MQA Users & Discussion Thread

[davewantsmoore]

21 minutes ago, rantan said:

Let's just hope there isn't an MQA 2.1 with even more egregious plans for the music industry.

The patents, and just the technology in general (even sans patents), exists for it to happen.

• I modify the behaviour of your playback device (undeafeatable by you)
• I modify the content being streamed to you (undeafeatable by you)
• You pay me for the privilege
• My actions my be in your best interests, but there is no guarantee of this, and you have no choice anyways

This is how most big closed "content delivery" platforms work, to one degree or another.

 

It does have some good aspects, but like anything powerful, could be abused.

[davewantsmoore]

2 hours ago, Marc said:

venture capitalists

Yep, this is my understanding, as a proxy for the big music industry players.

 

ie. those who would really benefit from a roll out of the concepts embodied in the MQA patents.

 

eg. the audio industry is dominated end-to-end by software and hardware, which knows what content it is playing, and turns down the quality of content which is unknown, or has not been paid for (or modifies the quality based on various license types).

 

ie. not only an "end to piracy", but a flexible "pay more get more" situation.    Really the last true blocker to this becoming easy/seamless is (micro)payments that are integrated right into the delivery platform.   ie. you can listen to dance money at telephone quality for 0.1 cents, or full quality for 1 cent (and are only billed for the % of the track that gets played)

[tripitaka]

Good riddance.

The consumer was never the intended beneficiary.

[BugPowderDust]

I hope Neil Young buys it and just turns it off. There's no love lost between Neil and Bob Stuart. He's got pockets deep enough to do it for the "funz" too.

[metal beat]

5 minutes ago, BugPowderDust said:

I hope Neil Young buys it and just turns it off. There's no love lost between Neil and Bob Stuart. He's got pockets deep enough to do it for the "funz" too.

 

what did Microsoft do after they bought HDCD?

[Misternavi]

Always have been curious about MQA, but never bothered.  Should I get a Tidal Subscription to listen to MQA before it disappears (My DAC does MQA)?

[MattyW]

I hope it dies yes

[davewantsmoore]

7 hours ago, metal beat said:

what did Microsoft do after they bought HDCD?

Sold 1 billion+ HDCD decoders

[winnor]

I subscribed to TIDAL for 2 years, but I don't have an MQA DAC, and listening to the TIDAL library casually to find what I like is what I aim to do.

[Niktech]

Chris Conniker (Audiophile Style) stated in 2021 that the only real viable option for the sale of MQA would be to sell to Dolby Laboratories . However, he’s recently clarified that position,. With the current success and scalability of Dolby Atmos there’s really 

nothing the MQA patents have  to offer .

 

Dead in the water……

[Volunteer]

5 minutes ago, Niktech said:

Dead in the water……

 

Yeah. We can hope.

 

[StereoNET]

MQA Ltd, the company behind the MQA digital music technology used extensively for TIDAL's Masters library, is going into administration.

View the full article

[TheBlackDisc]

12 hours ago, MattyW said:

I hope it dies yes

 

 

10 hours ago, Niktech said:

 

Dead in the water……

10 hours ago, El Tel said:

 

Yeah. We can hope.

 

 

 

[davewantsmoore]

11 hours ago, Niktech said:

With the current success and scalability of Dolby Atmos there’s really nothing the MQA patents have  to offer .

The MQA IP is a very very different thing to Atmos.

 

I guess I can understand the comment if he means "Dolby won't need/want what MQA have" .... but MQA is a content delivery platform where you control the behaviour of source/receiver to modify the perceived quality of the audio, so kinda not an apples to apples comparison.

[LongSong]

Not surprising given all the opinions and controversy you can find online surrounding MQA.  I've never tried it, but if it adds cost to products and the public are not sure there is real benefit to the extra cost then this is the most likely outcome.

[Niktech]

1 hour ago, davewantsmoore said:

The MQA IP is a very very different thing to Atmos.

 

I guess I can understand the comment if he means "Dolby won't need/want what MQA have" .... but MQA is a content delivery platform where you control the behaviour of source/receiver to modify the perceived quality of the audio, so kinda not an apples to apples comparison.

Chris wasnt comparing apples and oranges, he was referring to the possibility of backdooring the proprietary closed shop nature of the platform to further monetise Atmos.

He was also referring to the scalability of the Atmos codec so no need for MQAair.

 

Apparently, several years ago Meridian sold some IP/technology to Dolby Laboratories that Dolby were keen to work with

Edited April 7, 2023 by Niktech
Clarification

[davewantsmoore]

39 minutes ago, Niktech said:

Chris wasnt comparing apples and oranges, he was referring to the possibility of backdooring the proprietary closed shop nature of the platform to further monetise Atmos.

He was also referring to the scalability of the Atmos codec so no need for MQAair.

The MQA patents/concept are much more than just a "codec" (eg. MQAir).

 

39 minutes ago, Niktech said:

Apparently, several years ago Meridian sold some IP/technology to Dolby Laboratories that Dolby were keen to work with

Do you mean MLP?   That was 20 years ago tho.

[Niktech]

11 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

The MQA patents/concept are much more than just a "codec" (eg. MQAir).

 

Do you mean MLP?   That was 20 years ago tho.

I’m speak generally, Dave. If you want to know  more about the industry speak to Chris or go to Audiophile Style. 

[GregWormald]

Just a heads-up: MQA has gone into receivership.

[drhonk]

58 minutes ago, GregWormald said:

Just a heads-up: MQA has gone into receivership.

I read about it this morning and I'm not surprised by it.

[TheBlackDisc]

https://www.ecoustics.com/news/mqa-bankruptcy/
 

Another (but  similar) take.

Edited April 12, 2023 by TheBlackDisc

[firedog]

MQA has been a money loser from the beginning. It was being propped up by in-laws of Bob Stuart, who apparently got tired of funding another money losing venture of his. 

The IP may be worth something, probably not much. The new BT codec is probably worth more than the MQA stuff at this point. 

MQA has made a lot of noise in the audiophile world, but is virtually unknown among the general public. 

 

There's no compelling reason for it's existence, which is why in reality it's not available anywhere except at Tidal - an extremely minor player in the world streaming market. The other players in the streaming market haven't shown any interest. Neither have many equipment makers, as it just adds cost and complexity for them. 

 

Hopefully the company will be bought by some cold hearted capitalist who wants to make money and who does the logical thing - dumps the MQA thing and tries to sell the streaming codec for use with multi-channel and BT systems. Just don't tell us it sounds better than the original. 

[GregWormald]

It seems to be a money grab at every level of the music chain, and is basically something that nobody really wanted or needed—another lossy compression scheme.

 

Of course it was promoted as something everybody wanted—a way to get closer to the original performance—but extensive testing showed it was actually not that at all, so many people and companies where music came first said "not interested".

[roh008]

Thoughts on what this would mean for Tidal  HiFi streaming service?

Just signed up to a Tidal trial (could it sound better than Apple lossless?) liking what I hear so far. (Don't have a native MQA DAC though)

[Chigurh]

19 hours ago, firedog said:

which is why in reality it's not available anywhere except at Tidal

It's also available from Radio Paradise if you play it through a Bluesound device.