Linn Forums

Current time: 2017-12-13, 13:52 Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Linn Forums / Linn Music Systems & Hi-fi Separates / Network Music Players & Music Streamers v / MQA looks bad for music. Let me explain.

Post Reply 
MQA looks bad for music. Let me explain.
2017-11-09, 12:13
Post: #101
RE: MQA looks bad for music. Let me explain.
(2017-11-09 11:34)Tin Wrote:  
(2017-11-08 22:39)kelly200269 Wrote:  
(2017-11-07 20:38)BB1 Wrote:  
(2017-11-07 18:48)Jacques Barriere Wrote:  http://fairhedon.com/2017/11/05/an-inter...ian-lucey/

Thanks a lot for sharing this link, Jacques!
Here we go again...
Interestingly, Bob Ludwig has the polar-opposite opinion of MQA, as can be seen in interview at the MQA YouTube channel.
https://youtu.be/1iF9_3DLEbk
Why don’t you lot of ‘flat earthers’ just shut up about MQA? Wink I mean, it’s not like you can even listen to it properly on your Linn streamers? You’re all beginning to sound a LOT like Ivor when CD was first launched. Hang on... Did Linn produce any CD players after that...?? Rolleyes
Personally I think that potentially, MQA has a lot going for it, and I can definitely hear a perceived benefit. Through my Lumin.
So, unless you can actually listen to MQA through MQA approved equipment, I would respectfully suggest that you stop knocking it. Because you have no justification to do that. Because you can’t hear it. Period.
Next... Wink
I don't want a perceived benefit.
I don't want a lossy format.
I don't want a nasty DRM.

If you really want to benefit, test your 'MQA approved equipment' against a DS(M) in the same price range using a CD-rip and see which one sounds better.

You are allowed to your opinion and vent it, and so are we. We even have given Meridian a fair chance in this thread and they blew it, read the parts by 'Arthur Dent'.
I don't agree with Linn on every subject either, and there have been some head-on collisions with certain employees, but they have never told me to 'shut up'.
I haven't told you personally to 'shut up'. The comment was made collectively (with a wink!) to the forum, to highlight the fact that 'you' (in a collective sense) can't justifiably criticise something (like MQA) unless you have had the opportunity to utilise it, evaluate and then form an opinion on it.
If you don't 'want' or 'need' MQA, then that's fine. But no-one can credibly criticise MQA SQ without first evaluating it.

And whether or not MQA is 'bad for music' is a completely different, but related topic. This is a different issue to the perceived SQ benefits (or not) of MQA. Only time, and industry experience with the format will answer this question.

LP12 (Valhalla & Cirkus), Ekos, Adikt, Majik Kontrol, Majik C4100 x 2, Linn Silvers, Aktiv Majik 140's (Upgraded Bases), Majik 126, Denon DCD-A100 SACD, Lumin D1, Lumin L1, Chord 2QUTE
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-09, 12:54
Post: #102
RE: MQA looks bad for music. Let me explain.
(2017-11-09 11:57)Jim Collinson Wrote:  
(2017-11-09 11:09)kelly200269 Wrote:  But I'm sure the music industry would argue that MP3 and AAC downloads have kept the music industry buoyant at a time when sales of physical media are falling year-on-year.

I'm sure you'll hear a range of views on this from the industry. Many would claim, via file sharing, MP3 was very destructive to the music industry as it used to be constituted.

(But then again, you'll need to define what you mean by 'industry' I suppose.)

It's had positive and negative effects, but there isn't really and doubting that MP3, the internet and the sharing/streaming landscape, has seen revenue that's lower overall, concentrated on a smaller and smaller pool of artists and (predominantly major) labels.

As I stated in my blog, MQA aims to further consolidate this, lock it down, and extend its tentacles it deeper up and down the production chain. To the detriment of music as a whole.
Yes, I truly do appreciate what you say. Consolidation in any industry could be a bad thing for diversity, choice and creativity.
It's been going on in the music industry for years now, with UMG, Warner, Sony etc consolidating their 'portfolios', and acquiring smaller labels.
But the channels by which music is purchased and 'consumed' have also consolidated, through Google Play, Apple Music, Amazon etc.
Whether or not MQA will contribute to that consolidation is an interesting debate.
At the same time, I think there will always be 'room' for smaller labels, like Linn. I do hope that these smaller labels don't get 'squeezed' out of the market. I don't think they will, as long as they are offering good quality music at competitive prices. Plus with digital distribution channels, the overheads of distribution will be contained.

LP12 (Valhalla & Cirkus), Ekos, Adikt, Majik Kontrol, Majik C4100 x 2, Linn Silvers, Aktiv Majik 140's (Upgraded Bases), Majik 126, Denon DCD-A100 SACD, Lumin D1, Lumin L1, Chord 2QUTE
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-09, 18:42
Post: #103
RE: MQA looks bad for music. Let me explain.
For me the best approach is the one followed by the Desperate Bicycles in the late 70s - forget the music industry - there was music before there was a music industry & it there be music when the music industry has gone.

Desperate Bicycles cut & distributed their own records when the convenience of digital recording was not even on the horizon.

Several of my favourite artists sell direct or work through smaller labels that care about them & their music. They don't think of it as the music business.

So for me there is no need for MQA, Tidal, Google Play or Apple Music - and when a piece of software starts recommending what I should listen to next: I roon for cover.

Ray Davies says it much better than me




Digital Juke Box & KLP12 into KK/1D+KCT through SD9s
MDSM3 through MG12s
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-09, 19:59
Post: #104
RE: MQA looks bad for music. Let me explain.
(2017-11-09 12:13)kelly200269 Wrote:  
(2017-11-09 11:34)Tin Wrote:  
(2017-11-08 22:39)kelly200269 Wrote:  
(2017-11-07 20:38)BB1 Wrote:  
(2017-11-07 18:48)Jacques Barriere Wrote:  http://fairhedon.com/2017/11/05/an-inter...ian-lucey/

Thanks a lot for sharing this link, Jacques!
Here we go again...
Interestingly, Bob Ludwig has the polar-opposite opinion of MQA, as can be seen in interview at the MQA YouTube channel.
https://youtu.be/1iF9_3DLEbk
Why don’t you lot of ‘flat earthers’ just shut up about MQA? Wink I mean, it’s not like you can even listen to it properly on your Linn streamers? You’re all beginning to sound a LOT like Ivor when CD was first launched. Hang on... Did Linn produce any CD players after that...?? Rolleyes
Personally I think that potentially, MQA has a lot going for it, and I can definitely hear a perceived benefit. Through my Lumin.
So, unless you can actually listen to MQA through MQA approved equipment, I would respectfully suggest that you stop knocking it. Because you have no justification to do that. Because you can’t hear it. Period.
Next... Wink
I don't want a perceived benefit.
I don't want a lossy format.
I don't want a nasty DRM.

If you really want to benefit, test your 'MQA approved equipment' against a DS(M) in the same price range using a CD-rip and see which one sounds better.

You are allowed to your opinion and vent it, and so are we. We even have given Meridian a fair chance in this thread and they blew it, read the parts by 'Arthur Dent'.
I don't agree with Linn on every subject either, and there have been some head-on collisions with certain employees, but they have never told me to 'shut up'.
I haven't told you personally to 'shut up'. The comment was made collectively (with a wink!) to the forum, to highlight the fact that 'you' (in a collective sense) can't justifiably criticise something (like MQA) unless you have had the opportunity to utilise it, evaluate and then form an opinion on it.
If you don't 'want' or 'need' MQA, then that's fine. But no-one can credibly criticise MQA SQ without first evaluating it.

And whether or not MQA is 'bad for music' is a completely different, but related topic. This is a different issue to the perceived SQ benefits (or not) of MQA. Only time, and industry experience with the format will answer this question.
Most reactions, and certainly the initial post, in this thread are about MQA being bad for music, its DRM, the false claims made by both MQA and Meridian, the guerilla tactics by Arthur Dent the salesmanager from Meridian etc. etc. etc.

My personal interest is in the DRM mostly, as I have a very strong interest in security, privacy, ownership and freedom, although I must say I find MQAs archaic approach of using 13 and 17 bit also very amusing. Bandwidth and disk space aren't relevant issues in 2017 anymore, so the lossy format of MQA is fixing a non existent issue.
To me, being an IT guy that is hilarious.
The DRM part however is not. Read Jims original post again and you'll see why.

I have absolutely no intention to listen to MQA on MQA approved equipment. I really couldn't care less. I hardly ever listen to different equipment anyway, its really not my hobby. The last time I went to an HiFi show was in.. 1985 I think.
Besides, what good would it do? I don't want their DRM just like I don't want SACDs either.

For me it is clear that the music industry should focus on releasing more 24/96 and 24/192 FLACs, and that they should stop compressing the life out of music.
That article from that mastering engineer? I agree with his assessment on MQA making false claims, but I certainly do not agree with his mastering techniques.

Tin can telephone system.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-10, 07:16 (This post was last modified: 2017-11-10 07:16 by timster.)
Post: #105
RE: MQA looks bad for music. Let me explain.
(2017-11-09 18:42)Wat Wrote:  <snip>

So for me there is no need for MQA, Tidal, Google Play or Apple Music - and when a piece of software starts recommending what I should listen to next: I roon for cover.

<snip> (by the way, embedded videos don't work. You have to provide the URL link instead).

I agree with your stance on MQA. But the others, even if they are part of the industry, have opened up a whole world of music that otherwise would be unknown to me. In fact, probably the main reason I have re-invested in a top-end HiFi.
Even if they are just ways to discover, they serve a very useful purpose. When I find something new I want to buy, I always try and find it on bandcamp first though (which is also more artist-centred).

And was the "roon for cover" a deliberate pun? Wink

Akurate EDSM | Majik ExaktBox-I [on Custom Design iRAPs] | Majik 140, REL T5
Rega RP1, [QNAP HS-251+, Jitterbug, MinimServer, Asset], Kazoo [Linx1010]

AV: Marantz NR1506 | B&W 620(C), M1(S), REL T5 (LFE) | Fronts powered by Linn
Net: NetGear DGN2200 | GS108 | AQ Forest x3

Hello to Jason Isaacs
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-10, 15:46
Post: #106
RE: MQA looks bad for music. Let me explain.
Funny how playing many HDCDs non decoded sound great but when I play all MQA non decoded music, it is bright to the point of killing mosquitoes. With decoding activated it's only OK and far earth shattering for the cost demanded per MQA album. They should sound great non decoded and SCARY once the LED goes on.

Music nut with variety
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-10, 23:32
Post: #107
RE: MQA looks bad for music. Let me explain.
The assumption here appears to be that Linn owners don't have the means to listen to MQA properly decoded. Accepted, though Linn kit doesn't do that, I would argue that the assumption is a bit far fetched. Whilst you're no doubt correct that the noisiest people will argue against without ever having heard MQA, it would be unwise to apply that to everyone.

ADs/2 -> Klimax Exaktbox/1 -> Silvers -> 2xKCT/D -> K200 -> Ninka
Exaktbox Sub - BK Sub
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-10, 23:47 (This post was last modified: 2017-11-10 23:50 by Wat.)
Post: #108
RE: MQA looks bad for music. Let me explain.
(2017-11-10 07:16)timster Wrote:  
(2017-11-09 18:42)Wat Wrote:  <snip>

So for me there is no need for MQA, Tidal, Google Play or Apple Music - and when a piece of software starts recommending what I should listen to next: I roon for cover.

<snip> (by the way, embedded videos don't work. You have to provide the URL link instead).

I agree with your stance on MQA. But the others, even if they are part of the industry, have opened up a whole world of music that otherwise would be unknown to me. In fact, probably the main reason I have re-invested in a top-end HiFi.
Even if they are just ways to discover, they serve a very useful purpose. When I find something new I want to buy, I always try and find it on bandcamp first though (which is also more artist-centred).

And was the "roon for cover" a deliberate pun? Wink

Thanks Timster- this was the link (Please Click HERE)

A few years back I used to use MySpace to hear new music & then buy CDs. I think bandcamp is very much better than Tidal as it’s music enthusiasts promoting musical artists rather than entrepreneurs who are, to quote Frank Zappa, only it for the money.

My concern with Tidal is the artist gets next to nothing from sale of their music. I’m biased, of course, as I don’t care for subscription services from large global concerns. I prefer smaller concerns like Fledg’ling, Sunbeam or Topic, where it is all about the music & the artists.

My natural paranoia means I feel Tidal & its like, market music. As with Google searches being seeded, they will aim to push titles in which they have a vested interest. Whereas the Internet luld give an opportunity for the next generation’s Desparate Bicycles to get a hearing.

Sometimes I’m optimistic about new music when I hear Jackie Oakes, Basia Bulat or Current 93 & other times I’m pessismistic when it seems it is more important to get the image & choreography right than the music.

I’m not a Roon fan either - I really don’t want links to reviews. If I really want to know who sings backing vocals on Carla Bley’s Escalator over the Hill I can find out on Wikipedia. Most of the time though I just want to listen to an album. I don’t tend to jump from track to track.

I am a fan of Linn though as it makes it simple to play & enjoy music.

But in the final analysis, I am normal & want my freedom, I know I’m normal ‘cos I dig Bert Weedon (Vivian Stanshall).

All the best, Wat

Digital Juke Box & KLP12 into KK/1D+KCT through SD9s
MDSM3 through MG12s
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-21, 12:57
Post: #109
RE: MQA looks bad for music. Let me explain.
Additional

Bandcamp seems rather different ... I was able to hear some great music by Peter Daltrey (ex-Kaleidoscope, Fairfield Parlour, I Luv Wight: almost exactly 50 years since his first Kaleidoscope album called Tangerine Dream). There is an option to buy as FLAC or order the CDs: no subscription required.

https://peterdaltrey.bandcamp.com/album/...y-download

An excellent song writer who for his solo work sounds like a cross between Bob Dylan & Medicine Head (a mix that works surprisingly well).

Thank you, Timster, for the info.

Digital Juke Box & KLP12 into KK/1D+KCT through SD9s
MDSM3 through MG12s
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-21, 14:28
Post: #110
RE: MQA looks bad for music. Let me explain.
(2017-11-21 12:57)Wat Wrote:  Additional

Bandcamp seems rather different ... I was able to hear some great music by Peter Daltrey (ex-Kaleidoscope, Fairfield Parlour, I Luv Wight: almost exactly 50 years since his first Kaleidoscope album called Tangerine Dream). There is an option to buy as FLAC or order the CDs: no subscription required.

https://peterdaltrey.bandcamp.com/album/...y-download

An excellent song writer who for his solo work sounds like a cross between Bob Dylan & Medicine Head (a mix that works surprisingly well).

Thank you, Timster, for the info.

I am a fan of bandcamp, but it is so eclectic and vast, I do find it hard to navigate. I usually just rely on the feeds these days. You can play a whole album (in mp3) for nothing, so maybe Linn could consider integration into Kazoo...

Akurate EDSM | Majik ExaktBox-I [on Custom Design iRAPs] | Majik 140, REL T5
Rega RP1, [QNAP HS-251+, Jitterbug, MinimServer, Asset], Kazoo [Linx1010]

AV: Marantz NR1506 | B&W 620(C), M1(S), REL T5 (LFE) | Fronts powered by Linn
Net: NetGear DGN2200 | GS108 | AQ Forest x3

Hello to Jason Isaacs
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)