay MQA licensing fees because they were seen by MQA as an important halo for them. As for Tidal gets out of it, they get to boast that they have "hi-res" and charge more for it, even if they actually don't.
MQA has made one significant achievement though. It has united all audiophiles - subjectivists and objectivists - in near universal hatred for MQA. I have not seen a single thread on any forums I visit that has shed a tear for their demise. Everybody hates them.
Thanks for the great link. Very informative article.
Indeed. As the article says:
"Why should anyone care if other folks like the sound of MQA? “Mind your own business,” as many a mom would say.
"The MQA debate isn’t quite that simple."
And then it gives the reasons why it's not that simple and why thus (most) people hate MQA:
Fortunately, that future does not appear to unfold anymore.
(Gosh, again this MQA "unfolding" term. Seriously, I didn't realize that when I wrote the sentence
.)You probably would not expect this from me. I don't hate MQA. Tell the truth and market your product. For instance, I don't hate MP3. It is what it is.
MQA came too late to the market - by that time storage space and bandwidth were cheap and easily accessible. If we had MQA at the times of redbook before we could access real highrez things would perhaps have been different.
As far as I could see in forums and friends, although most people disliked MQA because it was not bit exact to source and changed contents irreversibly, not for sound quality, many audiophiles loved its sound quality.
Sorry most audiophiles did not like the sound quality. Have you forgotten what we did to Sony for SACD?
Hmmm, what did "we" do to Sony for SACD?
(Not that I care about the format, never had an SACD player.)
(Gosh, again this MQA "unfolding" term. Seriously, I didn't realize that when I wrote the sentence
Indeed. They have give new meaning to the term "MQA lossy" and "MQA folds".
Well, I own it and I really like the sound of many of my SACD's.
Yes, I am aware of that. Good for you.
I never wanted to choose that route for myself and still think for me personally it was the right decision: to put all my resources into optimizing CD playback.