• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

MQA Deep Dive - I published music on tidal to test MQA

Status
Not open for further replies.

Grooved

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Feb 26, 2021
Messages
679
Likes
441
The real audiophiles would pay extra to disable the LED because that interferes with the signal, man.
Let's add a switch to turn it off !... hum, no, it interferes too :)

1. Thanks to this discussion it has become more obvious that if you care about transparent music listening, as close as it was originally recorded, mqa is not the way. If you just like nice music, pick anything you like.
2. If you care about keeping musicians interested in making music, consider how much a musician receives from each streamed track. (Qobuz pays them 10x as much as tidal!)
3. Support what you care about even it comes as a package and you can't pick and choose.

That's right that Qobuz pays more than any other with between $0.03 and $0.04, but if we are checking all lies around MQA, from MQA or Tidal, manufacturers and media lies, we better not say something completely wrong too ;)
Qobuz has never paid 10x more than Tidal, it's 10x more than Spotify.
With the exception of Qobuz, Tidal has never been less than in the middle, and sometimes 2nd, even if a lot less than Qobuz. They are also mainly based on subscriptions percentage, so the lower rates give the lower royalties.
Now, there are a lot of artists who got problems to get paid with almost every streaming service, maybe once again with the exception of Qobuz (never heard of that)

2018 :
Royalties - 2018.jpg


mid 2019 :
Royalties - Mid 2019.jpg

End 2020 (digitalmusicnews) :
Royalties - End 2020.png
 
Last edited:

_thelaughingman

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 1, 2020
Messages
1,354
Likes
2,034
It’s a sad state of affairs in today’s times where artists are paid paltry amounts per stream for the amount of subscribers they have. Case in point Apple that recently said it only pays 1cent per stream to artists from their strong 70 million odd subscribers. It’s a net effect loss for audiophiles and artists because the artists have to push out heavily compressed music to earn more stream money.
 

Mountain Goat

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 10, 2020
Messages
188
Likes
295
Location
Front Range, Colorado
I do wonder what impact Spotify's move to GCP had on their bottom line.

I work in this area as well, and I'm very thankful our customers aren't binging on data. It gets very expensive if you're paying the list prices. I wonder if Tidal do, considering that they're sort of direct competitors to Amazon.

AWS will treat them like they treat Netflix. It's not in their interest to punish Tidal or any other music provider using their infrastructure.
 

levimax

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
2,385
Likes
3,511
Location
San Diego
I also own very little music, so I really can't afford abandon Tidal or Qobuz.
Thrifts are full of CD many of which are mastered better than the same title on streaming for next to nothing. Even though prices are on their way up most harder to find titles are still readily available on the auction sites. It is still a great time to build your music library that won't be subject to the whims of giant internet monopolies or wanna be monopolies like MQA.
 

TheBatsEar

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
3,161
Likes
5,115
Location
Germany
Sadly, this is where I am too. I also own very little music, so I really can't afford abandon Tidal or Qobuz.

I was in your spot and thought about how i want to consume music during the next 30 years or so.

My decision was to buy the odd record for the fun of it and to buy up entire collections of used CDs. I digitize them and sell the bulk of the collection on, often for the same, sometimes with a bit of profit. I keep the gems and the "backups". So far about 2500 or so CDs have passed my grubby hands, i kept about 200 and maybe 1500 backups. My investment was, so far, maybe 1000€ tops, most of which i recouped by selling most of the CDs.

CDs are very cheap and in my eyes still the medium with the best audio quality. Despite my bat ears i don't hear noise below 96dB or sounds over 16kHz or so.
 

Honken

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
342
Likes
605
Location
Scania
AWS will treat them like they treat Netflix. It's not in their interest to punish Tidal or any other music provider using their infrastructure.
True, but giving them list prices isn't really the same as punishing them.

As for Netflix using AWS, there are more than one reason why Netflix install cache boxes in ISPs networks.
 

LaL

Active Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2020
Messages
140
Likes
94
Looks like iFi is doubling down on it's MQA marketing.
22nd April 2021
https://iFi-Audio.com/what-is-mqa-and-does-it-work-with-ifi-dacs

" In the words of Gilbert O’Sullivan, iconic Irish-born singer-songwriter, “The great thing about MQA is that it delivers the finesse that was there in the desk sound. It’s tremendous, it sounds really good.”
MQA connects creators directly with their fans. Our label partners ensure the master recording is converted to MQA and delivered to the music service. On playback, the MQA decoder authenticates the sound using a digital display – either a light or a logo on the UI – so that listeners know they are hearing a true version of the original recording.
....MQA stream or file and denotes provenance to ensure that the sound is identical to that of the source material. It glows blue to indicate it is playing an MQA Studio file, which has either been approved in the studio by the artist/producer or has been verified by the copyright owner."
 

mhardy6647

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2019
Messages
11,368
Likes
24,567
And in response to those who are concerned with the presence of ultrasonic noise, both class-D amplifiers and DSD encoding also produce relatively high levels of ultrasonic noise. See, for example,fig.1 at https://www.stereophile.com/content/super-audio-cd-rich-report-page-2
The bane of digitialia, IMO.
Brings to mind the era of amplitude modulation (radio) -- chirps, birdies, and whistles.
Thank goodness there're filters.
Wouldn't it be nice if filters just weren't needed...?

Sorry Mr. Atkinson -- you pushed my Gran Torino/old codger button, albeit unintentionally, I know. :)

1619263810383.png
 

pjug

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 2, 2019
Messages
1,775
Likes
1,562
Still working my way through the messages in this thread. What you are seeing in the spectral analysis is the effect of noise-shaping. This is not uncommon. For example, following my experience of the POWR and Apogee UV22 noise-shaping algorithms, I tend to use 3rd-order noise-shaping when preparing the CD masters of my recordings. The level of the noise in the top half-octave that you show is higher than in my CD masters, but I can confidently predict that at -45dBFS it will be inaudible.

And in response to those who are concerned with the presence of ultrasonic noise, both class-D amplifiers and DSD encoding also produce relatively high levels of ultrasonic noise. See, for example,fig.1 at https://www.stereophile.com/content/super-audio-cd-rich-report-page-2

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

Regarding your recordings that were processed with MQA, giving you such a positive initial impression of the technology:

Did you compare the spectra of the MQA to the original to see if some EQ may have been applied?

Did you record the MQA analog output to DXD and then compare these to see if you heard such a big difference?

Thanks for your willingness to discuss this here.

P.S. You are not allowed to share some short clips of these files, correct?
 
Last edited:

voodooless

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
10,364
Likes
18,268
Location
Netherlands
so that listeners know they are hearing a true version of the original recording.

That says it all really… if it were so good, no lights or indicators would be needed.
 

Zensō

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
2,752
Likes
6,766
Location
California
"In the words of Gilbert O’Sullivan, iconic Irish-born singer-songwriter, “The great thing about MQA is that it delivers the finesse that was there in the desk sound. It’s tremendous, it sounds really good.”
MQA connects creators directly with their fans. Our label partners ensure the master recording is converted to MQA and delivered to the music service. On playback, the MQA decoder authenticates the sound using a digital display – either a light or a logo on the UI – so that listeners know they are hearing a true version of the original recording.
....MQA stream or file and denotes provenance to ensure that the sound is identical to that of the source material. It glows blue to indicate it is playing an MQA Studio file, which has either been approved in the studio by the artist/producer or has been verified by the copyright owner."
It’s a compelling story... if only it were true.
 

John Atkinson

Active Member
Industry Insider
Reviewer
Joined
Mar 20, 2020
Messages
168
Likes
1,089
JA is not here to discuss. He is doing damage control, or trying to.

Not correct. I am showing that some of the testing performed by GoldenOne and the conclusions he drew from the tests are flawed and/or misleading.

I have not made any comments either for or against MQA in this thread.

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile
 

raistlin65

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
2,279
Likes
3,421
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
Not correct. I am showing that some of the testing performed by GoldenOne and the conclusions he drew from the tests are flawed and/or misleading.

I have not made any comments either for or against MQA in this thread.

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

So what is your position on MQA?
 

_thelaughingman

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 1, 2020
Messages
1,354
Likes
2,034
From all the articles written about MQA at Stereophile by the cohort, not a single individual provides a personal take due to commercial conflict of interest. Every single article so far on MQA at Stereophile talks up all the technical undertakings of MQA, but skepticism or professional critique is glaringly lacking. Like any other media publication in business of selling magazines, Stereophile is not a reputed source of information.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom