TIDAL to add 'millions' of Master Quality (MQA) Tracks

[4367]

Chris, although you are on the opposite side of my viewpoints, I do respect your determination. I’m sure you make a loyal friend.

[Chrislayeruk (Chris)]

Thank you for that… appreciated

[SKBubba]

FLAC already has an embedded hash.

[killdozer (Brutalise me with music)]

Indeed it does, it’s usually (only?) MD5 but that’s fine for testing for corruption. Where better to put it than with the content it’s there to validate? Networking protocols are pretty good at testing for such things as well.

[killdozer (Brutalise me with music)]

Oh, and nothing lights up, that might be a problem for some

[euge_lee]

@Xekomi

I signed up for Tidal and that is a monthly sunk cost for me.

Two Roon endpoints have MQA capable DACs. One is a $149 iFi Zen and the other is a $129 iFi Hip. I got them before I knew what MQA was so I didn’t pay a “tax”, I paid what I paid. Even if MQA added $10 to the cost, yeah, I don’t care.

The other 4 endpoints don’t do MQA. But the music sounds great out of them as well for me.

My Tidal music is “DRM” already because if I cancel my Tidal, I can’t listen to anything from them anymore. That’s fair and fine with me.

This is why I don’t understand the DRM arguments when the one only real way to get MQA is from a monthly paid subscription streaming service.

[euge_lee]

@Peter_Bruderer

Now we have the fact, that you can easily save the music you download. Basically you copy the record without buying it. Today I can crawl through the TIDAL Library and creating a copy of everything they got. Even the HiRes stuff, which is basically the master copy. Today I can copy and save all music I stream. Basically I get hold of the master copy.

Are you talking about “illegally” making downloaded copies of music from Tidal’s library such that you can have the files to listen to without a Tidal subscription? If so, not sure what to say since it’s violating the Tidal TOS.

@Peter_Bruderer

The infrastructure established with MQA allows now to digitally sign and encrypt the music, so you can only play it in HiRes, if you got a matching device. This is only controlled so far today, that DAC manufacturers have their devices checked by MQA to comply with the license agreements. You as a consumer can copy the MQA file and play it on every MQA capable device. It sounds very similar as the master copy.

I have no issue with the requirement you need a MQA decoder and/or renderer to get the “high res”… put aside your feeling on if it is truly high res or “crippled”… it’s not any different from needing a SACD player to play that format.

@Peter_Bruderer

Now look 5 years into the future. MQA becomes widespread. Then, with the technology embedded in MQA, it is easily possible to apply short living certificates. In other words, you can play it on decent hardware for one week in HighRes. After that period you can only play it in LowRes or theoretically you can make it impossible to play it at all. Until you pay again.

Again, so long as I’m paying for Tidal, the files will play. If they come out with some weird “limited number of plays in high res” or whatever it is you’re referring to, I’ll need to reconsider if Tidal is the right service for me.

@Peter_Bruderer

But as soon as MQA got enough marketshare they can flip the coin. The tried to do it already several times. It never really worked. This is another approach.

Sure, maybe MQA can “flip the coin” but again… this is a subscription service that I pay to Tidal, not MQA. Terms can change… just like how Google Music went away and became YouTube Music… I decided it wasn’t for me and I moved on. But even in that example, it was “rented” subscription music… I no longer pay so I no longer have access to what Google provided me… that’s fair.

[killdozer (Brutalise me with music)]

You can buy MQA downloads on Tidal and MQA CDs are a thing. I like to own the music I like, streaming catalogues can be a little ephemeral. Once I’ve bought MQA content I need to pay for licensed hardware for any endpoint I want to access the best quality copy. If I exercise consumer choice and buy something non MQA it’s the lower quality first unfold at best. Using technology/licensing to restrict my reproduction quality is DRM. It’s not just copy prevention.

[euge_lee]

@Peter_Bruderer

Additionally here is the patent which describes it:

A method of providing a streamable PCM signal allowing conditional access to a lossless presentation of an original PCM signal, the streamable PCM signal having the same sample rate and bit-depth as the original PCM signal and providing a controlled audio quality when played on standard players, the method comprising the steps of:

• reversibly degrading a representation of the original PCM signal in dependence on degradation information for degrading the original PCM signal;
• embedding the degradation information into the representation using a method of lossless watermarking;
• creating a token in dependence on additional information; and,
• inserting the token into the degraded representation to provide the streamable PCM signal.

But isn’t by definition, necessary for any streaming service? Forget Tidal, let’s look at Spotify… you sign up for their standard lossy 320kbps service… then you upgrade to an imaginary “Spotify HiFi Premium” where you get lossless versions. Isn’t it OK for Spotify to have the means to “unlock” the better versions using technology and “tokens” authorizing this… but once you cancel your HiFi Premium plan, you go back to the inferior lossy version?

If all of the access is predicated on me having a valid paid subscription… I don’t see the issue here.

[euge_lee]

@killdozer

You can buy MQA downloads on Tidal and MQA CDs are a thing. I like to own the music I like, streaming catalogues can be a little ephemeral. Once I’ve bought MQA content I need to pay for licensed hardware for any endpoint I want to access the best quality copy. If I exercise consumer choice and buy something non MQA it’s the lower quality first unfold at best. Using technology/licensing to restrict my reproduction quality is DRM. It’s not just copy prevention.

I wasn’t’ aware Tidal sold MQA downloads. I’ve heard of the concept of MQA CDs but didn’t think it was really a thing yet.

But yes, fine, let’s say you “can” buy MQA downloads and MQA CDs… simple solution… just don’t buy them. I’m not a huge fan of MQA but I don’t mind it… I actually just let Roon do first unfold because right now, I’m playing around with DSD upsampling but that’s beside the point.

If I was going to BUY anything and not just stream from my Tidal subscription, I would buy DSD or FLAC and not MQA… it is too new and too “hotly controversial”…

But the whole hoopla arguments about DRM and MQA just doesn’t make sense for Tidal Streaming… which is 99% of MQA consumption today. The fear of some collusion in the music industry to “sneak in DRM then one day spring upon us a new paradigm where everything breaks”… it’s their content… it’s their perogative. They can do it today if they wanted without MQA… they can go back to good ol’ Microsoft “Plays For Sure” or whatever it was called, but the market won’t tolerate it, so I don’t worry about it. It’s a straw man, fake-hypothetical argument.

The only valid argument I see is… “MQA isn’t high res to me and I don’t like it”… to which I say… fine, go find an alternative you enjoy.

If then the response is “well, MQA is taking over, even Qobuz is sneaking in MQA files”… to that I say… take it up with Qobuz so they can take it up with their supplier. See what Qobuz is promising with their service offering and if they’re violating it, deal with Qobuz.

[Xekomi]

@euge_lee

This is why I don’t understand the DRM arguments when the one only real way to get MQA is from a monthly paid subscription streaming service.

Except it’s not, as @killdozer explained.

@euge_lee

let’s say you “can” buy MQA downloads and MQA CDs… simple solution… just don’t buy them.

In some cases, you already don’t have the choice. To take a big release, Run The Jewels’ RTJ4 is 24/48 on Qobuz, and 24/96 MQA. As far as I know, there’s no way for me to purchase 24/96 unadulterated FLAC. Likewise, Brittany Howard’s Jaime is a 24/48 MQA, and a 24/44 Qobuz download.

You can argue that who cares about HiRes for a super-produced rap album, and I’d agree, but that’s missing the point, which is consumer choice.

@euge_lee

the market won’t tolerate it, so I don’t worry about it.

The market didn’t tolerate the last attempts, which doesn’t mean it won’t tolerate this attempt. I’m sorry, but I don’t owe BS, his vulgar cronies, or his South African cigarette empire heir master anything, and I don’t want to have to give them money. I’ve already been forced to do so once (when Roon implemented MQA), I’d rather not have to do it again. What’s complicated about that ?

@euge_lee

If then the response is “well, MQA is taking over, even Qobuz is sneaking in MQA files”… to that I say… take it up with Qobuz so they can take it up with their supplier. See what Qobuz is promising with their service offering and if they’re violating it, deal with Qobuz.

What part of “in some cases, there is no choice” is ambiguous ?

[Peter_Bruderer]

I have no problem neither to pay my subscription fees. I pay already more for higher resolution. I pay more for the streaming service because of the higher resource requirements.

Not so with MQA. MQA is a value chain. I pay again a premium on top of the premium. I pay a premium for the device to play the same music I can play without MQA. And the musician get’s no cent more.

[Chrislayeruk (Chris)]

My MQA equipment has cost me nothing above what I would have bought anyway. Meridian and Bluesound. So, nope I haven’t paid a premium. I subscribed to Tidal before MQA also and that price has not risen. In fact I had a cheaper annual deal…
The musicians get more plays from me as I actively look for MQA content as it sounds better.

[euge_lee]

@Peter_Bruderer

Not so with MQA. MQA is a value chain. I pay again a premium on top of the premium. I pay a premium for the device to play the same music I can play without MQA. And the musician get’s no cent more.

And you can buy a $100 DAC or a $20,000 DAC… I hear that the $20,000 DAC sounds better. What’s the point?

The MQA file plays without any special equipment. If you don’t like the sound of it, go to Apple Music or Amazon HD.

[euge_lee]

@Xekomi

I’m sorry, but I don’t owe BS, his vulgar cronies, or his South African cigarette empire heir master anything, and I don’t want to have to give them money. I’ve already been forced to do so once (when Roon implemented MQA), I’d rather not have to do it again. What’s complicated about that ?

It’s not. Just go to whatever service or source for your music that meets with your ideals. I don’t see why you are blaming MQA. Someone out there is probably making 8-track versions of albums. I don’t want it, so I’m not using it. I’m not campaigning against them.

If Walmart replaced CDs with these 8-tracks, I would stop buying music from Walmart. I’d go elsewhere, not spend time on forums complaining about 8 tracks or Walmart.

[Peter_Bruderer]

@euge_lee

I hear that the $20,000 DAC sounds better.

That’s worth another discussion and that is off topic here.

[Xekomi]

@euge_lee

Just go to whatever service or source for your music that meets with your ideals.

There are places in the world where there is already no option, places where you can’t get Qobuz for example. I realise that such a concept may appear to be shocking, but such places do exist. The only solution then is to pay to illegally access Qobuz (I know how nuts this sounds, but that’s the reality of rights management: often, the reason you don’t get Qobuz in your country is that Qobuz doesn’t have distribution rights to the catalog).

@euge_lee

I don’t see why you are blaming MQA.

I’m not blaming MQA Ltd. for anything, I’m pointing out the fact that they have monopolistic aims.

Because I’m not completely stupid, I realise that it’s easier to bring attention to that while they’re hatching rather than when you’re faced with a 40 foot rabid t-Rex fuelled by billionaires and multinationals. If MQA Ltd’s ownership hadn’t been mendacious about pretty much everything, every single step of the way, then I’d possibly have a different attitude. But because they’ve been obfuscating, lying, and bribing their way around the audio world from the very start, I don’t believe it is healthy to give them the benefit of the doubt in any way.

@euge_lee

I’d go elsewhere, not spend time on forums complaining about 8 tracks or Walmart.

Do you really need me to explain that in your analogy, Wallmart’s plan is to replace all CDs, everywhere, with 8-tracks, and it’s a credible threat ?

[acbarn]

Thanks, Chris. I appreciate that and understand your motivation more clearly now.

[kwangomango]

The Tidal 44/16 MQA of Dr Dre’s ‘The Chronic’ sounds terrible compared to the 96/24 on Qobuz. In this instance i can only assume Qobuz has a better quality mastering as i haven’t heard such a large difference before.

[Dave_Richardson]

That can’t be true as, according to a number of people here, MQA ALWAYS uses the best Master. Authenticated, no less.