Warner Music signs long term MQA licensing deal

Is it me that has the wrong end of the stick here, or is 192/24 in a lossless FLAC file, absolutely equal to the same resolution in MQA, that is assuming that MQA compression and decompression is perfect enough to deliver no audible loss of information?  If so, it exists purely to reduce file sizes, simple as.  Yes?  In which case, I don't need it, do I?  The way the press talk about it seems to suggest that it is in someway superior in terms of the end result than a non-MQA studio master delivered as a FLAC, or even a WAV file.  As far as I can understand that is not so, it's just the latest form of data compression and reconstruction, allegedly with none of the draw-backs of MP3 and alike.  It does neither capture, or reconstruct, information that non-MQA mastering would not.  Is that right?

The basic MQA thesis is that in order to serve convenience, formats including Red Book have sacrificed subtle timing information in the encoding process, leaving music sounding flat and lifeless.

Based on a better understanding of how the brain works, MQA have been able to develop algorithms that fold the extra timing information in to the file, while keeping sizes reasonable. The result according to MQA "a realistic 3D soundscape in our minds"

In practice they achieve this by remastering the original material. When they know the ADC used in the studio, they match it to the corresponding algorithm. This gives the best results. For music where the ADC is unknown they will analyse the file and apply the best algorithm. Finally an MQA DAC is able to unpack the extra information in the home or on our mobile devices. This is why they claim to offer better audio quality at any size/bit rate.

I've been to a demo and very much liked what I heard. That said the hardware was unfamiliar, as was much of the music. Until we hear it in familiar surounding on familiar equipment it is too early to judge imo.

Irrespective of how good MQA is or isn't, I'm very encouraged. We now have a major record label commited to improving audio quality. When was the last time that happened? DSD was stillborn and hi-res is a mess. Post LP music has been a slave to convenience. This feels like the first step, that could halt or even reverse that trend.

In related news. In Q1 2016 streaming was the biggest source of revenue for Warner. Streaming is reality and any new formats need to address that.

Technically I still can't claim to understand what is going on with MQA very well, but I suppose I should not be so cynical about these things.  Your point about the demise of quality in pursuit of convenience is a good one, and we should indeed be thankful that this is at least an attempt to take things in the direction, bringing better quality for the modern world of streaming. 

And yes, streaming is a reality, very much so.  As my handle might suggest I stream music a lot via internet services.  However, it is also true that the ability to stream damn near anything and everything, has lead me to purchase more music than I have done for years.  I've been a subscriber to Qobuz Hifi since it launched in the UK, and for quite a while I was of the opinion for my need to own music no longer existed, unless it wasn't available to stream.  However, when they nearly went bust, I began to realise that potentially a whole bunch of newly discovered favourite albums could be taken away at any moment, at least made unavailable at the quality I was used to.  Since then many of said albums have been purchased and in hi-res format where available.  And thanks to Naim and a full system upgrade that's taken place since I first signed up to Qobuz, I can not only hear a benefit in hi-res recordings, but also redbook streamed from my NAS; both seem to outperform the same album streamed over the internet in lossless FLAC format.  

Internet streaming in one form or another I am in no doubt is here to stay, and the music industry needs to embrace it, improve it, prosper from it, and not fight it.  I guess Warner are now leading the way on this.  

GregW posted:

The basic MQA thesis is that in order to serve convenience, formats including Red Book have sacrificed subtle timing information in the encoding process, leaving music sounding flat and lifeless.

Based on a better understanding of how the brain works, MQA have been able to develop algorithms that fold the extra timing information in to the file, while keeping sizes reasonable. The result according to MQA "a realistic 3D soundscape in our minds"

In practice they achieve this by remastering the original material. When they know the ADC used in the studio, they match it to the corresponding algorithm. This gives the best results. For music where the ADC is unknown they will analyse the file and apply the best algorithm. Finally an MQA DAC is able to unpack the extra information in the home or on our mobile devices. This is why they claim to offer better audio quality at any size/bit rate.

I've been to a demo and very much liked what I heard. That said the hardware was unfamiliar, as was much of the music. Until we hear it in familiar surounding on familiar equipment it is too early to judge imo.

Irrespective of how good MQA is or isn't, I'm very encouraged. We now have a major record label commited to improving audio quality. When was the last time that happened? DSD was stillborn and hi-res is a mess. Post LP music has been a slave to convenience. This feels like the first step, that could halt or even reverse that trend.

In related news. In Q1 2016 streaming was the biggest source of revenue for Warner. Streaming is reality and any new formats need to address that.

+1 .. that too is my understanding .. very well explained.