CES 2017: MQA announces TIDAL Masters, and more

[Trerit]

Isn't that what I read multiple times?

Just grab a listen to the album Coltrane's sound. Non MQA and MQA version on tidal. Volume difference is huuge! Screams remaster

 

[manpowre]

I see the Madonna album Like a Virgin that was recorded and digitized in 14/44 is on Tidal Masters ! doesnt MQA guarantee a remaster of the original recording ? 

 

[OldRoadToad]

What I don't understand is if you work, you get paid, so why is it greedy for a new format and remasters, that obliviously took some time and work, to charge people for the ability to use it. Why don't you go to work and than not get paid?

​So I can force some one to pay me for work that they did not ask for me to do?  That is MQA's desire.  That every thing be MQA.  How about I come over and move your stuff around and then tell you to pay me for that work.  It does not matter that you never asked for it to be done nor did you even want it done by any one including your self.  I did the work so pay up.
 
FTN.
 
ORT

 

[manpowre]

What I don't understand is if you work, you get paid, so why is it greedy for a new format and remasters, that obliviously took some time and work, to charge people for the ability to use it. Why don't you go to work and than not get paid?

 
Every kind of work is expected to be able to VERIFY the quality of the specific type of work. With MQA not delivering encoders to the mass market, only to those who sign a contract with them, there is no way for the mass market to VERIFY their statements if their format is better than the established high res standards in the market ! Escpecially since their product is a compression algorithm. I dont have a problem with the cash grab, but I do have a problem with MQA group NOT giving us an opportunity to consider same remastering on their compressed format 24/96 vs uncompressed format eg. flac or another type. Problem is that we dont know if we are listening to a new remastered product or a converted version from an old remaster. Sometimes in Tidal it says when its remastered. But take Madonna album Like a Virgin. Nothing is stated when its remastered or even remastered. It was digitized 33 years ago in 14/44. If you throw it through a FFT spectrum, you can see a clear cut at 22 khz to a noise floor, thats added to fill in the gaps from the original recording. Blue light my ass on that specific recording ! and they get extra money from doing this ******** !
 
I am starting to wonder if they DONT want us audiophiles to start measure their encoded files to find the flaws, especially when it comes to 24/192 HW decoding.

 

[Left Channel]

  I see the Madonna album Like a Virgin that was recorded and digitized in 14/44 is on Tidal Masters! Doesn't MQA guarantee a remaster of the original recording ? 

 
"According to discussions here, Like A Virgin was a multi-track 16/44 recording mixed to 14/44; so resolution-wise, it's not even of CD quality to begin with." ---Archimago's Musings (Comparison of Tidal/MQA stream and high-resolution downloads) 

 

[pkcpga]

​So I can force some one to pay me for work that they did not ask for me to do?  That is MQA's desire.  That every thing be MQA.  How about I come over and move your stuff around and then tell you to pay me for that work.  It does not matter that you never asked for it to be done nor did you even want it done by any one including your self.  I did the work so pay up.

FTN.

ORT

No one forced people to buy records, tapes, cd's, sacd, dvda, MP3, dsd or any other format, people purchased them because they wanted to and formats changed.

 

[OldRoadToad]

No one forced people to buy records, tapes, cd's, sacd, dvda, MP3, dsd or any other format, people purchased them because they wanted to and formats changed.

​Surely you jest?
 
Being forced to have MQA is just fine with you then?  MQA on every digital device and if they can figure out a way, on vinyl is fine and dandy with you?  That is  what we were talking about, not people buying different physical formats but rather having to buy MQA equipped devices when they don't give a hoot for it, do not want it and should not have it forced upon them by Meridian because Meridian says it is "superior" and will let them "hear the artist as they artist intended them to be heard".   Ad copy ad nausea. MQA is in this for the MONEY, not to make the audio world a better place. 
 
To Hades with that and any that would force it upon us.  Ridiculous.  And I know you under stood what I was saying and yet you still replied as quoted above.  Do not pretend to be naïve as I have read enough of your posts to know you are far removed from being ignorant.   
 
Meridian's MQA is the current Blue Pill of frAudio.  So-called Audio Journalists eat it up.  Just because a bunch of self-proclaimed frAuido sophists call it palatable does not make it so.  They are like flies and what do flies eat?
 
Pretty much any thing fed to them.
 
 
ORT

 

[JeremyLaurenson]

Meridian's MQA is the current Blue Pill of frAudio.  So-called Audio Journalists eat it up.  Just because a bunch of self-proclaimed frAuido sophists call it palatable does not make it so.  They are like flies and what do flies eat?

Pretty much any thing fed to them.


ORT

Have you heard MQA? Where did you get the tracks from? I would like to audition it on static, non-straemed files before making any observtions.

 

[OldRoadToad]

Have you heard MQA? Where did you get the tracks from? I would like to audition it on static, non-straemed files before making any observtions.

​Yes sirI have at T.H.E. last year.  I did so with out knowing what I was listening to from start to finish and in between and all with out knowing when or what was being switched/played et al.  No difference was detected but in the real world you will have to pay for that no difference.
 
And that is the only difference that matters to Meridian and by that I mean they get paid.  What a bunch of crap.   Screw that.  I doubt any one could tell a difference unless they were told when the difference was being presented.  frAudiophiles like to feeeeeel they are superior "listeners".   Once the little blue light (or what ever colour they choose for the MQA indicator) goes on, frAudiophiles crème their genes.  Yeah...a play on words because of  them are sad little nerdlings living an imitation of life.  Most.  Not all, just most.   
 
As if any one with a modicum of intelligence is going to believe/trust some one that listens to cables and the like and claims to hear a difference.  Any one that makes such claims is doing so based upon a belief not scientific proof.  All that and I suspect more than a few of these nerdlings despise people that have a faith in any God because the nerdlings can not see him. 
 
It is the Emperor's New Clothes, repackaged for audio...errrrrr...frAudio.
 
ORT

 

[jude]

Yes sirI have at T.H.E. last year.  I did so with out knowing what I was listening to from start to finish and in between and all with out knowing when or what was being switched/played et al.  No difference was detected but in the real world you will have to pay for that no difference.
 
And that is the only difference that matters to Meridian and by that I mean they get paid.  What a bunch of crap.   Screw that.  I doubt any one could tell a difference unless they were told when the difference was being presented.  frAudiophiles like to feeeeeel they are superior "listeners".   Once the little blue light (or what ever colour they choose for the MQA indicator) goes on, frAudiophiles crème their genes.  Yeah...a play on words because of  them are sad little nerdlings living an imitation of life.  Most.  Not all, just most.   
 
As if any one with a modicum of intelligence is going to believe/trust some one that listens to cables and the like and claims to hear a difference.  Any one that makes such claims is doing so based upon a belief not scientific proof.  All that and I suspect more than a few of these nerdlings despise people that have a faith in any God because the nerdlings can not see him. 
 
It is the Emperor's New Clothes, repackaged for audio...errrrrr...frAudio.
 
ORT

 
I guess I don't understand your beef, ORT. There's nothing you have to pay for because of MQA if you don't want to pay for it.
 
If you buy/download music that happens to be MQA-encoded--and I say "happens to be" because I can't imagine you (given your position) would be buying it because it's MQA-encoded--it's still going to work with whatever DAC or player you've got, and will play back at CD quality.
 
If you subscribe to TIDAL--but not TIDAL Hi-Fi--then it's still going to work the same as it has before.
 
If you subscribe to TIDAL Hi-Fi, then it's also going to work as it did before, only your DAC (if you allow TIDAL to software-decode) might see hi-res files when playing MQA-encoded files (I say "might see" as it depends on the file, which could pass as anything from 44.1 to 96kHz with MQA software-decode).
 
I suspect that maybe there's a misunderstanding here, so, just to be clear: MQA-encoded files do not require an MQA decoder/renderer to play back at CD quality.

 

[OldRoadToad]

   
I guess I don't understand your beef, ORT. There's nothing you have to pay for because of MQA if you don't want to pay for it.
 
If you buy/download music that happens to be MQA-encoded--and I say "happens to be" because I can't imagine you (given your position) would be buying it because it's MQA-encoded--it's still going to work with whatever DAC or player you've got, and will play back at CD quality.
 
If you subscribe to TIDAL--but not TIDAL Hi-Fi--then it's still going to work the same as it has before.
 
If you subscribe to TIDAL Hi-Fi, then it's also going to work as it did before, only your DAC (if you allow TIDAL to software-decode) might see hi-res files when playing MQA-encoded files (I say "might see" as it depends on the file, which could pass as anything from 44.1 to 96kHz with MQA software-decode).
 
I suspect that maybe there's a misunderstanding here, so, just to be clear: MQA-encoded files do not require an MQA decoder/renderer to play back at CD quality.

​If it is encoded into a CD I buy and the manufacturer/record company had to license this dross, I had to pay for some thing I will NEVER use.  I do not enjoy being made to pay for some thing that again, I will NEVER use.  I consider it a principal, not a beef.  For example,  I do not force my beliefs upon others, especially by making them pay for them even if they do not believe in them.
 
Meridian wants this to happen.  They want money in the form of licensing, etc. for a service/software/ripoff that we never asked for and they seek to get it in what ever method they can employ.    Animal Farm.  No thank you!
 
Thanks!
 
ORT

 

[doggiemom]

  Meridian wants this to happen.  They want money in the form of licensing, etc. for a service/software/ripoff that we never asked for and they seek to get it in what ever method they can employ.    Animal Farm.  No thank you!
 
Thanks!
 
ORT

Like it or not, music is a business, and the R&D that goes into developing and testing compression formats is not cheap.  How Music Got Free is an excellent history of the mp3, and offers some interesting insights about the business aspects (licensing, etc.) that are relevant to the MQA discussion.

 

[TadMorose]

Have you heard MQA? Where did you get the tracks from? I would like to audition it on static, non-straemed files before making any observtions.

 
You can download samples in MQA from 2L's High Res Test Bench, which also offers the same music in other formats and resolutions for comparison:

http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html?

However, you need an MQA capable DAC to be able to take full advantage of the MQA files.

 

[ThomasHK]

Just grab a listen to the album Coltrane's sound. Non MQA and MQA version on tidal. Volume difference is huuge! Screams remaster

Good example. Did you find any others?

 

[m0rancharles]

This is HUGE for bringing the concept of Hi-Fi to the masses... and with it to cheaper and more available equipment...
 
BUT. MQA is more frequency while sacrificing bit depth... soooo its cool for on the go, but seeing as I already doubt they're going to actually re master all those old vinyls (IMHO the only music I could give a hoot about in Hi-Res), I'm going to stick with a solid 16/44.1 vs a possible 13-15/(upsampled)192.
 
I don't see many people on here sacrificing that kind of quality, when Tidal already offers 16/44.1 (although I think they often do a poor conversion as it is)... could be wrong, and don't wanna ruffle any feathers here, to each his own, but I tried MQA and got tired of it pretty quick..