MQA disappointing

Sure.
But most discussion of physical media being a financial asset is about people ripping them first.
Not cool.

A bit sensitive on this as I’ve made a long career out of intellectual property.
Have had some debates with children of friends…

1 Like

Hahahaaa.

(Sorry)

What are you sorry for?

Being the OP, I see this discussion has wandered from the merits of MQA, but into something more important: the financial treatment of artists. Maybe people like us who value audio don’t need this comment, but for a long time I’ve had a concern about financial fairness to artists, i.e., paying for their work. While I love streaming, I use it with a bit of misgiving in my mind, knowing the pittance artists apparently receive from it, even with a rare entity like Tidal that apparently tries to address this problem. My practice, maybe like others’, is, if I like the music enough from streaming, I buy the CD. Look, I’m not on any kind of moral high horse here, but stealing is stealing. These people who contribute so much to our lives through their work with music deserve to be paid. I conjecture that most of them aren’t really in the high income brackets in this country. Maybe a solution could be some kind of pricing structure for individual listens to a piece of music streaming. So you pay your $20 a month to Tidal, but it records how often/much you listen to each album, and beyond a certain point, you accrue additional charges that go to the artist. There would be a limit to these charges, i.e. the price of the CD, so if you listen more than the point where the charges reach this, there are no more additional charges. In effect, you’ve bought the music. The sad part is that commercially this idea would probably be fatal to providers like Tidal. Maybe they could offer it on a voluntary basis.
Jim Heckman

2 Likes

Hear! Hear!

I try and support the artists who enrich my life by seeing them live (inflated ticket prices, hotel, airfare, etc.), purchasing physical media (vinyl, in my case), and buying lots of swag like t-shirts and such.

1 Like

As long it is bit perfect, you can copy just about anything but that doesn’t mean it is legal to copy. One still need a licensed hardware or software to decode it back. So there’s no free lunch here.

Roon Labs has to pay licence fee to every copy of Roon software whether the user use this feature or not. I would rather have Roon charge an additional fee to those who want to use.

I will be very surprised if they take legal actions because there’s no honest truth in their case; it is already proven beyond doubts that their claims are simply a bad marketing wahoo.

1 Like

Sounds great.

I am not looking for a free lunch. I’m happy to pay for music and do. I know from experience of putting on live artists how much sales and merchandise means to them. There is no free lunch (Unless they come play for us, as we feed them lol). We really do. Lyn’s special egg sandwiches are a house special…
If all the moaning on MQA is about their opinion of a poor marketing statergy, then I can’t see the fuss… get over it, who’s perfect anyway.

Have you ever listened to “Baby I Love Your Way”? Perhaps the streaming companies were offering a public service! :wink:

1 Like

:joy:But that’s not the point…

@Chrislayeruk True! Just having some fun! :yum:

1 Like
2 Likes

Nobody is perfect but if one knows the limitations, do not give false claims in your products; be truthful in one’s forthcoming and let the consumers decide. Of course you support it and I respect, but do your own research and have open mind on things. Beliefs are based on proven testings not on dubious claims.

If their claims are false they can be prosecuted. Why has no one done that yet?

1 Like

Indeed… 10 characters

No need to sue anybody. That is a rather strange idea to sue somebody for their marketing lies.
You must sue 99% of the worldwide companies. And you must start with the pope and his church.
MQA is destroying themselves rather effectively. I have full trust in them.

I am sorry but that is a pretty ineffective answer. if you are accusing people of dishonesty amounting to fraud you should reasonably expect the law to be involved and to take action. The reality is MQA and their parent company are UK based if I am not mistaken. We have a pretty robust system of challenging bad advertising and fraudulent claims in advertising and marketing. In fact a few years back a ruling was made against a company who sells some of the more esoteric hifi performance enhancing bolt on and plug in bits. He had to change his marketing. I would encourage anyone who believes MQA and their representatives are misleading the public to report them to the Advertising Standards Authority in the UK. Identify any published material used in marketing in the UK that you believe to be incorrect or misleading and make the ASA aware. They will look it over and adjudicate if they haven’t already.

2 Likes

I never accused anybody of dishonesty.
That is nonsense.
Although I have some doubts on their marketing strategies. But that is me.
They look to be happy.as they apply their strategy from “the life of brian’.
The spirit of the music lord is with them. Happy people.

So “marketing lies” isn’t dishonesty. OK, I guess we just need to let this saga unfold and allow the people to decide.

2 Likes

It was ( I think) the british ex foreign minister who said something like that: Disonesty ( or was it it honesty) is not in the genes of the British entrepeneurs.
Who am I to argue against that? Or in favor of that?
I am just an astonished observateur.