If you prefer Tidal with MQA, you could ask them to start streaming everything at 22khz mqa rates. Tell them you'll pay double for it.
Tidal class-action
MQA declared bankruptcy. I smell the fear of a class action lawsuit against Tidal. We could do that. Tidal has 8 million subscribers, we don't know how many or how long they all were paying double by subscribing to the 'nobody can prove Tidal has any tracks higher than 44.1khz' plan. They probably have lots of people on phones who haven't even heard of MQA who trust them and wanted the one that sounds better. They're right not to have to listen to any talk about MQA if they want the plan that sounds better.
MQA means you can't prove the file is an original copy or not. That Beethoven track you like it says is 192 could actually be Dua Lipa at 11khz.
The bankruptcy move was probably to protect themselves from Tidal, who is the receiver of people's funds.
- ...
- 80 posts total
The great thing about forums is that you don't have to read all the threads of stuff you're sick of. If you think mqa works, ask why your processor can only handle the first unfold to 96, and then you need another cheap chip, that has to be in your dac, for some reason, to make it able to go to 192 and beyond, with the same sized 44.1 stream. |
Streaming is the price of 1 album, 1 higher res album if you get a higher res plan (unless you get the Tidal mqa plan, which upsamples from 44.1). If you listen to more than that, or especially if you want to explore new music to find out what to buy, streaming is great, though automatically inferior in sound output quality compared to files. |
@mitch2 +1. good point! "...sold it to many of us, and nobody can prove it is exactly what they say it is? That doesn’t sound so different from most of the audio tweaks we buy." |
- 80 posts total