I have no clue at all what that means. “My” approach, real reason, what? Is it another new conspiracy theory?
It helps to actually read these posts before writing?
I said “use the Roon unfold” because @j_a_m_i_e was complaining about the hypothetical of losing Qobuz, being stuck with only MQA in Roon, and having an elaborate home setup with multiple endpoints and a possibility of additional expense to provide end stage MQA hardware. Using the Roon unfold without an MQA DAC solves the problem without more expense. @ john answered the same thing the same way, and suggested adding an inexpensive MQA renderer as a final step. This is all about keeping Roon if Qobuz is gone. If you don’t care about Roon or Roon hasn’t integrated more services, or you’re not happy playing local high res files with Roon, than do any of the other options you like - Apple,Amazon, Spotify, Deezer, HighResAudio, Bandcamp, Primephonic.
I’m quite surprised to see someone from Roon quoting the MQA marketing material.
@john: as you are very well aware, this statement is a bold faced lie:
“Master Quality audio is the only format that guarantees music fans that they are listening to the original master recording – exactly as the artist intended the track to sound.”
This, like the majority of MQA statements, is demonstrably false.
But this is precisely and demonstrably what MQA is trying to do: replace a superior, free, open format, with one that is inferior, proprietary, and rent-seeking.
If that weren’t the case, no one would care about MQA. The fact that they lie about their format, and lie to the public and the studios is the problem.
Authentication has always been primarily about seeing that the streaming service and user’s DAC didn’t change the bitstream or add processing.
The MQA website makes a point of saying that files can be signed off by the artist, producer, or label (under Bob-Talks, Provenance), and all three occur in differing circumstances. “Artist” in the summary version would be the simplest way of putting it. Not being a recording engineer, I can’t verify the average working arrangements but according to specific mastering engineers, the artist and production group work as a team anyway, so their sign off would be joint. Labels however might encode separately at a later time.
Hahaha, I thought MQA is already dead in the water… Ever since Apple music and Spotify announced lossless streaming. Ironically, they never been truthful in the beginning and that’s why it has been a mess in the audiophile circles. I’m happy to listen whatever it takes. if the music industries are moving away from this, it is a sign of failure.
The purpose of the light is then, not achieved. There have been tests showing that 30% of the file can be altered and the blue light illuminates.
Room has been given dispensation to apply EQ and then re-enable the blue light authentication.
It is great that Roon can do this but illustrated the farcical nature of the little blue light.
In all areas of sound, the key benefits of MQA include:
Clearly mostly false, since multi-track recordings may not be using the same encoding.
Encoded audio files are always decoded by matching decoding.
MQA attempts to make proprietary currently open HD-Audio formats.
I’d hate to fill my landfills with wasted data. There are cases where 44.1/16 have been MQA encoded creating wrong-sized data.
This is a key feature? I am not sure this is even a coherent statement.
What the hell is “last mile” technology?
Neil Young does not agree. He demanded that Tidal remove his work precisely because they had altered his masters.
This little blue light indicated that up to 70% of the file is intact.
I have downloaded numerous tracks from HDTracks, no bits are missing or altered.
And yet parted with Bob Stuart well before this, because he could not obtain exclusivity with MQA. Assemble these words in order: ‘Axe to grind he has an’….
