MQA - Time for a rethink?

[ElTel (Tel)]

But zero legal action from mqa themselves - your hypothesis remains a possibility.

[AndyR (Andy)]

@ElTel

But zero legal action from mqa themselves

Are you sure? Have we heard from the golden one lately?

[ElTel (Tel)]

@AndyR

Have we heard from the golden one lately?

You have a point. Maybe he’s been disappeared… See - we told you it was a conspiracy!

[DrTone (Jeff)]

@4367

Good luck. I think Bob needs to spend more money on defense to turn the tide of public perception.

I’m not sure it can be done at this point. He’s tried the environmentally friendly angle already. They won’t get into the technical IP of MQA so they lay in their bed.

[ElTel (Tel)]

He has not been banished to the salt mines! He intends to respond according to this:

MQA is Vaporware

[anon11710408]

Wow 900+ pages. Does Tidal really only have ~4 million subscribers? Ouch.

[Richard_Graham (rdg)]

@Magnus_Back

It’s clear Goldensound was lying for personal gain. His result are not valid and the response from MQA shows why.

Having read the MQA response, in the cold light of day, it was helpful to have the lies so clearly outlined. I imagine any defamation specialist lawyer would have an easy task, and if I were the author I would be rather concerned. Also, given the growing trend for platforms to be held more responsible for content, I wonder how liable AS would be for promoting it.

I think the personal gain issue is interesting too, as the Centre for Countering Digital Hate has undertaken interesting research on the commercial models that underpin some disinformation, which, of course, usually targets beliefs and values.

My own sense of this is that if anyone thinks the tone of the response is ‘passive-aggressive marketing drivel’ they do not understand what has been carefully crafted for further legal scrutiny.

And it starts with a lie.

[Richard_Graham (rdg)]

@Xekomi

thanks, corrected.

Ditto.

@Xekomi

I will say I’d find our resident MQA fans to be a bit less contempt-worthy if they made the effort to directly engage with the author of the video instead of passive-aggressively reposting marketing drivel.

I may have a reading comprehension problem because it was not clear to me, in the sequence of posts who you were referring to. Given that your comments appeared to be a response to Chris dropping in the MQA response, I had assumed you considered his actions a ‘reposting marketing drivel’? In your previous post you had replied to him? I’m sorry if I have misquoted you, but it is a little confusing if you move from a specific reply to a more general comment on those that like MQA.

@Xekomi

clearly the crowd that this blog post addresses, that they have a PhD in Stuart drivel

My point is that the structure and wording of the MQA response was not written for anyone who likes MQA, or for the purposes of reposting, or for any forum where MQA is debated. It has the tone of something beyond ‘marketing’.

[4367]

If Mqa gets lawyers involved to shut down contrarion views, my crystal ball tells me that the perception of Mqa might even be worse that what it is now…Mqa vs the people.

I can see the headlines now, Bobby and Mqa sue 105 year old deaf Spanish man. Master Quality Assurance. Suing the snot out of people, to get their message right.

Mqa is bad for music, like the proposed super football league is bad for football(soccer). I’m getting that on a t-shirt.

(Bobby, please don’t sue my dog. She’s 11. But for a Rottweiler she really doesn’t have too much time left. I’ve already told her not to post about Mqa. She knows that I’m serous because I talked to her in a stern voice. Thanks Bobby, I appreciate you not suing my dog. And I should point out, she is a huge fan of rangers)

My crystal ball tells me I will be disappearing very shortly.

[Richard_Graham (rdg)]

@4367

I can see the headlines now, Bobby and Mqa sue 105 year old deaf Spanish man.

You might want to check the warranty on your crystal ball.

But I do like the fact that no-one is disagreeing with MQA that the author of the video has lied.

[4367]

Ok guys my family and I are safe. We have went underground in a undisclosed location. There is no way that a huge multinational can sue my dog now for “wrong think”.

Ok, I gotta run, word is Bob is so upset that he signed Joe Pesci to break knee caps wide open.

Please spare any warm wishes as a huge multinational has deep pockets for all types of bullies and thugs

Be safe.

[killdozer (Brutalise me with music)]

@Richard_Graham

But I do like the fact that no-one is disagreeing with MQA that the author of the video has lied.

I’ll disagree I’m not saying that he’s not made a mistake or an erroneous assumption, I really don’t think he set out to deceive. For reference, here’s a big fat lie, point 3 of ■■’s response:

3. Provenance: MQA files are delivered losslessly and reconstruct exactly the sound that an artist, studio or label approves.

Getting lectured by ■■ on integrity is pretty rich. I’m also doubtful any technical claims will see the light of day in court. If they do they’ll be night blind since ■■ has kept them locked in a dark room for so long.

[Wim_Hulpia]

Yeah Goldensound didn’t lie. Maybe some small mistakes like not pausing after a full stop. For mqa a reason to lynch him.

Mqa otoh seems to continue spreading lies. They didn’t remove his tracks. Maybe Mata Hari did?
And they continue talking bs that mqa is lossless because the lossy crap is compressed losslessly.
And that provenance of course. NY didn’t even know they had mangled his beautiful pcm masters. We know what happened when he noticed (and heard!) it.

[Richard_Graham (rdg)]

@killdozer

I really don’t think he set out to deceive.

You have evidence of this? But even if they have not lied, if they have made a mistake, presumably an apology is in order? I wonder when that will be forthcoming.

[Richard_Graham (rdg)]

@Xekomi

Neil Young

Any others?

And didn’t Neil fall out with Bob when Meridian refused him exclusive rights to MQA?

[Wim_Hulpia]

@Richard_Graham

And didn’t Neil fall out with Bob when Meridian refused him exclusive rights to MQA?

Nope. That was a decade earlier.

[Richard_Graham (rdg)]

@Wim_Hulpia

Nope. That was a decade earlier.

I’m not sure I follow…you say ‘nope’, but it was a decade earlier? So there is history to Neil’s relationship to Bob/MQA…which may at least be a factor.

The whole space is riddled with conflicts of interest, competition and personalities…yet it is often discussed as if they don’t exist?

[Richard_Graham (rdg)]

@Xekomi

that’s even more irrelevant than “any others ?

A sample of one, compared with mankind’s ability to hold a grievance over decades…please.

[robbi_burdeck]

econstruct exactly the sound that an artist, studio or label approves.

Well of course that approval can be automated and not all artists care like Neil Young does, or have the control over their work that he has, but here again, let’s not bother people with inconvenient and confusing details. While we’re at it, let’s also not forget that a Mastered for iTunes file has the same level of approval AND is reconstructed as exactly…

Let’s be clear. Bob Stuart’s statement is precisely the case. The RIGHTS HOLDER makes the decision on encoding and approval. That can be either the artist, which is the case for many indies, or it can be the label. That’s the way the music industry works, and there is no way to force a label to re-involve the artist or the mastering studio once those individuals are paid for their work. So MQA does what it can, and they are clear in saying that the label may make the decisions. Let’s not find even more ways to try to invent a conspiracy theory blaming MQA.

With Neil Young’s MQA-encoded files, the path leading to the encoding is probably buried in one of his contracts with his distributor. Maybe the contract isn’t well constructed (common) or something else, but Neil Young can find out how it occurred if he tries.

[robbi_burdeck]

[Moderated] golden sound, is spreading his “small mistakes” all over the internet and you tube, even though he was informed about them before doing so. So he is not acting in good faith and he is knowingly looking for publicity.