It’s more the operator not the tool. We are in a world of self produced.
But Chris, to how many of us is that particular issue relevant? Probably very few. Do we have many musicians here…?
But we all listen here. And that’s why the issues surrounding MQA are relevant to US.
Well we listen to what is recorded and if the engineer is forcing the artist to confine to a program, that’s not good for music. 4/4 easy 5/4 awkward…
Shouldn’t your critique of Pro-Tools belong in the, err, ‘Pro-Tools’ thread?
Does that thread exist…? 
I don’t know about “hundreds”, but even most studio genres (Jazz and Classical can {but not always} the exception) go through several A/D and D/A conversions during recording, mixing, and then mastering.
I wonder if some self produced music, particularly in the electronica genre, does not actually have a better/purer/simplified production path, given that much of it stays in the digital domain until the end…
1 Like
Of course !
Where we disagree is part of the rest of your read - bandwidth (and interconnection, and storage) costs are going down. Regarding mobile, 5G is getting rolled out in some European countries, and 4G is often good enough for quite a bit. So while I would’ve wholeheartedly agreed with your “leverage in the market” ten or fifteen years ago, I tend to think that ship has sailed already, and that all that’s left is the quasi-hi-res, not-the-crown-jewels-but-let’s-sell-it-to-suckers angle.
So you can do only two simultaneous DXD streams ? The outrage ! The disgrace ! The shame on Her Majesty’s services for being so backward ! TOTALLY JUSTIFIES SUPPORTING SUPER MP3+ !!! 
(No worries there - I did say European countries, but 5g will happen sooner rather than later for you as well, unless of course one of your PMs decides to organise a vote on 5G, that is 
)
1 Like
I don’t know what sort-of ‘bubble’ you live in, but internet download speeds are still very variable in different countries, and in some countries the average speed is less than 10mbps.
And as for 5G, it’s probably years away from gaining decent market penetration.
So please do your research before posting such tosh 
Which means that MQA, especially in a system with limited internet capability, still has leverage with respect to its application in streaming.
I spend most of my time around megabit connections on a good day, sometimes with > 500ms pings to continental Europe and forced VPN use, the not-for-Netflix-or-the-RIAA-kind, so no bubble there, much the contrary.
I kinda agree with you, but this probably depends on where. It’s cheaper to deploy 5g than it is to pull FTTB/H, at least AFAIK in continental Europe which was what I understood we were talking about. Of course it’s going to be years, but current infrastructure in the developed world isn’t horribly bad - it’s completely anecdotal, but I recently TGV’d through France, comfortably streaming Redbook over cellular from a Plex server, so that’s doable, yesterday, in a giant faraday cage moving at 200MPH…
As far as MQA is concerned, it’s really a question of use scenario, and there isn’t one that makes actual sense that I’ve found, yet. I’m unconvinced streaming HiRes from a train or car is useful, and at home, 10Mbps should still get you a pretty stable 24/192 FLAC stream (though no simultaneous Netflix for little Timmy). Yes, more bandwidth is always better, and so is order of magnitude better compression, but MQA brings neither, as we both know.
1 Like
As someone who lives in a semi-rural area in the USA with “only” 9mbps (and not even this at peak evening use) this is true what you say about the variability of download speeds, but this still is not an argument for MQA. IF a significant consumer base wanted Hi Res (not - only a small small niche is not happy with 320kbs MP3/AAC), and IF streaming companies really wanted to provide Hi Res to them, then they could with free/open 18/96 FLAC compression. This however is not a real problem - no one was solving it with the free/open tool set before MQA came along and tried to convince anyone it was a problem. MQA is about other things…well, one thing: DRM
1 Like
Compared to major music labels like Sony Music, Universal and Warner Music, Qobuz offer all of them in true lossless resolution up to 24/192k. If getting DRM implemented, the above mentioned labels will be the first to jump aboard.
2L is a small label and if it insists streaming on MQA due to DRM alone, then it is questionable. I believe there’s an agreement between 2L and MQA on some exclusive rights when it comes to streaming. Smaller labels like Erato streams MQA on Tidal Master and 24/96kHz lossless in Qobuz Hi-Res.
You can always down-sampled to 176.4k and stream in Qobuz as Hi-Res, there’s virtually no different when it comes to ultrasonic frequency response at 88.2kHz (176.4k sample) vs 176.4kHz (352.8k sample) unless your ears are as sensitive compared to bats!
Haha I just got two comments flagged and erased just for saying MQA is a lossy codec. What a sensitive crew. MQA is the new cable!
Now I get what Zeos meant here (minute 25:20):
Who said I don’t believe in it? It’s technically lossy, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be great.
To be honest, I wasn’t aware about this “mqa war”, and I’m a bit shocked. We are discussing a codec, for Pete’s sake, not the map of Europe in 1919!
Allow me to provide you some enlightment.
THE MQA RESOLUTION IS REAL AND IN THE CASE OF THE 2L RECORDINGS IT GOES UP TO 24 BITS AND 352.8 KHZ WITHOUT UPSAMPLING
And here is a link where you can confirm this, where you can find samples up to 352.8 KHz on PCM and DSD256 of the very same tracks.
1 Like
MQA is lossy. There’s no debate about that.
I think I’ve said that before, somewhere…?
This probably belongs in the “MQA is dissapointing” thread.
Just because 2L record at DXD or whatever doesn’t make their MQA releases DXD. That a track can be bought in MQA and in DXD doesn’t equate MQA to DXD, and that there’s ambiguity as to what the “best” quality is doesn’t make those getting confused idiots, it’s a sign that MQA Ltd is successfully blurring both the norms of language, and of technology. This is not something anyone in their right mind should think highly of.
Anyway, regarding the technological aspects, please remember that writing things in bold, capital letters doesn’t make them correct, so be kind, and humble, and read up on the rather sprawling literature before spreading misinformation or wasting some stranger’s time.
5 Likes
Agreed, posts moved.
1 Like
And then we got evicted…
Who runs this forum? Robespierre?
Given the way things seemed on a steep slope to re-litigating established stuff around MQA (that it’s lossy, that 2nd unfold is just upsampling, etc), with the same 2 or 3 BS fanbois finding a fresh, unsuspecting audience not necessarily versed in the dark arts of parsing MQA Ltd’s mendacious ways, don’t you think quarantining is the saner option for everyone ?
5 Likes
It is indeed a sad story here where people just take literally all the claims and assumed it is actually true. All these are part of marketing to lure people like you.
All it takes is a little understanding how MQA works. I can summarize a few sentences for you. MQA is only good for recording up to 88.2/96k that is because MQA core decoder will unfold all the musical details up to 44.1/48kHz response, and this is done as an approximation (lossy) of the original recording. Subsequent rendering is done with MQA de-blurring filters with over-sampling to match the DAC chip.
In all certified MQA DACs, those can display the sample rates are actually showing the ‘authenicated’ sample when playing back MQA. It doesn’t show the actual sample rate done by the internal DAC chip. So don’t be fooled by this.
You aren’t the first one and definitely not be the last; there are many out there just like you…
5 Likes
Not what several people in this thread below are saying:
I am not sure of your settings on Roon, as you never showed it.
And let me blunt here: you make that DAC sound like the best thing since slice bread. Far from the truth. MQA or not. Having MQA capabilities does not make any DAC magical. Especially if you use a general purpose laptop to stream to it. So hold your horses. I am not anti-MQA, but I do find your enthusiasm overblown to say the least