Anti-MQA extremists: “MQA is the work of Satan.”
Pro-MQA extremists: “MQA will deliver us from all evil.”
Most other people: “What’s MQA?”
14 Likes
Sorry, Jeff, I hadn’t read this before my previous post. A very convincing argument!
I thought we were over DRM in music. Once this lock-in is cracked like all the previous popular DRM schemes (see CSS, AACS, HDCP, etc), I will merely not care about it instead of being hostile toward it.
I think I don’t fully understand the DRM aspect of this. How am I being prevented from playing MQA music due to DRM? I can play MQA through systems that do not have MQA abilities. Am I missing the point?
2 Likes
My understanding is that you need their proprietary algorithm to do the first unfold. While that math is obfuscated, your files are not fully decodable. Without their “keys” you don’t have control of the contents of the music you bought.
Roon does the first MQA unfold (decoding).
That’s very interesting but still puzzles me a little. I own an MQA album which sits on my computer. I am able to stream this via Roon to my Naim Atom as MQA, but more puzzling to me is that I’m also able to stream it just fine directly from my computer to a Sonos device using the Sonos app and it’s own mesh architecture. Where does the DRM feature in this scenario?
Sure, and iTunes used to decode FairPlay DRM’ed files. And the Zune used to decode PlaysForSure DRM’ed files. But ask people how to play the purchased tracks that have PlaysForSure DRM on them.
Just because there is a solution today, doesn’t mean there will be one tomorrow. See HDCD.
I’m not sure of the ins and outs of MQA but it was my understanding that you can stream a reduced quality version (3 bits removed effectively) without the first unfold. But I could very easily be wrong about that.
Still, it’s DRM’ed music and is inherently a bad idea.
Sheldon
1 Like
There is no DRM in MQA, it plays anywhere on anything. The level of quality is determined by your DAC and system
Yes you do, you have an MQA DAC if you are interested in MQA. It will play fine through a normal DAC
It’s not DRM’d as you can play it on anything.
From Wikipedia:
" MQA-encoded content can be carried via any lossless file format such as FLAC or ALAC hence, it can be played back on systems either with or without an MQA decoder. In the latter case, the resulting audio has easily identifiable high-frequency noise occupying 3 LSB bits, thus limiting playback on non-MQA devices effectively to 13 bit."
So it’s playable, but significantly degraded. Sure sounds like it’s locked down to me.
Sheldon
This is another way of saying that you don’t get access to the highest fidelity copy without paying for licensed hardware. DRM isn’t just about the ability to render a version of the file. It covers any technology that controls or restricts the use of content. Restricting access to the best quality copy without proprietary hardware/software seems to qualify.
Well, I’ve played it undecoded and never noticed any degradation. Just because something is on Wikipedia doesn’t make it true.
So I can post this
Also know that I repeated this same experiment with the AURALiC Vega DAC. No MQA software on its XMOS chip but also no FPGA silicon and no Ted Smith code. Instead an ESS Sabre decoder. And guess what? Same result: MQA sounds better than hi-res even when the DAC chip doesn’t see north of 48kHz when faced with MQA source files.
So round and round we go.
In the end, it doesn’t matter what people post here knocking MQA and trying to justify their concerns. People all over, ordinary music lovers, are loving MQA.
You get the CD quality and you are not paying anything to stream the file anyway.
If I buy a Blu Ray Disc. Guess what? I have to buy a Blu Ray Player and then if I want multi channel surround, I need a decode/ processor, speakers cables etc…
If I want to watch color TV, I use a color TV. If I wanted black and white, I would not purchase a color TV. I use Tidal Masters MQA, so I purchased two MQA capable DACs. My main listening system is a non-MQA Oppo 203 and Bose, but using Roon MQA decoding, it sounds every bit as good as Qobuz.
Again, if you don’t want to use MQA, DON’T USE MQA.
1 Like
This topic has been rehashed so many times, including by me, that even I am tiring about posting on it (!) But alas, one last time…
The point Jim, is not whether you want to listen to MQA or not. Have at it! Enjoy it! If you like MQA that’s great.
The point that @DrTone, I and others have made in many prior posts, and the reason why so many people are anti-MQA, is that:
(a) MQA is trying to force the studios to release in this format at the expense of true lossless high res formats. In other words, “I” am affording you the opportunity to listen to MQA all you like, but “you” are trying to restrict what I want to listen to;
And
(b) MQA markets their format to the public as the “Master,” which it is definitely not. So, said more directly, they are lying.
2 Likes
Don’t use it then. Studios will use what they want. Nobody is forcing anything. These arguments are silly.
2 Likes
I don’t.
But again, that’s not the point.
That is the point. Supply and demand. If people don’t use MQA it will die. Bitching about it on the internet probably does nothing. If everyone drops Tidal because they use MQA…Evidently a lot of people like it and use it.