MQA: A Review of controversies, concerns, and cautions

[tmtomh]

That's not true mister, unless 8 bits of the MQA 24 bit are filled with complete bullshit.

He said "without unfolding" - the bottom 8 bits are indeed filled with complete bullshit until it's unfolded.

 

[amirm]

I think a more interesting tack would be "Do you prefer your digital music with or without DRM?"

Without but there is no DRM in MQA. Files can be readily copied with zero protection against redistribution. I can give you an MQA file and you can play it on your MQA DAC without paying an extra cent to the copyright holders.

 

[abdo123]

He said "without unfolding" - the bottom 8 bits are indeed filled with complete bullshit until it's unfolded.

in MQA CDs 13 bits are pure PCM, with MQA 24 bits it's 15-16 bits, (almost CD quality, indistinguishable).

MQA CDs sound like absolute shit unfolded, but MQA 24 bits is really indistinguishable.

 

[tmtomh]

Without but there is no DRM in MQA. Files can be readily copied with zero protection against redistribution. I can give you an MQA file and you can play it on your MQA DAC without paying an extra cent to the copyright holders.

There absolutely is DRM in MQA. I can't freely copy the unfolded or rendered, full-resolution MQA file - I can only stream it through my MQA DAC, which DAC has a Bob Stuart tax incorporated into its purchase price.

That's copy control, and it's copy control with a vertically integrated revenue stream for MQA.

 

[abdo123]

There absolutely is DRM in MQA. I can't freely copy the unfolded or rendered, full-resolution MQA file - I can only stream it through my MQA DAC, which DAC has a Bob Stuart tax priced into its original cost.

So Blu-rays are DRM for people who don't have Blu-ray players?

 

[maverickronin]

So Blu-rays are DRM for people who don't have Blu-ray players?

The HDCP is...

 

[abdo123]

The HDCP is...

Great lets protest Netflix now for not allowing us to easily copy and manipulate their copyrighted material lmao.

 

[levimax]

Without but there is no DRM in MQA. Files can be readily copied with zero protection against redistribution. I can give you an MQA file and you can play it on your MQA DAC without paying an extra cent to the copyright holders.

From what I have read it is a closed system so no one knows for sure what it can do but some have claimed to have reverse engineered it and it is indeed DRM capable https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/54464-how-does-drm-in-mqa-work/#elControls_884477_menu

 

[maverickronin]

Great lets protest Netflix now for not allowing us to easily copy and manipulate their copyrighted material lmao.

In other words...DRM.

 

[scott wurcer]

There absolutely is DRM in MQA.

IMO the whole DRM issue is moot, nothing gives you access to an original bit exact copy as in a lossless FLAC.

 

[bobbooo]

So Blu-rays are DRM for people who don't have Blu-ray players?

Err...yes.

 

[amirm]

There absolutely is DRM in MQA. I can't freely copy the unfolded or rendered, full-resolution MQA file - I can only stream it through my MQA DAC, which DAC has a Bob Stuart tax incorporated into its purchase price.

No. Licensing for hardware decoding has nothing to do with rights management of the content. DRM is designed to protect the rights of the content owners, not hardware makers. To the extent you can freely copy any MQA content as purchased, then it has no "rights management."

Licensing to decode MQA is no different than license to activate Windows. Or use your phone on a carrier.

And you don't need to freely copy output of your DAC as that is analog anyway. You are free to give me a copy of said file and I can play it without paying the license holders. I can play that file without MQA decoding, or with.

The fact that you have issue with MQA making licensing fees has nothing to do with "DRM." Video codecs have licenses. Every TV you buy pays for these licenses. Every Blu-ray player pays for these license. They also then add DRM so the original content can't be distributed without authorization. No such thing exists in MQA yet you consume content on your PC/BD player, but complain about MQA?

 

[amirm]

From what I have read it is a closed system so no one knows for sure what it can do but some have claimed to have reverse engineered it and it is indeed DRM capable https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/54464-how-does-drm-in-mqa-work/#elControls_884477_menu

You don't need to know anything about the system to know that it has NO DRM. Take any MQA file and copy it. It copies just fine indicating no rights are associated with said content. You can make perfect copies of these MQA files and distribute them to the world. It doesn't get more "no DRM" than this.

People throw the acronym "DRM" around without understanding what it means. And try to get consumers upset about it. No consumer should get upset if they can copy any such content with zero restriction. I can back up the MQA content. I can move it from server to server. I can put it on a flash drive. I can give you a copy yet play the original myself. You don't need to circumvent any copy protection to perform these acts. Therefore as a consumer you are not harmed one bit due to any copy control. The argument simply does not exist.

Yes you need a decoder to play MQA content fully. You need the same thing for H.265 video content as well. MQA is backwards compatible with PCM which is way ahead of any new audio/video format that cannot be played whatsoever without a new decoder. There is rudimentary marking that enables the MQA decoder to tell you if the bits are as is or modified. So what? It doesn't get in my way one bit that it does this. Once again, I can access MQA content freely on any device I should choose.

Now, you could be upset about proprietary nature of MQA. That's a valid concern and attention should be focused on that and not this empty "it has DRM" claim. It just doesn't since it provides no additional protections for content owners, or restrictions on users of said content.

 

[witchdoctor]

I had a friend over recently who listens casually to music but is not an audio person. I cued up Abbey Road Masters album by the Beatles from Tidal and within 10 seconds my friend exclaimed, "OMG, it sounds like we are in the studio with them". This guy doesn't know diddly about audio yet in 10 seconds he described the MQA value proposition with no idea of what MQA even was. I just smiled and was happy that we were both enjoying the best copy of Abbey Road either of us had ever heard.

 

[KeenObserver]

This is what I like about audio in 2020....choice. You got PCM,DSD,MQA, SACD, concert Blue rays,, Auro3D music,Atmos music, Sony 360, etc. Just like equipment choices there is something for everyone.

Warner is replacing all their music on Tidal with MQA. If the studios decide to only supply MQA, then you will no longer have a choice.

 

[witchdoctor]

Warner is replacing all their music on Tidal with MQA. If the studios decide to only supply MQA, then you will no longer have a choice.

Wow, I'm buying stock in Warner because I have really enjoyed the drops from them I have listened to so far. There is this feature now in Tidal that when you listen to a track you click this little letter d and it recommends similar tracks to you and you can see if they are masters or not. I can spend 2 hours playing files like this on a week-end and not even know it. I am playing through my MQA friendly Onkyo DAP connected right into my marantz processor via a 3.5 mm to RCA Mogami cable.

 

[KeenObserver]

I had a friend over recently who listens casually to music but is not an audio person. I cued up Abbey Road Masters album by the Beatles from Tidal and within 10 seconds my friend exclaimed, "OMG, it sounds like we are in the studio with them". This guy doesn't know diddly about audio yet in 10 seconds he described the MQA value proposition with no idea of what MQA even was. I just smiled and was happy that we were both enjoying the best copy of Abbey Road either of us had ever heard.

I have to wonder what other copy of Abbey Road you have.

 

[KeenObserver]

You don't need to know anything about the system to know that it has NO DRM. Take any MQA file and copy it. It copies just fine indicating no rights are associated with said content. You can make perfect copies of these MQA files and distribute them to the world. It doesn't get more "no DRM" than this.

People throw the acronym "DRM" around without understanding what it means. And try to get consumers upset about it. No consumer should get upset if they can copy any such content with zero restriction. I can back up the MQA content. I can move it from server to server. I can put it on a flash drive. I can give you a copy yet play the original myself. You don't need to circumvent any copy protection to perform these acts. Therefore as a consumer you are not harmed one bit due to any copy control. The argument simply does not exist.

Yes you need a decoder to play MQA content fully. You need the same thing for H.265 video content as well. MQA is backwards compatible with PCM which is way ahead of any new audio/video format that cannot be played whatsoever without a new decoder. There is rudimentary marking that enables the MQA decoder to tell you if the bits are as is or modified. So what? It doesn't get in my way one bit that it does this. Once again, I can access MQA content freely on any device I should choose.

Now, you could be upset about proprietary nature of MQA. That's a valid concern and attention should be focused on that and not this empty "it has DRM" claim. It just doesn't since it provides no additional protections for content owners, or restrictions on users of said content.

If the music studios force MQA onto the music consumer, could they not also add DRM?

 

[witchdoctor]

I have to wonder what other copy of Abbey Road you have.

That is actually an astute observation because I have never been a customer of SACD's or hi rez downloads. So having it available via a streaming service is a plus. I did compare it with the Amazon ultra HD version and the biggest difference I could notice was in the vocals. There is a sound to the voice in my system that is palpably lifelike via MQA. I have compared using a bluesound node in addition to my onkyp dap. I notice it on headphones too. This is 100% subjective and YMMV.
I like Amazon Ultra HD too but there is just that slight digital harshness you get in the highs. The MQA seems more analog in my system. I have been thinking about that Gustard MQA dac but just don't feel a need to change just yet.

 

[bobbooo]