MQA: A Review of controversies, concerns, and cautions

[Rusty Shackleford]

You really are not a fan of getting your facts straight, are you?

Zune was a hardware device. My group had nothing to do with it whatsoever. Zune was developed in the Xbox group by a team unqualified to do so. I fought it tooth and nail but eventually was told I better stop or else. So I did and left the company about a year later.

WMA has been in massive success. Billions and billions of devices have shipped with it from every manufacturer in the world. A day does not go by that I don't see it listed in the specs of products I review.

As for HD-DVD, that was not our product either. I resigned from the company about a year before the conclusion of format war. What came out of that effort was what I explained: that we got HD-DVD to adopt more advanced codecs and that led to Blu-ray to adopt them. Otherwise, you would have had an MPEG-2 only format in Blu-ray. Why? Because companies that created that format made the most royalties from MPEG-2.

Next, maybe you tell me your qualifications in this field.

I’m happy to let anyone do their own research about these events in the trade press or the DOJ MS emails and make their own conclusions.

I have no desire to discuss your CV. Indeed, once again, my point was that appeals to authority are irrelevant in a debate about MQA.

But you continue to make appeals to authority rather than to facts.

You seem to be very bothered by your authority being criticized. I see that all the time in this discussion. Why? I saw mitcho saying he doesn't like to see that happen here. Why? You are feeling good criticizing your host but criticizing him is out of line?

You need cool off and not be so bothered by someone pointing out what he says as being incorrect. I showed specifically what he said and what was wrong with it. You have provided no counter to that. Just protest after protests. Attack after attack. Tell us something useful. I am not there to keep cleaning up after your claims.

You are also severely misunderstood about my position regarding "high-end" audiophiles. I am not saying anyone should be like them. But if they are going to comment about who they are, they better know who they are. Archimago doesn't know who they are based on statements he made. He can talk about MQA technical points but his business/market/industry comments should be left out to people who know that better than he does.

Your response is a non-sequitor. I am not claiming to be an authority. Haven’t done so once in my posts. Indeed, I’m arguing against the logical fallacy of appeals to authority. Instead, I said we should weigh Archimago’s arguments and facts more than amorphous, irrelevant references to someone else’s CV.

 

[amirm]

Your argument is, apparently, that MQA is okay because Stuart and other proponents falsely touted its superiority, thereby misleading customers into , and now further expansion of MQA is justified because “consumers demand it.” QED, Amir.

None of that is my argument. I don't like Blu-ray format in how it came about and politics within. But I use the format and know why it is successful.

You seem to be living in this childish world where what you like should happen, and what you don't like shouldn't. That is not how the consumer electronics and format worlds work.

MQA has a business and technical proposition that is working to some extent for wide ranging set of customers from LG in their phones to Warner record label. None of you have presented any argument as to why that is happening. Just a wish that it shouldn't. I hear you. But that is neither here, nor there. It is a waste of energy to keep shouting what you shout. I get it. There is a protest in the streets and you are following the crowd. Just leave me out of it with simplistic and uninformed stunts like what I am responding to here.

So it is clear:

I have shown you no love for MQA. I have respect for the technical person behind it. And it provides value to me as a customer when I play content in Roon and Tidal. I know that when I click on the Masters tab in Roon, I am more likely to find well-recorded music than not. If MQA goes away tomorrow, that is perfectly fine with me.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

None of that is my argument. I don't like Blu-ray format in how it came about and politics within. But I use the format and know why it is successful.

You seem to be living in this childish world where what you like should happen, and what you don't like shouldn't. That is not how the consumer electronics and format worlds work.

MQA has a business and technical proposition that is working to some extent for wide ranging set of customers from LG in their phones to Warner record label. None of you have presented any argument as to why that is happening. Just a wish that it shouldn't. I hear you. But that is neither here, nor there. It is a waste of energy to keep shouting what you shout. I get it. There is a protest in the streets and you are following the crowd. Just leave me out of it with simplistic and uninformed stunts like what I am responding to here.

So it is clear:

I have shown you no love for MQA. I have respect for the technical person behind it. And it provides value to me as a customer when I play content in Roon and Tidal. I know that when I click on the Masters tab in Roon, I am more likely to find well-recorded music than not. If MQA goes away tomorrow, that is perfectly fine with me.

There seems to be a conflict between how you talk about equipment and how you talk about MQA. If business decisions, consumer preferences, market power, etc. are what matter in audio, you should stop measuring equipment and instead make a graph of best DACs based on market share, not SINAD.

 

[amirm]

I’m happy to let anyone do their own research on this in the trade press (or the DOJ MS emails) and make their own conclusions.

No need. I am happy to give the inside story. This is what the rags wrote that you are referencing: https://www.engadget.com/2007/01/20/microsoft-made-the-zune-because-partner-hardware-sucks/

As it clearly said, I was advocating helping our hardware partners building better interfaces and hardware to compete with Apple. At the same time, I did start to investigate what it would take for us to design something. I pulled in our own industrial designers and experts from our hardware group and brainstorming. I was in Windows team with no charter to build hardware whatsoever.

What happened then is that Steve Ballmer started to get worried about Apple's success with iPod and decided this "was a hardware problem. And anything hardware belongs to Xbox group." So overnight the charter to build a competitor to ipod was given to Xbox group (ie. build a portable music player). Xbox group was a completely parallel team to Windows. Some of the key people there hated Windows as a matter of fact. They absolutely refused to collaborate with us and decided to OEM a bulky, non-competitive hardware player from Toshiba with their own software. Given the two-step manufacturing, the cost was sky high too.

The XBox team was all about Xbox. They had no love or interest in this product. So when it came out, it had no marketing either. No sales plan. Nothing. And other serious, serious business mistakes that I won't go into.

I watched all of this from the sidelines. I repeatedly offered help to the Zune team but they turned it down. By then Jim Allchin (great guy running the platform group) was gone, Bill had retired to run his charity and the company I had come to work was for was no longer the same. So I resigned and left formally in 2008.

So please excuse me if I am sensitive to nonsense you have been posting. Get your facts straight. If you don't know them, ask.

 

[amirm]

There seems to be a conflict between how you talk about equipment and how you talk about MQA. If business decisions, consumer preferences, market power, etc. are what matter in audio, you should stop measuring equipment and instead make a graph of best DACs based on market share, not SINAD.

No conflict. I can do good by analyzing audio products. People like you just screaming on forums with misinformation no less are doing nothing to help anyone. Worry about yourself before you worry about me.

Are we done with your snide remarks?

 

[DonH56]

@amirm @Thomas savage Time to close this one again?

 

[beefkabob]

Correct me where I'm getting this wrong, smarter people...

MQA, by offering DRM, gives control to labels, streaming services, and so on. They have plenty of old studio recordings they could remaster and then stream for a premium, but they're probably terrified of losing their best recordings to piracy. Napster and piracy totally destroyed their old business model, and then online mp3 sales transformed everything again. Meanwhile they see DRM-laden video streaming services making a great deal of money, and they want in on that bonanza. But then mp3s are old, and they haven't cashed in on the DVD to BluRay to HD to 4k to 8k process that the video people are doing, and they want to recreate that business model. So... MQA comes along, saying, "Hey, it sounds better than CDs, even if slightly. It'll save you a bit of money on the bandwidth, maybe. You can limit piracy through DRM." So the labels and such said, "We know you. We like you. You're one of us. I see how you see what we want and understand us. Let's try this." And the hardware sellers said, "Well, we don't wanna pay the license fee, but if our customers want it, we can sell more and for more money with MQA as a feature." And some consumers said, "Hey, it lets me hear better quality music that mp3s and 16/44, the usual stuff, so it's a step up. I'll pay for that!"

That said, there are DRM and license free formats that are essentially technically superior, though probably not audibly so. They just don't have the DRM, so some music isn't available there. Yet.

Also some people are being dicks to Amir. I don't have a horse in this race, but I can see dickishness, and it's not coming from Amir. So cut the dickishness, peeps.

 

[amirm]

MQA, by offering DRM, gives control to labels, streaming services, and so on.

Labels gave up on DRM years ago when Steve Jobs talked them into letting him sell content without it. They have been releasing high-res content in the clear for years now. There is no one inside the labels that cares one bit about DRM or controlling content now, especially since it is all becoming streaming anyway.

The movie studies care a ton about content protection but not the music labels.

 

[GrimSurfer]

Correct me where I'm getting this wrong, smarter people...

MQA, by offering DRM, gives control to labels, streaming services, and so on. They have plenty of old studio recordings they could remaster and then stream for a premium, but they're probably terrified of losing their best recordings to piracy. Napster and piracy totally destroyed their old business model, and then online mp3 sales transformed everything again.

Labels have plenty of old studio master tapes, not counting those lost in a massive fire. At the industry level, these tapes aren't well cared for, but artists are starting to demand better.

Industry fears about remastered recordings being ripe for piracy is inaccurate. Remasters are mostly of inferior sound quality to original pressings. Remastering in many cases is about creating buzz or adding just enough to qualify for renewed copyright protection on works close to becoming public domain in certain markets. Artists are complicit in this, as I would be if this were my livelihood.

If I were a pirate, I'd ignore the remaster, go back in the catalog, buy an older CD with a higher DR and make bit perfect copies. But I'm not a pirate, so I buy used CDs as a means of hedging my bet between quality, control of material for personal use in my own home, and remaining free from the contested issues and fees involving streaming.

Napster et al was a big threat. But that threat was reduced greatly by legal action, the emergence of streaming services, and on line music sales. This is format agnostic... or at least it was until the industry stared touting lossless formats (please note that they didn't say anything bad about lossy formats while they were selling them!).

But then mp3s are old, and they haven't cashed in on the DVD to BluRay to HD to 4k to 8k process that the video people are doing, and they want to recreate that business model.

They want to make money... any way they can. You are right, however, in saying that DVD-A, Bluray et al have not significantly contributed to the industry's revenues.

So... MQA comes along, saying, "Hey, it sounds better than CDs, even if slightly. It'll save you a bit of money on the bandwidth, maybe. You can limit piracy through DRM." So the labels and such said, "We know you. We like you. You're one of us. I see how you see what we want and understand us. Let's try this." And the hardware sellers said, "Well, we don't wanna pay the license fee, but if our customers want it, we can sell more and for more money with MQA as a feature." And some consumers said, "Hey, it lets me hear better quality music that mp3s and 16/44, the usual stuff, so it's a step up. I'll pay for that!".

Lots of different thoughts here. MQA's claims are its claims, which other more qualified people may pass judgment on. The DRM issue is quite separate and also has to do with payment methods, as I understand that there may be some tracking algorithms embedded to keep everyone honest (which would be a first in the music industry).

I don't think mainstream customers know any more than they are being told. Such is the power of advertising and the growing complexity of encoding/decoding methods. If they did, 16/44.1 would be far more respected for what it is and the value of 24/48 et al wouldn't be as high as it currently is.

Also some people are being dicks to Amir. I don't have a horse in this race, but I can see dickishness, and it's not coming from Amir. So cut the dickishness, peeps.

I find it deeply suspicious that there was discussion on the PS Audio site about Amir's love for MQA before this thread on MQA was resurrected. If any of the "new" members raising this are part of the PS Audio clique, I would call them out for being lackeys, sock puppets and people of low character. The fact that they don't use their membership here to air their grievances directly over the PerfectWave review demonstrates their intellectual cowardice and overriding fear that maybe, just maybe, Amir's test was correct in its findings (as I believe them to be).

So yeah, there is likely a dick factor playing out in all of this. A cowardly dick factor, to be precise.

 

[Ron Party]

The movie studies care a ton about content protection but not the music labels.

I've often wondered about this. The reasons probably are obvious to everyone but me... wouldn't be the first time . Can you or others explain this?

TIA.

 

[amirm]

I've often wondered about this. The reasons probably are obvious to everyone but me... wouldn't be the first time . Can you or others explain this?

TIA.

Which part? The movie studios or the record labels? They are completely different stories.

 

[Sal1950]

I've often wondered about this. The reasons probably are obvious to everyone but me... wouldn't be the first time . Can you or others explain this?

TIA.

IMHO, the cats already out of the bag with music. lossless coping is dead easy and rampant. (At least until MQA and Meridian has it's way.)
Movies are a bit tougher. Ever try to copy-rip a BD losslessly?

 

[LuckyLuke575]

Hmmm. I don't understand him sometimes. He is not a high-end audiophile. Nor is his data points correct with respect to that. For example:

View attachment 34722

I have gone to ton of audio shows and they most definitely talk about and use high-res audio.

View attachment 34723

I bought literally thousands of dollars of high-res audio files before I signed up for Tidal. Here is an example:

View attachment 34725

In this case, horrors of horrors, it is actually massive DSD files!

I think he is focused on mainstream labels where the action is in independendent and small labels. May are vertically integrated, recording their own content and releasing it online. This is behind the come back of DSD. And high-res PCM.

He needs to live the high-end audio to know the high-end audio.

This is why I stopped reading articles and watching YouTube videos of convoluted bullshitters with an opinions, pseudoscience, and egos. They just try to push their views onto everyone else, and then try to attract followers and have a big circle jerk. The Emperor had no clothes the moment I read glowing reviews in mainstream publications and blogs about how great the Schiit Jotunheim is lmao

 

[LuckyLuke575]

I'm not sure what would be considered high-end this context, but here's some information about his system as of July 2017:

Emotiva XPA-1L monoblocks, Emotiva XSP-1 preamp
Technics SL-1200 turntable
Paradigm Signature S8v3 speakers

View attachment 34728

This is the problem nowadays; every bozo with a hifi and a computer can have a platform and claim to be an "expert". The Internet has been great in a lot of ways, but it has also unleashed a lot of hogwash.

 

[Ron Party]

Yeah, I was wondering why there seems to be such a dramatic difference between the two industries.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

No conflict. I can do good by analyzing audio products. People like you just screaming on forums with misinformation no less are doing nothing to help anyone. Worry about yourself before you worry about me.

Are we done with your snide remarks?

You're the only one making snide remarks -- snide remarks about whether Archimago and others who are presenting research and facts about MQA's inferiority can dare critique MQA since Bob's resume or your resume is "superior." Once again, this is what's known as the logical fallacy of appeal to authority. I have no desire to debate CVs. I'd rather debate research and facts. But at this rate you might as well stop measuring DACs and instead simply critique each DAC designer's CV, since apparently that matters more than data.

 

[LuckyLuke575]

So, let me see if I get your argument straight:

1. Some elite audiophiles actually do have massive PCM file collections (sure, I can buy into that, at least for a portion of the target market; I guess I'm in that bucket)
2. MQA is not targeted at #1, but for that portion of the elite audiophile segment who weren't early adopters (Harley's proposition)
3. MQA is a good solution for #2 because they are shopping for convenience and don't really care if it's technically inferior to #1, plus they have no "sunk cost" in the form of big libraries of files.

I'm the real life guy in number 2 & 3; I love TIDAL & MQA because I get 96/24 in my office, on my iPhone, and at home for EUR 20 a month for music that I love to listen to and never owned electronically or physically. I've been interested in hifi audio as a hobby since January this year, and I value high res audio (having come from the iPod / Mp3 generation).

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

This is the problem nowadays; every bozo with a hifi and a computer can have a platform and claim to be an "expert". The Internet has been great in a lot of ways, but it has also unleashed a lot of hogwash.

A member of ASR (a forum that says often cheaper gear is better) calling the work of Archimago (someone who's been doing good measurements and research since before this forum existed) "hogwash" since he doesn't spend enough money on equipment. Now I've seen everything.

 

[FrantzM]

@amirm @Thomas savage Time to close this one again?

+1

 

[Sal1950]

I've been interested in hifi audio as a hobby since January this year, and I value high res audio (having come from the iPod / Mp3 generation).

Ah, maybe you should take a bit longer to learn some reality's of audio.