Not so buddy - I am stating my choice and pointing that choice is not up for a debate here as it purely subjective. You seem to want to have the last word - so be it.
1 Like
There is a huge difference between preaching and being skeptical. Hitchensās razor applies here. As he originally stated: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
8 Likes
The issue here is that there is precious little evidence either way. And there is no clear focus by the anti MQA lobby targeting any single weakness in the MQA case. They havenāt been able to put together an argument of any real coherence and they themselves have failed to present any real evidence to debunk MQAās claims. There is only so many times you can post a link to an interview with someone in the industry telling you why he personally does not like MQA. And the truly indicative thing about this is I donāt think anyone has come out and said a definitive no to MQA in the industry. They are all falling in line or fence sitting because ultimately this wonāt be about MQA being better, itāll be about wether they will lose out commercially if they fail to adopt.
2 Likes
Absolutely. The challenge with the anti-MQA lobby is that this isnāt Betamax vs VHS or DTS vs Dolby. With both of those you had competing companies pushing competing technologies. If it turns into MQA vs DSD then history says āDonāt back the Sony oneā¦ā.
But this isnāt a company vs a company (or group of companies). It is a company vs a group of individuals who donāt have a financial agenda to push. They donāt have a competing technology to get behind - it is more about freedoms. These days you canāt buy Betamax. You canāt get a movie that isnāt encoded with Dolby. To the consumer āso what?ā - but for movie distribution it means all cinemas are kitted out with Dolby kit, all DVD players can decode it etc. And MQA is the same. It isnāt a technical argument, and it isnāt a coordinated argument. It is more a case of not wanting a company to become pervasive and then be able to dictate how we consume music or have the power to shut out new technologies as they emerge (or just acquire them). It is less āwell what is the alternative to MQAā and more āWhat alternatives could we have had if theyād been given the chanceā.
Edit: Personally I am not keen on MQA. Just as I am not keen on digital cameras having proprietary RAW formats. That is my opinion. Opinions arenāt generally right or wrong - theyāre just that. Opinions. Problem comes when folks confuse their opinion for fact and then want to convert the world.
I think this is a little overstatement. History predicted VHS worn over Betamax not on itās quality but mass adoption. DSD has been around since SACD was launched in 1999. I was so amazed by sound quality I got a legendary Marantz SA-1 SACD player, since then Iāve been listening to Hi-Res recordings even up today. I donāt see why we shouldnāt embraced a proven technology instead of jumping into unknown format that has caused so much of heated arguments.
As I said, thereās no perfect sound forever, Sony and Philips have laid the fundamental grounds of digital audio from CD to SACD and Hi-Res mastering. So guys, we have it NOW, so enjoy the music!
I was being flippant and trying to lighten a heated topic (Sony backed Betamax, Sony backed DTSā¦). But point taken.
Competing tech? FLAC streaming? I think thatās alive and kicking.
Thereās a Super-VHS Sony unit in my closet. I am not sure how I got that, I am pretty sure I have never played a VHS tape in it. 
I hope higher quality mastering and streaming is in our near future, MQA or not. Thatās all I want.
Yes. But who is āFLACā? With Betamax vs VHS you had companies going against each other. Ditto DTS vs Dolby. MQA vs FLAC? Who is āFLACā?
So my point is it is companies against people. This isnāt a technical debate like Dolby vs DTS where each side wheels out technical evidence to support their claims. This is more a moral debateā¦ why have they chosen - like Dolby did - to license hardware, software, mastering etc. MQA could be 100% hardware. Or 100% software. Why did they choose to make it both?
I donāt know what it is about MQA but this thread has gone massively off-topic (again).
Any more news about the first unfold in Roon?
Not yet. When there is an announcement it will probably close this thread, so if itās still open then youāll know thereās no news yet.
3 Likes
Thank you, @andybob. Perhaps someone should start a āLetās argue about MQAā thread somewhere else that I can just ignore to stop this thread getting polluted again.
1 Like
I suspect if that happened, everyone would go over to that thread insteadā¦
If we are going to keep this thread true to its subject, then it should be about 4 posts.
This here is the most dangerous thing about MQA. Non Dolby innovation has completely stopped in the video space because of this monopoly by Dolby. I fear the future with another Dolby.
8 Likes
I have no problem with that, mpd. Thatās what different threads are for.
I think one difference is the continued rise in bandwidth (except in Australia of course, where we are doing Fibre to the Nuff-Nuff meaning you have toā¦ donāt get me started).
Eventually MQAās streaming efficiency will be less significant. I think compressed FLAC hi res can already match it. The recording companies will probably be pleased to sell us all further formats again.
3 Likes
As long as it is audiophile quality fibreā¦ 
1 Like
I have fibre to the home. Im not gloating. Honest.
1 Like
NBN is da bomb (not) - Nothing Bloody New
Lol yeh Iām on a 100mbps plan, except from ~5pm to ~9.30pm, itās an ~8mbps connection.
Outside of those hours I do actually get 100mpbs! Except Iām not home to use it outside of those hours lol.
Itās a common complaint. I think itāll improve as this CVC crap gets sorted and they purchase more of it for peak hour traffic.
Way off topic but @andybob started it 
1 Like