In Reply to: RE: Gasp! More Jaws Dropping over MQA in Los Angeles! posted by Charles Hansen on June 11, 2017 at 17:41:50:
"Which is puzzling to me. Clearly MQA files are more expensive than Redbook CD files, both to create (encoding costs), to store (larger file size), and to stream (roughly double the bandwidth of Redbook CD). Who is absorbing these added costs, and how long do you expect them to continue doing so?"
Yes, but maybe no. Note the question marks after each of my comments?
"Clearly MQA files are more expensive than Redbook CD files"
For whom? If the labels decide to encode the files and give them to TIDAL and charge them the same per-play then maybe not?
"Who is absorbing these added costs"
Guessing the labels? Otherwise TIDAL would have to raise their prices?
"(larger file size), and to stream (roughly double the bandwidth of Redbook CD)"
I thought that the selling point of MQA was that the encoding process 'folds' a 192/24 or 96/24 file into a 48/24 sized packet?
As to who pays?
I'm pretty sure I know the answer to THAT one. $20 a month is far from 'free' and streaming in one form or another is here to stay. Perhaps all of this is just market positioning and, like your cable TV bill, eventually the price goes up. =:-0
First they came for the dumb-asses
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a dumb-ass
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Gasp! More Jaws Dropping over MQA in Los Angeles! - Ivan303 08:04:53 06/12/17 (0)