I think thats a very valid point for both parties.
MQA discussions heat up very fast.
1 Like
While I’m not above getting a little heated on occasion I try to stay civil/positive. Regarding fact vs. opinion, I’ve always considered this a good guide (it’s not as hard-line a read as the title implies).
You don’t have to guess what Neil Young believes. Read his book – “To Feel The Music”. It’s an excellent read on the history of digital music from his perspective and of course carries his opinions on most of it. He does not dislike CDs or 16 bit digital. He simply believes that Analog LPs >> HD Digital (96K/24 bit or better) >> CD >> MP3s. And he doesn’t want anyone post processing his masters like MQA does because it does not represent what he intended.
1 Like
Let’s hope the 50% investors agree with his principles for his sake.
Greater than 90% of all startups fail and Neil’s pono effort was one of them. You pay your money and take your chances. That’s the way this works. I doubt any one of them think less of Neil because of it.
I think this may refer to NY’s decision to sell 50% of his publishing rights, not Pono investors.
Hmm… you may be right. Missed that. The company that bought the 50% rights was chosen because they are in alignment with Neil on his views to represent his music in the best possible way and know exactly what they are getting with him.
I think the suggestion is that they may do something with his masters that he wouldn’t approve of, e.g. license them as Tidal MQA. Totally agree with the alignment part, the quotes when the deal was made back this up:
“I built Hipgnosis to be a company Neil would want to be a part of,” said Mr Mercuriadis.
"We have a common integrity, ethos and passion born out of a belief in music and these important songs.
“There will never be a ‘Burger of Gold’, but we will work together to make sure everyone gets to hear them on Neil’s terms.”
1 Like
It wasn’t meant as a hint.
Suggestion then? I fixed it for you.
Fixed it? I didn’t realise there was anything to fix?
Sorry, thought you were taking issue with my wording is all?
Haha not at all. Wires crossed in type. I understand now thank you.
1 Like
Interesting thread.
I noticed in it someone from Qobuz posted they are working with 2L to get MQA files labeled properly as such. Here we are a year later and they still are not labeled properly. 
We all know the name of at least one artist that doesn’t like MQA. Do you know the names of some that do like it?
I would suggest that anyone can do as Neil Young did and object and withdraw their support?
My opinion is if you are following the crowd then you aren’t objecting to it.
I’m guessing this isn’t the answer you are hankering after though but I’m sure there is an argument to it.
They’re comparing MQA with MP3 … read into that what you like.
1 Like
Chris, my first reaction to the video was, I hear all the things they’re talking about without MQA. The second thought is, we have an artist of the stature of Neil Young on the don’t like it side, is there perhaps an artist with more than one EP in 2014 on the like it side?
1 Like
Not true. Only a handful of major artists own and control the decisions for their masters. The labels make all the decisions for the rest and the artists have little to no say in these decisions. If you’ve followed the fight between Taylor Swift and Scooter Braun (who owned the label that owned all her masters prior to her recent new albums where she took back control) you can see this in action. Even a major artist like Taylor Swift had no control over the decisions on her masters…