Apple, in rolling out OS 11, may be the beginning of the end for MQA

MQA Truth · Sep 15, 2017

With iOS 11, Apple has introduced native FLAC handling on it's devices.

According to industry insiders, this may signal the end of MQA.

Lossless streaming services currently keep both a FLAC and ALAC copy of an album on their servers.

Eliminating the need to store an ALAC copy would free up un-measurable server space.

The MQA big selling point to lossless streaming services was the savings in data storage.

Now these services can stream full, true lossless FLAC up to 24/19, and still save tons of money. (MQA only works
up to 24/96, anything beyond that is upsampled).

So, before you invest in an "MQA" ready DAC, you may want to reconsider, and buy
the best sounding DAC, as opposed to one that caters to marketing buzzwords.

asiufy · Sep 15, 2017

Can you point to some proof that streaming services store FLAC and ALAC copies of albums?

My, you're really looking for ANYTHING to disparage MQA, aren't you?

Native support just means you'll be able to add your FLACs to your iTunes/iPod/iPhone music library, while before, you had to convert them to something else.

So, with that in mind, and seeing as MQA files are actually encapsulated and distributed as FLAC files, this move will actually BENEFIT MQA, since when/if Apple decides to adopt MQA too, the wrapper format (FLAC in this case) will be supported already, while before it would've forced MQA to supply files in AIFF or ALAC format.

MQA Truth · Sep 15, 2017

asiufy said:
Can you point to some proof that streaming services store FLAC and ALAC copies of albums?

My, you're really looking for ANYTHING to disparage MQA, aren't you?

Native support just means you'll be able to add your FLACs to your iTunes/iPod/iPhone music library, while before, you had to convert them to something else.

So, with that in mind, and seeing as MQA files are actually encapsulated and distributed as FLAC files, this move will actually BENEFIT MQA, since when/if Apple decides to adopt MQA too, the wrapper format (FLAC in this case) will be supported already, while before it would've forced MQA to supply files in AIFF or ALAC format.

-I know for a fact that lossless streaming services must currently keep copies in both formats for their Apple/Android user base.
This is not up for debate.

-Apple will never support MQA. I really don't think you understand how the distribution of MQA works.

I suggested educating your self about the streaming business before getting too worked up.

asiufy · Sep 15, 2017

Ah, so you know it for a fact, and that's it? OK then!

DaveyF · Sep 15, 2017

A question for all----
Will the new iOS be able to stream large files that sound as good as the MQA files that I heard on the MSB DAC at the demo? If, that is the case, then the usefulness of MQA will certainly be diminished, IMO.
What would be very interesting would be to compare an MQA file---up sampled from 16/44 and an exact same file simply up sampled to 24/196.

mauidan · Sep 16, 2017

DaveyF said:
A question for all----
Will the new iOS be able to stream large files that sound as good as the MQA files that I heard on the MSB DAC at the demo? If, that is the case, then the usefulness of MQA will certainly be diminished, IMO.
What would be very interesting would be to compare an MQA file---up sampled from 16/44 and an exact same file simply up sampled to 24/196.

How can anyone comment on iOS 11, when it hasn't been released yet?

You seem to be double clutching; you've heard a MQA demo by an outstanding member of the Hiend community and now you can't get your thoughts back on the road to musical enjoyment.

DaveyF · Sep 16, 2017

mauidan said:
How can anyone comment on iOS 11, when it hasn't been released yet?

You seem to be double clutching; you've heard a MQA demo by an outstanding member of the Hiend community and now you can't get your thoughts back on the road to musical enjoyment.

They can comment on what the expected result will be.

I have never stated ---and boy I guess I have to continue to state this--- that I was not impressed by the difference in the SQ between the MQA file and the standard file at that demo...
What has that to do with my later questioning the process of MQA???? Why don't you tell me!

Sablon Audio · Sep 16, 2017

mauidan said:
How can anyone comment on iOS 11, when it hasn't been released yet?.

iOS11 has been available to public in beta format for some weeks. Is pretty easy to register with Apple’s beta testing program and my 11yr daughter has been running it for a month.

rbbert · Sep 16, 2017

DaveyF said:
They can comment on what the expected result will be.

I have never stated ---and boy I guess I have to continue to state this--- that I was not impressed by the difference in the SQ between the MQA file and the standard file at that demo...
What has that to do with my later questioning the process of MQA???? Why don't you tell me!

Now I'm really confused; I thought you were impressed by MQA??

still-one · Sep 16, 2017

MQA Truth said:
With iOS 11, Apple has introduced native FLAC handling on it's devices.

According to industry insiders, this may signal the end of MQA.

Lossless streaming services currently keep both a FLAC and ALAC copy of an album on their servers.

Eliminating the need to store an ALAC copy would free up un-measurable server space.

The MQA big selling point to lossless streaming services was the savings in data storage.

Now these services can stream full, true lossless FLAC up to 24/19, and still save tons of money. (MQA only works
up to 24/96, anything beyond that is upsampled).

So, before you invest in an "MQA" ready DAC, you may want to reconsider, and buy
the best sounding DAC, as opposed to one that caters to marketing buzzwords.

No its not. In almost every case the MQA tracks sound better than the 16/44 FLAC versions and again in many instances as good as the Hi Rez versions on other sites. The hi -rez comparison is harder to get a handle on since there are not as many duplicate versions of these albums.

You really have no clue about MQA.

FrantzM · Sep 16, 2017

DaveyF said:
They can comment on what the expected result will be.

I have never stated ---and boy I guess I have to continue to state this--- that I was not impressed by the difference in the SQ between the MQA file and the standard file at that demo...
What has that to do with my later questioning the process of MQA???? Why don't you tell me!

Color me confused too.

M'Truth

MQA Truth said:
-I know for a fact that lossless streaming services must currently keep copies in both formats for their Apple/Android user base.
This is not up for debate.

-Apple will never support MQA. I really don't think you understand how the distribution of MQA works.

I suggested educating your self about the streaming business before getting too worked up.

Can you point toward the source of your "fact" ? For .... education purposes?

C.A.P · Sep 16, 2017

Yet another Ill fallow for truth or dare !

PeterA · Sep 16, 2017

DaveyF said:
They can comment on what the expected result will be.

I have never stated ---and boy I guess I have to continue to state this--- that I was not impressed by the difference in the SQ between the MQA file and the standard file at that demo...
What has that to do with my later questioning the process of MQA???? Why don't you tell me!

DaveyF, I thought you and the entire audience were in universal agreement that the MQA files sounded much better than the standard files in that demo. Is that not also Alex's position? What do you mean now that you were NOT impressed by the differences?

MQA Truth · Sep 16, 2017

FrantzM said:
Color me confused too.

M'Truth

Can you point toward the source of your "fact" ? For ... education purposes?

http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2017/06/native-flac-support-coming-to-ios-11/
"Did someone say “MQA”? Tidal presently store duplicate files for each of their 35million+ tracks: one in FLAC and the other in ALAC for iOS users. Apple picking up FLAC could see Tidal slash their data storage bill down the middle."

I know this to be a fact having heard it directly from Tidal engineers first hand on numerous occasions. Hope this helps.

MQA Truth · Sep 16, 2017

still-one said:
No its not. In almost every case the MQA tracks sound better than the 16/44 FLAC versions and again in many instances as good as the Hi Rez versions on other sites. The hi -rez comparison is harder to get a handle on since there are not as many duplicate versions of these albums.

You really have no clue about MQA.

Stop...before you make a fool of yourself.

MQA Truth · Sep 16, 2017

PeterA said:
DaveyF, I thought you and the entire audience were in universal agreement that the MQA files sounded much better than the standard files in that demo. Is that not also Alex's position? What do you mean now that you were NOT impressed by the differences?

What they heard was an older set of Redbook master files processed with MQA's proprietary digital filte, then returned in a 24 bit, 48 Khz container.

This provided a euphonic sweetening of the files, that "impressed" the group.

Ask why no native high resolution recordings, of which McGrath has many, were not used.

PeterA · Sep 16, 2017

MQA Truth said:
What they heard was an older set of Redbook master files processed with MQA's proprietary digital filte, then returned in a 24 bit, 48 Khz container.

This provided a euphonic sweetening of the files, that "impressed" the group.

Ask why no native high resolution recordings, of which McGrath has many, were not used.

Interesting. I don't recall having read a WBF post detailing the information about what they actually heard at that demo. I just read a wrap up report about the LA Audio Show in TAS in which the reviewers also described being extremely impressed by this Peter McGrath demo. This must be the same one that DaveyF attended.

treitz3 · Sep 16, 2017

Gentlemen, we are all adults here. Please soften your tone while talking to each other. It does absolutely no good for anyone when snide comments are made.

Let's tone it down a notch and have a cordial discussion moving forward, shall we?

Tom

caesar · Sep 16, 2017

Personally, I have only heard mqa on tidal, so I am not sure if the "m" files sound good because mqa is better or if they sound better because files were remastered. Yet people's experiences aside,

(1) why such hate for MQA? are they lying or misleading? are the "audio journalists"/ reviewers lying about something (again)?
(2) why can't there be 2 (or more) competing distribution mechanisms for streaming?
(3) how many people in the world actually care if new music gets recorded in mqa? I think it's minutest fetish in the audiophile community (even smaller than DSD fanatics, who are too stubborn to hear good pcm). Guys seem to get a bigger rise from cables and stillpoint-type footers in this hobby, not recording formats...

DaveyF · Sep 16, 2017

PeterA said:
DaveyF, I thought you and the entire audience were in universal agreement that the MQA files sounded much better than the standard files in that demo. Is that not also Alex's position? What do you mean now that you were NOT impressed by the differences?

Ok guys, please re-read what I wrote...

I said "that I have NEVER stated --and boy I guess I have to continue to state this--that I was not impressed by the difference in SQ between the MQA file and the standard file at the demo".

Therefore, I WAS impressed and still remain consistent with that opinion...

Apple, in rolling out OS 11, may be the beginning of the end for MQA

Banned

Industry Expert/VIP Donor

Banned

Industry Expert/VIP Donor

Well-Known Member

Member Sponsor

Well-Known Member

Industry Expert, VIP Donor

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads