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
I think that option is already in the âDevice Setupâ section.
Sorry - I think Iâm wrong. It doesnât look as though the option is there.
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 canât change this behaviour.
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 âHi-Fiâ instead of âMasterâ 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 âFocusâ and âFormatâ
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 âhi rezâ, 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 âaudiophileâ 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.
We added MQA because it was our most demanded feature request by a fair margin. The Meridian history had nothing to do with it.
Are you open to allowing customers to choose the default file type?
Itâs 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 Roonâs 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 âitâs my hi res way or the highwayâ stance currently certainly does not add upâŚ
Roon can respond for themselves. I would just point out that âitâ has nothing to do with contractual agreements with Qobuz, because Qobuz does not support nor does it offer files in MQA format.
Iâm simply asking for a switch like the Tidal client has, hifi or masters. I donât 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.
Indeed - I think that yours is a perfectly reasonable request.
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 QobuzâŚ
I was obviously wrong then. I was aware of the 2L Label although I donât have any of their full albums (I do have some of their free test files) and I donât subscribe to Qobuz. I wasnât 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) âhi resâ when Roon is interfacing with Tidal?
Iâll let Roon answer that one.
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 doesnât therefore make a worthwhile investment.
I donât give a hoot about MQA but have been on the user feature, personas software development interface for decades.
Allowing customers to focus on this or that, except when it comes to MQA, is not about what is or is not âthe mostâ requested, coding time, etc. Curating files based on tags is what Roon does - itâs a core competency and feature.
This is about privileging MQA for reasons that have yet to be stated.
But thatâs your view. Not the majority.
Not sure I follow. Is all the functionality in Roon base on âthe majorityâ? 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?