Prefer Tidal FLAC over MQA option

(Larry Post) #1

Please add an option to change the preferred file type to be FLAC instead of MQA when browsing Tidal albums in Roon and for Roon Radio and/or set the data rate to lesser such as 320Kbps.

I often use Roon for casual listening and would like to be able to save against my monthly ISP data cap when not listening critically.

Thank you

7 Likes
Don’t listen to the naysayers about how MQA is crap
Option to set preference to CD Quality (Tidal)
My DAC clicks when the sample rate changes - How do I turn MQA off?
#2

I think that option is already in the ‘Device Setup’ section.

#3

Sorry - I think I’m wrong. It doesn’t look as though the option is there.

#4

MQA is flac so what you want is to have the cd quality version not mqa. You can change the primary source on any album to be this if you want. But Roon will choose mqa automatically as it is in theory higher quality than standard cd Res flac. As far as I know you can’t change this behaviour.

#5

MQA is not FLAC but wrapped using any lossless wrapper such as FLAC, ALAC or WAV. He is referring the ability for Roon to filter off MQA format from Tidal. In Tidal app, can select ‘Hi-Fi’ instead of ‘Master’ to filter off MQA. For local library, Roon also have the ability to select the format you want and filter off the rest by going to ‘Focus’ and ‘Format’

(crenca) #6

I started a thread about a year or so about this. To summarize, the Roon team is uninterested. They are interested in promoting the false notion that MQA is “hi rez”, as is much of the rest of the industry. The history of the Roon team with Meridian may or may not be a factor here.

Fortunately, it is increasingly apparent MQA is a still born “audiophile” codec of very dubious value. The market is simply not taking it up in any significant way. The Roon team will not be able to privilege MQA in the long run IMO.

2 Likes
(Danny Dulai) #8

We added MQA because it was our most demanded feature request by a fair margin. The Meridian history had nothing to do with it.

10 Likes
split this topic #10

6 posts were split to a new topic: Reasonable definition of ‘hi-res’ music

(Larry Post) #12

Are you open to allowing customers to choose the default file type?

1 Like
(crenca) #13

It’s certainly not a technical limitation. They allow us to choose (focus) in our local libraries, and of course all the tagging is already there from the streaming services.

No, this is a philosophical/marketing decision. It might have something to do with Roon’s contractual agreements with Tidal and Qobuz, and possibly even the labels.

Whatever the reason, for a product that tauts its curating ability to the end user, the “it’s my hi res way or the highway” stance currently certainly does not add up…

1 Like
#15

Roon can respond for themselves. I would just point out that ‘it’ has nothing to do with contractual agreements with Qobuz, because Qobuz does not support nor does it offer files in MQA format.

1 Like
(Larry Post) #16

I’m simply asking for a switch like the Tidal client has, hifi or masters. I don’t hate mqa. I just prefer the sound of the standand flac version more often than not from Tidal.

This only applies to my ears, my system, my room. I see no need for a religious war either and I realize you were replying to crenca and not me, the OP, directly.

3 Likes
#17

Indeed - I think that yours is a perfectly reasonable request.

(Geoff Coupe) #19

Um… yes it does. Qobuz has recently discovered that one of its suppliers, the 2L label, has been giving them albums in MQA-CD format, and these are available in Qobuz…

3 Likes
#21

I was obviously wrong then. I was aware of the 2L Label although I don’t have any of their full albums (I do have some of their free test files) and I don’t subscribe to Qobuz. I wasn’t aware that they had supplied MQA CD files to Qobuz.

However, I still think it to be at best far fetched and a leap in the dark, and at worst propagation of conspiracy theory to suggest that because of this, Qobuz has entered into a contract with Roon which precludes Roon from allowing MQA filters to be by-passed.

then why is Roon resistant to giving its customers a choice when it comes to what is (or is not) “hi res” when Roon is interfacing with Tidal?

I’ll let Roon answer that one.

(Ged) #22

MQA was the most requested feature. I would think that roon can see the stats and see how many people are seeking out MQA tracks, given the number of threads helping identify them, quite a lot.
Roon will invest coding time where bang equals effort.
Switching off the most requested feature doesn’t therefore make a worthwhile investment.
I don’t give a hoot about MQA but have been on the user feature, personas software development interface for decades.

3 Likes
split this topic #23

24 posts were split to a new topic: MQA, 2L and Qobuz

(crenca) #29

Allowing customers to focus on this or that, except when it comes to MQA, is not about what is or is not “the most” requested, coding time, etc. Curating files based on tags is what Roon does - it’s a core competency and feature.

This is about privileging MQA for reasons that have yet to be stated.

1 Like
(Ged) #31

But that’s your view. Not the majority.

(crenca) #35

Not sure I follow. Is all the functionality in Roon base on “the majority”? How many folks use HQPlayer, or DSP? I suspect its a distinct minority. Roon is a veritable plethora of minority choice.

Why is a feature request - one that is already everywhere found in Roon, namely we be given a way to focus on 16/44 as opposed to MQA in Tidal, an issue at all?

1 Like