Nugs' catalog is rife with MQA

Roon Software Discussion nugs
23

That’s a deal breaker for me. I’m surprised Roon didn’t publicize this. What a shame.

@mjw , I’ll respond here, ‘cause it appears I can’t respond elsewhere.
Don’t try to talk me in to a subscription just because Roon wants this to succeed. Roon had Pål Bråtelund pushing MQA for years (and he’s still pushing MQA). Those of us that paid Tidal for “remastered” music quickly realized MQA was nothing more than a batch process encoding that provided no fidelity improvement whatsoever. I won’t go on about the ridiculousness of MQA; I will never pay for MQA again. And Roon knows better than to offer an MQA only Service (no choice not to stream MQA). Give me plain ‘ol FLAC, or give me nothing.
You’re right; as a huge live music lover, I’m the one that will suffer.

EDIT: signed up for Nugs. So far, all MQA. Very disappointed.

IMG_5561
IMG_55611178×1083 117 KB

24

I thought this was about the music, not the format. After all, we are discussing music recorded directly off the concert hall mixing desk. There are some wonderful live recordings on nugs.net, and the last thought on mind is the format. Such a shame to miss out because it’s MQA.

2 Likes
25

It is about the music, but if you’re using Roon at all, you’re likely also interested in sound quality. And one could say that it’s a shame that Nugs has ruined so much of its catalog with this abomination of a codec that does nothing but introduces noise and distortion…

2 Likes
26

MQA is a revelation, not an abomination.

27

That’s right. A revelation of what a greedy and deceitful industry can do.

4 Likes
28

MQA costs you nothing extra.

29

You need to educate yourself. Every sylable of your post is demonstrably false.

1 Like
30

It means you don’t have lossless even though you were sold lossless. It’s theft.

3 Likes
31

Is the principle not the cost. Not everything is related to money.

2 Likes
32

MQA absolutely ruins fidelity. If you want lo-fi you could use MQA. If you want HiFi you want to avoid MQA.

1 Like
33

The problem now if you don’t like it is that you will get MQA without you knowing it. The end to end aspect is gone as is the A and the compression but the ADC technology (FOQUS) s being sold to studios as plug-ins for their mixing software and is being included directly in some ADC chips. So if the studio/engineer etc. wants it you will get it and you will never know as I doubt you will ever hear any problems with it. The user end will be optionally available on devices that chose to implement it (QRONOS) so you will know and have some options around that.

34

Hey, Nathaniel!

I agree about Nugs. But I wish you would find a different descriptor for your headline :laughing:.

Thanks!

Jon Michael Rife

2 Likes
35

It does, indirectly, by charging royalties.

4 Likes
36

I think my headline is just about perfect.

37

my ears are highly educated.

38

interesting. then why doesn’t MQA cost more?

in fact, many sites charge less for MQA downloads than they do for high bitrate FLAC.

39

nope and nope.

40

It makes sense to charge less for lossy. It also makes sense if you want to draw people into an ecosystem that brings in revenue on multiple fronts.

5 Likes
41

Likely because it’s a debunked fraudulent format (vs FLAC being everything that is delivered, lossless)

4 Likes
42

‘twas ever thus.