|
Computer Audio Asylum Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies. |
|
|
|
Computer Audio Asylum Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies. |
|
In Reply to: RE: Benchmark weighs in on MQA posted by Archimago on August 19, 2016 at 01:28:41:
"We might not call it DRM in that we do retain the right to copy MQA files I suppose. But it is a form of control of user rights in that we have to buy MQA sanctioned/licensed DAC hardware. And we cannot access the hi-res portion of the MQA file without such hardware. This means people currently using HQPlayer or do convolution DSP for room corrections will not have access to the full resolution digital for playback."
I agree. I used the term DRM, and that is not correct. However what I was trying to get at was that it is a way for the record companies to sell us hi-res while retaining the master tape version for themselves. They certainly have the right to do that. The fact that it can only be used on licensed hardware sure makes it walk and talk more like a DRM duck.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Benchmark weighs in on MQA - Mr_Steady 03:27:56 08/19/16 (1)
- RE: Benchmark weighs in on MQA - ahendler 11:45:58 08/19/16 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]