Sep 03, 2017, 09:37 am
Copyright holders have a problem with the CD, it's a digital master DRM-free format.
When the specs of red book were created at the end of the 1970s, there was no internet as today and hard drives have only a few MBs, so it was considered secure.
When filesharing and CD ripping tools got mainstream, 20 years later, they saw their error, and since that moment they have tried to kill the CD. First they tried non-red book CDs, then the rootkit malware, but nothing worked. The problem was the CD itself, it was just too good (for users).
They needed a new format, the SACD. It was designed with hardware and software DRM. Encripted data, licensed-only hardware, copy protected. It didn't work, for many reasons: format wars, premium price tag, new hardware needed, etc. But the main problem was that, to get backward compatibility, it has a CD layer: it had what they were trying to kill. For the SACD to work, they would have to eliminate CD completely. Stop producing CDs, and only DSD layered SACDs. But they didn't have the guts.
But now, finally, they have figured it out. A new format, MQA. And this time it's gonna work.
First, it's lossy, so no more giving lossless masters to the masses. Of course, they say it's lossless, and the container will be FLAC (and FLAC is lossless isn't it).
Second, it's a DRM format. You'll need licensed hardware to authenticate the files.
And don't think they are going to kill the CD, they will continue to produce CDs, only they will be MQA-CDs (at a premiun of course).
This is not only the end of the CD, but of the idea of the CD too: a lossless DRM-free format. It's a new paradigm. Do not think that you are going to download 24/96 "studio masters" anymore (not that they are not watermarked anyway), or stream lossless anymore. Everything will be MQA, at a premium. The entry level will be mp3.
The marketing is the same as always: high res, "digital sounds digital", analog warmth, etc; so the people that have bought that garbage to disregard the CD are now incapable to articulate any coherent argument against MQA. It's funny to see how high res vendors, seeing they are going to be thrown out of the market, are now lamenting about how "MQA is bad for music". Pathetic.
As for hipsters, they'll just buy some MQA DAC to brag about how analog sounds ( though not as good as vinyl!).
As for users, it's necessary to make a distinction between the people who fell for that marketing bullshit (mere consumers), and the users which see this as a cultural battle against neoliberalism. Mainstream music will switch without even noticing it.
Some people disregard any discussion just saying "no one is forcing you to use it", "don't buy it if you don't want it", etc. They don't understand that there will be no different options to choose from. That's the problem of seeing everything as a commodity, you lose perspective.
And for filesharers, as myself, I've always thought that the archiving work we do will be more appreciated in time when DRM-free music will be nothing but a distant memory.
When the specs of red book were created at the end of the 1970s, there was no internet as today and hard drives have only a few MBs, so it was considered secure.
When filesharing and CD ripping tools got mainstream, 20 years later, they saw their error, and since that moment they have tried to kill the CD. First they tried non-red book CDs, then the rootkit malware, but nothing worked. The problem was the CD itself, it was just too good (for users).
They needed a new format, the SACD. It was designed with hardware and software DRM. Encripted data, licensed-only hardware, copy protected. It didn't work, for many reasons: format wars, premium price tag, new hardware needed, etc. But the main problem was that, to get backward compatibility, it has a CD layer: it had what they were trying to kill. For the SACD to work, they would have to eliminate CD completely. Stop producing CDs, and only DSD layered SACDs. But they didn't have the guts.
But now, finally, they have figured it out. A new format, MQA. And this time it's gonna work.
First, it's lossy, so no more giving lossless masters to the masses. Of course, they say it's lossless, and the container will be FLAC (and FLAC is lossless isn't it).
Second, it's a DRM format. You'll need licensed hardware to authenticate the files.
And don't think they are going to kill the CD, they will continue to produce CDs, only they will be MQA-CDs (at a premiun of course).
This is not only the end of the CD, but of the idea of the CD too: a lossless DRM-free format. It's a new paradigm. Do not think that you are going to download 24/96 "studio masters" anymore (not that they are not watermarked anyway), or stream lossless anymore. Everything will be MQA, at a premium. The entry level will be mp3.
The marketing is the same as always: high res, "digital sounds digital", analog warmth, etc; so the people that have bought that garbage to disregard the CD are now incapable to articulate any coherent argument against MQA. It's funny to see how high res vendors, seeing they are going to be thrown out of the market, are now lamenting about how "MQA is bad for music". Pathetic.
As for hipsters, they'll just buy some MQA DAC to brag about how analog sounds ( though not as good as vinyl!).
As for users, it's necessary to make a distinction between the people who fell for that marketing bullshit (mere consumers), and the users which see this as a cultural battle against neoliberalism. Mainstream music will switch without even noticing it.
Some people disregard any discussion just saying "no one is forcing you to use it", "don't buy it if you don't want it", etc. They don't understand that there will be no different options to choose from. That's the problem of seeing everything as a commodity, you lose perspective.
And for filesharers, as myself, I've always thought that the archiving work we do will be more appreciated in time when DRM-free music will be nothing but a distant memory.
