I didn't see it coming (Tidal replacing albums with MQA only)

A post was merged into an existing topic: MQA disappointing

Tidal is not more expensive than Qobuz for a monthly payment. Considering the price of a Node 2i which integrates a rather good MQA DAC, it is to be hoped that DAC for Hires with crazy prices can integrate this function in a transparent way. I do not believe that ethics has something to do in this debate.

1 Like

I never said tidal was more expensive.
I said Qobuz was more expensive in $aud, it is also not available in Australia which is why we are stuck with Tidal and MQA using Roon.

Why would I downgrade to a node 2i from an RME adi 2 Fs? This makes no sense.

And secondly, why should I need to buy a new dac to listen to music that I could listen to previously without MQA authentication?

And yes it is an ethical discussion. MQA to many is a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist? Much has been written on this topic.


That was not the point of my answer. It was a question of underlining that the problem of the cost is a false problem at the level of the equipment of the participants in this forum. And I am very satisfied with my Node 2i to spend more seems unreasonable to me.

What is it with people lining up to make value judgements for others?

And then in the next sentence with absolutely no hint of irony


It’s absolutly not a judgement value. And absolutly no joint of irony (the word downgrade is not very fair)
Sorry if you think so.

1 Like

I don’t give a shiny tuppence about your hardware choice. I just hate hypocrisy when people say cost isn’t a factor in decision making. Of course it is, for many many people.

Yes it is, but everyone does not have the same limit, who is rather at a high level in the world of hifi enthusiasts.
It’s better :slight_smile:

Much has been written on this but that doesn’t make it right. Also you do not need a new DAC to enjoy MQA. Your current DAC will make a very good job after the first unfold which you can perform in either Tidal or Roon at no extra cost. The most important thing is to enjoy the music.

1 Like

No, the most important thing is to end a post with a patronising truism in a vain attempt to deflect.


How can I enjoy the music without a little blue light confirming that I am hearing the best possible, most authenticated audio available?

1 Like

It’s very easy you know, just close your eyes and open your ears and mind… But that blue light… It’s oohhh soooo lurvely… :joy:

1 Like

And you have listened to mqa on DACs that don’t support it to back up this and ensure it sounds good ? It really doesn’t sound that good at all in my experience. With an MQA DAC it does. This is what everyone is mad about having to buy a new MQA DAC to actually get it to work as good as pcm on the same DAC.

1 Like

When you include a requirement for a crypto suit in a product in order to perform origin authentication, then of course one could also implement rights management as the same crypto suit API will be used for both. However IIRC, there is nothing about rights management in MQA, just a mechanism to secure a claim of what you hear being from the approved source unchanged (since it was encoded).

I dont really know where this common beleif about DRM in MQA came from… I guess I missed something, or likely as soon as any kind of crypto use gets involved then people assume DRM will be imposed.

Crypto gets used in our daily digital lives all the time - pretty much every web site for eg partly to confirm that the site is the one you think it is. Rarely is DRM involved. Usually the nearest thing we get to copy prevention is secure local caching for a music stream to prevent a copy being made from a stream. DRM cannot happen in general music playback unless all approved music playback systems go down the route of HDCP as used over HDMI for video. There is no equivalent standard in music playback AFAIK.

1 Like

Nobody’s talking about “general music playback”, they’re talking about a nightmare scenario where music is only available as MQA-encoded streams or MQA-encoded CDs. Once that happens, since MQA requires proprietary and secret software on both sides of the stream, in order to get at the actual bits of the stream, you essentially have the equivalent of HDCP for video. It can be strengthened as needed purely at the whim of MQA, Ltd. DRM can easily be added, monthly licensing fees can be added, etc.

Your point about cryptography suites being widespread for good reason is accurate. But it really has little to do with the DRM point – DRM can be implemented in a variety of ways, given bespoke secret software on both ends of the stream.

1 Like

My bench Mark is close up live Music. I have also owned decent Hi Fi all my adult life. Meridian passive and active systems. I know what good music sounds like and what instruments sound like. As I type I am enjoying Seasick Steve’s latest album in glorious MQA Studio.

And HDCP has been cracked basically as soon as it came out. HDCP up through 2.1 is effectively wide open and the only thing HDCP does is screw up connections at this point.


That does not answer my question does it.

If the question is do I listen to non MQA music? For sure I do, not all music is in MQA and certainly not our private gig recordings. Yes they sound great too but I am now aware that there is more to have.
Do I do A/B comparisons any more? No, life is too short and I want to enjoy the music I play and not over listen, spoiling the music for pleasure.
That’s work for people paid to do it and curious enthusiasts who are exploring. My exploration is done to my satisfaction.

No that was not my question, you obviously didnt read my post properly at all.