[GREQ]

Not sure why you've decied to feel victimized here.
Sorry to see you go. o7

 

[Sphere 57]

That said... ignorance in of itself is not an insult, nor is it a sin.
So, chosing to feel that it is derogatory only proves you are?

Acting like a sanctimonious bore and accusing people of ignorance isn't really civil is it?

 

[GREQ]

Acting like a sanctimonious bore and accusing people of ignorance isn't really civil is it?

Once again, let me remind you that ignorance is not a sin or anything to be ashamed of, or an insult.

At no point in this thread did anyone say something like "I'm happy with MQA because while it is not lossless, it provides smaller file-sizes of near-equal quality, and I'm fine with not getting master-quality despite being lied to"

For some reason, instead of acknowledging or accepting new information people have been feeling victimized, or taunted by their lack of knowledge or understanding.
This doesn't make any rational sense.

I should have known better than to talk about knowledge and truth in a forum that worships cables.

 

[castleofargh]

Agreed, the appeal to popularity is for people who don't subscribe to Tidal and have no standing to scream scam. I guess people have a lot of free time and nothing important to worry about.

As for me and all the other subscribers, we're getting what we paid for for the last five years. The self-righteous indignation and a$$holier than thou attitude of those telling us what to like and what not to like is despicable and belongs in the audioscientolgy forum

That too is a fallacy (or 2).
1/ Nobody is telling you what to like. That's just a strawman argument. Of course, it's a little harder to like a business model rooted in misinformation, but that's not our fault.
2/ The old "if you don't use it, shut up" of audio forum is a massively egoistical way of thinking, IMO. Informing people about the reality of MQA as a product or as a business is a service to others. They're still free to use whatever they want, but they can make a more informed decision. I can't understand how that's bad, or self-righteous.


You and some others have a hard time dissociating yourself from a streaming subscription, is what's happening here IMO. You have no reason to feel like our posts about MQA are an attack against you, even less so if as you explained, you have limited options in your country. You made a decision, and I'm sure that everybody's fine with it(not like we can do anything anyway^_^). Try to read the posts about MQA again, and you'll see that mocking or attacking users just isn't the message or hidden intent. The critics are over the marketing and some aspects of the format.

 

[Sphere 57]

Once again, let me remind you that ignorance is not a sin or anything to be ashamed of, or an insult.

At no point in this thread did anyone say something like "I'm happy with MQA because while it is not lossless, it provides smaller file-sizes of near-equal quality, and I'm fine with not getting master-quality despite being lied to"

For some reason, instead of acknowledging or accepting new information people have been feeling victimized, or taunted by their lack of knowledge or understanding.
This doesn't make any rational sense.

I should have known better than to talk about knowledge and truth in a forum that worships cables.

Your assumption that other people are ignorant is patronising. Are you truly unaware of how rude this can seem?

gimmeheadroom has said that he is aware that MQA is not lossless and that he is not bothered by nonsense marketing claims. If you are going to set about 'correcting the ignorance' of someone, wouldn't it be best to actually read what they have posted on the thread?

What "new information" have you offered? And who has rejected it irrationally?

 

[Luckyleo]

And yet more than five years later it's still fine.

Well, I guess it's your definition of fine... Let's check back in 5 years. Notice, I'm not discussing sound quality. That's not relevant to my point. Bad PR, they haven't done much to try to win back the ney sayers. Amazon, Apple, and to some degree, Qobuz will continue to win share at Tidal's expense. Or not !! . Stay tuned for "Rest of the Story"

 

[Luckyleo]

You're calling us ignorant and complaining about derogatory labels?

This is what I have been saying.

To be more clear, we don't need your crusades. You're free to not to save us from ourselves.

I for one have no problem with any personal choices anyone makes, especially something like high quality audio streaming. I tried Tidal, wasn't for me. It sounds like it's for you. Congrats to everyone living their streaming dreams. Enjoy the music and put the noise of the chattering masses aside for a bit of time and get lost in the music you love.

Leo

 

[jonathan c]

It's a shame you are running around with a pitchfork and torch regarding something that doesn't affect you at all.

And now, into my ignore list you go, despite the fact I have enjoyed your posts and thanked you for sharing your knowledge in various threads in the past.

What you're doing in this thread is indefensible. Nobody needs that.

….

 

[gimmeheadroom]

….

@Pharmaboy somebody is stealing your avatar!

 

[Ieonasj]

i have same song on my laptop FLAC quality size 30mb, and found this song on tidal hifi pcm 16/44.1khz. i dont feel any difference in sound quality. but i feel big improvement tidal hifi song vs same song on my laptop in mp3 format.... focal stellia headphones used for this.

 

[Andrew_WOT]

im tidal hifi plus user,but try for free qobuz and will see diffeence. 16.44.1 vs 24/192 human ear can feel diference with high quality headphones and dac.

Qobuz has 24/192 files as well, why not compare apples to apples.

 

[Andrew_WOT]

Qobuz is available in very few countries compared to Tidal.

Not pitching for Qobuz, but do you happen to have list of countries supported by Tidal and Qobuz to back this up.
I remember Qobuz started small but greatly expanded their coverage in the last few years.
Qobuz Locations

Open in France since 2007, Qobuz extended its reach in 2014 to eight European countries: United Kingdom, Ireland, Germany, Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, Luxembourg and the Netherlands then, in 2017, in Spain and Italy.[17]

In 2018, Qobuz was active in eleven countries. In 2019, Qobuz opened its subsidiary in the United States.[18]

On April 15, 2021, Qobuz made its streaming and downloading offers available in six new countries: Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Australia and New Zealand.[19]

On May 4th, 2022, Qobuz, continues its global expansion with the opening of its service in six new countries: Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Colombia, Chile and, in Europe, Portugal. [20]

 

[Andrew_WOT]

Not sure if this was posted already or not. Apologies if dup, it's a long thread.

False audio quality claims, GoldenSound's test and MQA's response

After confusion of Tidal and MQA claiming that the MQA encoding is better than the FLAC format and encoding with little to no evidence,[80] a YouTuber known as GoldenSound conducted a series of tests[81][82] by attempting to publish test audio to the platform, however got rejected because "the MQA encoder was unable to encode the file." GoldenSound then successfully published music with hidden test audio inside of it such as white noise, an impulse response, a square wave, a 32-tone test signal and the RMAA test sequence interspersed with self-produced music. He uploaded a 44.1 kHz version and an 88.2 kHz version, which the MQA encoder should have been able to upload with no loss, distortions or compression. However, after comparing the original master to the MQA encoded one, it was shown that the "mastered" MQA-encoded versions uploaded to Tidal was lossy and had distorted many of the tests and, on the 88.2 kHz version, had added high-frequency noise to the entire file. These files were compared to the same files uploaded to other streaming services, prominently Deezer, which had absolutely no loss or compression added, showing that it was only the MQA encoding that had been worsening the quality of the file. The concluding statement from GoldenSound was that MQA is not lossless, it is lossy and differs from the original master and is not at all how the artist intended for it to be listened to.[82]

The test files uploaded to Tidal were quickly taken down shortly after GoldenSound sent an e-mail to MQA questioning their legitimacy and their recommended methods for encoding to MQA, stating that there is no viable or easy method to test their claims about lossless-ness, even for indie artists.

Musician Neil Young removed his music from Tidal after it had been converted to MQA and misleadingly labeled "Master". Young criticized the audio quality and the MQA business scheme:

"TIDAL's master is a degradation of the original to make it fit in a box that collects royalties. That money ultimately is paid by listeners, I am not behind it. I am out of there. Gone. My masters are the original."
— Neil Young[83]

EDIT: Actually it's just a wrap up of the video from second post.
The second part is even more interesting.

 

[Ieonasj]

Not sure if this was posted already or not. Apologies if dup, it's a long thread.

False audio quality claims, GoldenSound's test and MQA's response


EDIT: Actually it's just a wrap up of video from second post.
The second part is even more interesting.

does any can write tidal master song/songs with bigger than 24/192 resolution?

 

[gimmeheadroom]

does any can write tidal master song/songs with bigger than 24/192 resolution?

somebody posted a 352 KHz playlist. I don't have it saved anymore since the music was so horrible but it worked