As I watched this video, it occurred to me that I’ve heard this line of reasoning somewhere before.
The quotes in bold are that of Steve, followed by comments made by Amir from the locked MQA thread.
“There are bigger things to be cynical about.”
The bigger wrong by far is Blu-ray, not MQA.
You want examples of where your rights are being managed, look to Blu-ray.
Let me turn around the question: why on earth is the community going after him instead of the countless people selling junk to audiophiles? Why don't they all get together and go after the people behind those products?
Now if we went after video and liberated that, we would have something.
Really, in the world of audio today, MQA is not remotely big enough problem for people to go after.
Way too much energy is wasted on this topic really. It has become cause célèbre for a number of people, distracting from otherwise useful work that could be done. Frankly I don't care for archimago spending time on MQA which he could otherwise use for more useful contributions to audiophile society. As he used to do.
Wouldn't energy be better spent to go and deal with that than MQA?
“Cynicism about audio products, specifically, cables … Mmm, give it a break.”
Complaining about MQA? Give me a break….
“Hard business to get into” “If it’s that easy to do, do it” “Takes time and money”
Indeed if people want to beat up MQA, they should build their own version of it.
It is not easy to build a perceptual codec that is backwards compatible with PCM.
That said, I have said elsewhere that I think I can hire the right signal processing experts to build an open-source competitor to MQA for around $100,000. Everyone who is up in arms on this should create a funding campaign and I will then get the people to build it.
If it is not worth that kind of funding to people complaining the most, then it is not an important problem to solve.
Building something like MQA is not hard. Folks should do that instead of complaining.
Don't waste your energy on me or in forum arguments. Create a gofundme or whatever and get a few DSP people to build this after hours. I think it will take $50K or so to get there.
“At the end of the day, it’s got to do something.” “Proved their worth by surviving.”
If it becomes ubiquitous, it means the consumer has spoken and wants it. In that case, that is it and we better not complain.
t might be but there is market demand for higher sample rate so tech companies rise up to support it.
How about the fact that every DAC chip produced today supports higher than CD sample rate and bit depth? They are doing so in the interest of meeting market demand. The logic is added to chip, likely increasing its cost.
Again, they do this because there is demand for it.
Once again, there is market demand for sample rate/bit depth above CD. MQA meets that demand while not requiring the full bandwidth.
It doesn't matter that it is an illusion. It is what the customer is asking. If he wants Wagyu beef, you can't give him a different kind of beef. That is what he wants to put on the menu.
You cannot talk people out of using MQA with just some word arguments. MQA has a value proposition that is working in the niche market they are going after to some extent. That market is real. It is there. Success to date of MQA proves it. Building something like MQA is not hard. Folks should do that instead of complaining.
“If you don’t believe in cables, don’t buy cables” “Get your hardware store cables and live happily ever after” “Do what you want to do” “If other people want to spend … so what” “Give it a break”
It is just one more thing for people want it to consume it. For the other 99%, we can all go about our business.
I also don't get the sense that any of this negative fighting has had any effect. The people championing MQA are in the population of actual consumers of high-res audio and hence their opinion matters a lot more than someone like Archimago who has fought that notion. It is like Android users trying to tell Apple users to not buy iPhones. It just doesn't work.
All of this has really surprised me. If MQA is chasing a problem that doesn't exist, then let it go there and fail for heaven's sake. If we are so worried, it seems that we think it is solving real problems!
On your question anyway, I am not scared of them. They present no threat to me as an audiophile. I am confident of access to lossless, MQA-less content for the foreseeable future. I have access to tons of independent labels producing content without MQA in high resolution.
Nope. It has become a "thing" to dump on MQA on Internet forums. Getting on board that hate wagon seems to have value to folks. Why else would Chris volunteer to give that talk? It has become a political movement of sorts.
Well, here we have them attacking a little company, i.e. MQA.
The market for MQA content is NOT objectivists. They don't believe in high sample rate/bit-depths anyway so they are not the customer.
We are just an annoying bunch of non-customers for the company. We have to be straight and honest about this.
Anyone who shows up to get content they get it and that is that. What they do with it is their business.
As a wise man once said, ask not for the other person to change, but think of how you can change. You cannot hold back MQA.
Last edited: