Nothing please
5 Likes
It is not an opinion it is a prove that the whole âauthorizationâ thing is a big lie.
Why had MQA not published a list of all the artist who really had authorized the MQA version? Would be easy to have all the thousand names in public to prove their claims.
Itâs only MQA studio that is artist or studio approved as the definitive master. MQA is an MQA file that has had the MQA process applied. It probably hasnât been signed off or is not the definitive version. Thatâs always been true⌠Whatâs your beef?
Thesis: proofs 0
Antihesis: proofs 1
Sythesis: (make up your own mind)
Should I quote the dozens of your post that claimed something else for MQA (without the studio addition)?
The beef is that outside of small number of examples (like 2L releases) there is actually no proof that any MQA release is from the original master and âas the artist intendedâ. You repeating that it is true ad nauseam doesnât make it so.
3 Likes
If you like, but we all know the levels of MQA and what they mean, or we should do.
Should normal MQA then not be named MQ or MQNA? Otherwise the name would be misleading, wouldnât it?
1 Like
Of you go, prove it. This is one case where clearly things have gone wrong behind the scenes with communication amongst those whoâs job it is to get things right. It could also be Neil just changed his mind. Thatâs ok, stuff happens. Things have been corrected to Neils satisfaction and we move on.
You can rant here all you like to no consequence but in reality you should take this to MQA, the company, should you feel deceived or at financial loss.
If on the other hand you donât listen to MQA or subscribe to Tidal then just move on. What does it matter anyhowâŚ
Thruth always matters!
Yes, it does, but I covered that. If you read again. Take it up with MQA and TidalâŚ
Gone wrong in all aspects the abbreviation MQA stands for:
M aster: âTidalâs MQA files are not my mastersâ, âTidal falsely labeling my recordings as Mastersâ, âI am not behind itâ, âMy masters are the originalâ
Q uality: âI feel my master files are in no way improved. They are degraded an manipulated.â
A uthentication: âI am not behind it. I am out of there. Gone.â
That is a lot of wrong for a lot of albums (Mr. Young is a diligently artist)!
1 Like
They are not the ones repeating the same disproved claims in this forum on and on.
I am just joining the discussion. Whatever I say, do or believe is of no consequence to the wider world.
So, sure this is a disappointing state of affairs, people somewhere have messed up. No body died and the Music is still out there.
Egos have been massaged and points scored if it matters but it doesnât matter a jot to me.
Neil Young owns his music and can do what he likes with it. He has done so for now. He only speaks for himself as does anyone else.
The dogs bark but the wagon train moves onâŚ
1 Like
If MQA makes a claim that all releases come from studio masters and are as the artist intended, the onus is on them to prove it. They have not. Nor have you.
3 Likes
There is no need for me to repeat myself as itâs just regurgitating the same thing to no avail.
I covered it to my satisfaction, time to move onâŚ
Bookmarked.
Chris, please reassure us that you didnât just state you were content with yourself that you just covered an entire thread in pro-MQA vomitâŚ
3 Likes
Itâs amazing to be considered so important 