Is Roon supporting MQA? What are the pros and cons of MQA?

[fritzg]

Good, god. I just want to hear it through Roon and decide myself.

[wklie (Peter Lie)]

@MusicEar

I’ve many colleagues who are audiophiles and have made comparison between MQA and Hi-Res, majority prefer unaltered Hi-Res because of its transparency. Take a look at many forums out there and you can see for yourself the many dissatisfied remarks.

I did. Partly because of my work I paid a lot of attention to SQ comparisons of Tidal Master vs Tidal HiFi or CD on certified MQA decoders. While there are both positive and negative reports, my impression is that from users of Lumin, Berkeley, dCS and PS Audio, there are more reports of enjoying Tidal Master than not enjoying it. I don’t care whether they sound better because they come from better masters or technical improvement, I care deeply our customers can enjoy Tidal Masters in their full glory without paying additional fees.

(I know the quote is about MQA vs Hi-Res. Since most amount of MQA music only exists on Tidal right now, I look at this from a Tidal subscriber perspective, who streams instead of pays for downloads. Those who prefer Hi-Res can subscribe to Qobuz Sublime+, at a higher cost and not integrated with Roon.)

[crenca]

“No, this cannot happen, as explained above.”

Why not? The public/private key encryption is in MQA for what, exactly? Even as a legal matter, are you saying that consumers can not be forced to accept any changes in MQA (say, some future version - maybe MQA 2.0 - part of a required firmware/software update) and if they don’t, they will have recourse…to whom, and how?

[wklie (Peter Lie)]

If MQA Ltd. decides to add “phone home” functionality, that will break compatibility with existing products - especially those DAC without a network port.

[philr]

@MusicEar

I’ve many colleagues who are audiophiles and have made comparison between MQA and Hi-Res, majority prefer unaltered Hi-Res because of its transparency. Take a look at many forums out there and you can see for yourself the many dissatisfied remarks.

I’m glad they have tried it. Frankly I’m surprised about any lack of transparency with MQA but If they have listened in an unbiased manner as no doubt they have they are entitled to their opinion.

The monkey in me hopes that it’s not just some placebo effect from all the negatives they have read about MQA online. No doubt my positive view of MQA is merely the result of some placebo effect from positive reviews in Stereophile etc.

You enjoy Qobuz and I will enjoy Tidal Masters as we are both entitled to do, that is what it is all about after all.

[philr]

@wklie

(I know the quote is about MQA vs Hi-Res. Since most amount of MQA music only exists on Tidal right now, I look at this from a Tidal subscriber perspective, who streams instead of pays for downloads. Those who prefer Hi-Res can subscribe to Qobuz Sublime+, at a higher cost and not integrated with Roon.)

Significantly higher and not in many countries around the world. Quobuz is expanding but currently only available in the major European countries.

Interesting that given all the arguements about MQA extracting licensing fees at every stage and ripping us off that MQA is cheaper than hires and costs not more than cd streaming and that many DACs are being upgraded to decode MQA at no additional cost. Currently not seeing where this hits my wallet.

[Jim_Austin]

Another courteous and substantive reply–but I’ve run out of time for now. I will try to respond this weekend. Thanks.

[philr]

I think Danny summed up the most significant downside to MQA here.

@danny

the lack of DSP post “full” decoding is a ginormous achilles heel

I agree, this is critical. If this is not allowed, then MQA becomes the Dolby of music audio, and innovation is stuck in the hands of a commercial entity that has no incentive to innovate

[andybob (Andrew Cox)]

Moderators have removed parts of some posts and deleted others which had descended into personal argument. Please try to keep the discussion about MQA rather than each others posts.

[DrTone (Jeff)]

In my opinion, if MQA becomes the mainstream distrbution format, that’s the state we will be in if DSPing is allowed or not.

[andybob (Andrew Cox)]

@philr, that was a fascinating series of posts to be involved with. Unfortunately I no longer qualify to play the speculation game. But there are a few public facts that we all know:

• Roon started with a prior business relationship with the founders of MQA and yet it took a very long time to negotiate arrangements with MQA. Much longer than other licensees;

• The Roon devs have spoken in the past about doing something different to others as regards MQA and were pleased with the outcome of negotiations.

[Jim_Austin]

@philr

Significantly higher and not in many countries around the world. Quobuz is expanding but currently only available in the major European countries.

It has however announced plans to expand to the United States. The only date I’ve seen is “2018.”

Home Page

[philr]

@Xekomi

Let’s assume that what you can get off the air is mostly 720p 4:4:4, so Redbook.

This whole arguement assumes that MQA is just another way of delivering the same file. However if it is an improvement ie a akin to 1080p vs 720p then just like I need an MQA decoder to get full MQA I need a 1080p capable TV not 720p one to benefit from the higher definition.

I disagree with you MQA is not a high res file with noise added it is more akin to removing noise. What about Dolby noise reduction? Is that DRM in your view? It certainly was not in most people’s view. That removed tape hiss but needed Dolby cabanke machines to play to back without signifant chances in the sound. MQA removes “noise” that comes in the ADC process. Unlike Dolby MQA plays back fine in conventional machines and DACs and in fact offers some improvements even without decoding so it is even less problematic than Dolby.

[andybob (Andrew Cox)]

@macrog

I hate the fact that MQA has been used as a rationale for the high cost of Roon

I can understand being frustrated with the time taken to implement MQA in Roon; at one stage I had lost confidence that it might occur (now I am sure that it will). But I don’t believe that MQA has ever been a rationale for the cost of Roon. Roon predated the release of MQA and has maintained the same cost structure since release.

[DrTone (Jeff)]

@philr

However if it is an improvement ie a akin to 1080p vs 720p then just like I need an MQA decoder to get full MQA I need a 1080p capable TV not 720p one to benefit from the higher definition.

An interpretation not necessarliy an improvement. TVs have optional noise reduction, torch mode, frame interpolation etc etc. Those options go away with MQA and if god forbid the worst happens and the studio master as the mastering engineer wanted it becomes unavailable we aren’t left with a choice at all.

[crenca]

I actually don’t give MQA much of a chance of becoming mainstream. Where is the value? On the consumer side, it is a small, “subjectivist” SQ tweak to some (but certainly not all, or even most) Audiophiles. That is not a viable market. As a streaming container for an alleged high res like (but definitely not the “crown jewels” actual Hi Res PCM) encoding? Not needed, except in the minds of a few. Why would the consumer subject themselves to the DRM that MQA is in its current form, to say nothing of future changes (at the whim of MQA and/or it’s partnering DAC/Software firms) via software/firmware updates or some other mechanism? Our current DAC’s are “legacy DAC’s” (the words Bob uses), what motivates us to a re-investment? “End to end” & “Authenticated”? Turns out to be a pipe dream of Audiophiles who want to enforce a standard of recording and delivery quality on an industry that has no $incentive$ to be forced into such a standard. MQA does not change that (it just plays on the dream). DSP? No can do.

What of the “average” or regular musical consumer? He is perfectly satisfied with 192 (or lower) mp3/AAC. Indeed, he has long ago ripped his 16/44 CD collection into this encoding, consciously and on purpose! He has neither asked for nor wants “Hi Res” let alone all the DRM baggage of MQA.

What of equipment manufactures and suppliers such as Roon, what’s in it for them? Do DAC manufacturers really want to give up their ability to innovate and their distinctiveness to an “end to end” black box which requires NDA’s and other restrictions? They will if they have to, but why would they want to? Is Bob’s invention really an end game “we’ve done it! We have taken digital audio as far as it can.”? Even if there is a possibility that this is not true, why sign on to closed format?

What of the industry, where is the value for them? Well, they tried the “dumbed down” mass (read batch) conversion of MQA on Tidal, but is that actually increasing Tidal subscriptions, or sales? Do they really need a yet-another partner/tax on their supply chain? Well, they are desperate and seemingly willing to try anything. Their commitment to a Video like DRM “solution” to control their rascally customers who are somehow ruining them? Well, now we are getting to their actual motivations as Robert Harley has argued. Is this enough for them to actually cooperate and force an MQA only encoding delivery across the big three and/or in streaming?

Where is the value?

[erich6]

@andybob

The Roon devs have spoken in the past about doing something different to others as regards MQA and were pleased with the outcome of negotiations.

Thanks @andybob. This put a smile on my face

[wklie (Peter Lie)]

@crenca

Why would the consumer subject themselves to the DRM that MQA is in its current form, to say nothing of future changes (at the whim of MQA and/or it’s partnering DAC/Software firms)

Because it’s free for existing Tidal HiFi subscribers, or at no additional cost over their lossless tier. The Tidal desktop app is also free, so users can at least get free MQA Core decoding. Pricing can change in the future, but the present is more important for the users. When something is free, they can enjoy it for as long as it lasts.

@crenca

What of equipment manufactures and suppliers such as Roon, what’s in it for them?

We received customer and dealer requests for supporting MQA since Tidal provided it at no additional cost. (If it were $40 per month then the situation may be totally different.) We try our best to support whatever format designated by streaming service providers. Hypothetically if Tidal or Qobuz switches to some other format, we’ll consider supporting them too.

Tidal is the only streaming service that is integrated into Roon. Look at how many users here requested for MQA and for how long.

You may dislike MQA or Tidal, but my interpretation is that Qobuz offered Sublime+ only in response to Tidal Master. Prior to that Qobuz only offered purchases of Hi-Res albums, and allows Hi-Res streaming if and only if the user has purchased that particular Hi-Res album with the Sublime (no +) subscription. So, in a way, you have Tidal and MQA to thank for the availability of Sublime+ Hi-Res FLAC streaming in at least some parts of the world.

[Off topic: Responding to customer demand is important, if this is not obvious. Recently, another hi-end manufacturer who dismissed DSD and said it was inferior to PCM for many years, recently provides a DSD upgrade.]

[macrog (Andrew)]

I suppose what I cant understand is why does and has Roon talked about decoding MQA as if it is just around the corner and not delivered. I took the talk of it by Roon as being a committment by Roon that they would deliver it a timely manner. Clearly not the case. The talk of MQA by Roon and the impression of the imminence of Roon decoding it does add perceived value to the Roon product.

If there was an alternative quality alternative to Roon I would have already changed to it.

[crenca]

Peter Lie,

I had to give you a like. Your reply to “why would consumers subject themselves to the downsides MQA” with “because its free!” really brought a smile too my face

It reminded me of that Monty Python skit where one old lady asks another, “What is it?” “It’s a piston engine” “Why did you buy it”, “because it was a bargain!”