XtremePlace Forum

AV Galaxy => Planet Audio => Topic started by: AndrewC on December 29, 2014, 07:08

Title: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on December 29, 2014, 07:08
After the spectacular failure of DVD-Audio/MLP, looks like Meridian’s ready for another attempt to kill-off DSD with their "Meridian MQA" (Master Quality Authenticated) - http://www.musicischanging.com (http://www.musicischanging.com)

http://www.youtube.com/v/VA74bHXMq0A&fs=1 http://www.youtube.com/v/YKHQOKd7DfI&fs=1

Will they succeed? I doubt it… Too little too late I’d imagine, but here’s TAS’ Robert Harley’s take on MQA (over-the-top as usual from TAS ::));

http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/robert-harley-listens-to-meridian-mqa/ (http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/robert-harley-listens-to-meridian-mqa/)
Quote

MQA samples the audio signal in three different ways, and then encapsulates the three signals into a bitstream that fits in a conventional 96kHz/24-bit package that can be stored or transferred as a FLAC, ALAC, or other lossless file format. We’ll cover MQA in more detail in an upcoming issue of The Absolute Sound, but in the meantime I can report my listening impressions of what was then a work-in-progress.


The sound of MQA, reproduced through a pair of Meridian DSP7200 loudspeakers, was simply stunning in every way. I heard a wide range of music, from full-scale orchestral to voices to a very quiet piece by the Modern Jazz Quartet from the 1950s. I can still vividly recall the delicacy, ease, and resolution of the cymbals in the MJQ piece. I was also struck by the precision of their placement and how they appeared to float in the air against a completely silent background. The treble was totally unlike any other digital I’d heard, completely free from the metallic hardness and artifacts we assume are part-and-parcel of digital audio. Instrumental timbres were so naturally rendered to be almost eerie in their realism. Voices had a stunning palpability and immediacy that were all the more realistic for their compact image size and the sense that they were surrounded by a natural acoustic. It’s interesting that, as I recall the experience, my sonic impressions were so striking that they are still vivid nearly a year later—yet I can’t remember any other demo I heard at the show.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: ks on December 29, 2014, 12:48
1) Current DACs in the market, do they need a firmware upgrade to be MQA ready, assuming MQA doesn't need proprietary hardware?
2) I assume Meridian will license out their IPs to studios and major music sites can make their current data sources MQA ready

Otherwise I really can't see how MQA can take off if its requires huge investments of hardware and software.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on December 30, 2014, 07:48
MQA encoding is PCM based, and is similar to HDCD encoded disc in that where a player doesn’t support MQA, it will just read the bit stream as Redbook quality PCM. So, one wouldn’t need to change hardware unless you want to experience MQA. The coding is also apparently quite efficient, despite being high-resolution, it only consumes as much bandwidth as a 44.1/16 PCM stream.

It supposedly has strong support from record labels and artists… if you watched that launch youtube video, it seems to have support from Sony, Onkyo, Warner - but whether that means new MQA based hardware/software remains to be seen ;).  It does look like the recently introduced Meridian Explorer2 will support MQA, so, a relatively cheap way to experience it on supported hardware.

Stereophile’s JA has a fairly extensive write-up, and with much more technical details;
http://www.stereophile.com/content/ive-heard-future-streaming-meridians-mqa (http://www.stereophile.com/content/ive-heard-future-streaming-meridians-mqa)

Quote
...
With a pair of Meridian digital active speakers being fed audio data from a laptop, Bob was playing 24-bit files with sample rates up to 192kHz, yet the data rate was not much more than the CD's 1.5Mbps! Not only that, but there was palpability to the sound, a transparency to the original event, that I have almost never heard before, which Jason Victor Serinus can testify to.
With this low a data rate, MQA will allow what appears to be true high-resolution audio to be delivered over the same Internet pipes over which music lovers currently experience at best CD-quality audio from Tidal or Qobuz.



Judging by the recordings I heard in Manhattan, some dating back to the early 1950s, I feel the launch of Meridian's MQA is as important to the quality of sound recording and playback as digital was 40 years ago.

 

I read the AES paper that Bob Stuart and Dr. Peter Craven presented, it sure looks like they're attempting to invent a modern-day DSD/SACD (against it’s original intent, as a music archiving/distribution format)  ;D
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: malsound on January 09, 2016, 11:37
http://www.youtube.com/v/dgnwxixiM3c&fs=1http://www.youtube.com/v/r_wxRGiBoJg&fs=1http://www.youtube.com/v/T5o6XHVK2HA&fs=1http://www.youtube.com/v/4bTnW1hY5kw&fs=1
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 09, 2016, 13:58
Tidal showcased  MQA streaming at CES this week… official launch seems to be delayed though… considering there isn’t a lot of hardware out there capable of MQA decoding right now, only Meridian’s - http://www.whathifi.com/news/tidal-showcases-mqa-streaming-ces-2016-launch-delayed (http://www.whathifi.com/news/tidal-showcases-mqa-streaming-ces-2016-launch-delayed)

Stereophile claims it’s “taken off big time” with a list of hardware suppliers - http://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-takes-big-time-2016 (http://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-takes-big-time-2016)

(http://cdn.stereophile.com/images/styles/600_wide/public/010416-MQA_Banner-600.jpg)

…but with the exception of Meridian themselves (and Mytek?), I don’t know of anyone else shipping hardware (or firmware updates) to support MQA yet. Still, it’s early days. That said, MQA seem to be putting in A LOT of effort (http://hifipig.com/mqa-integration-made-simple-ces-2016/) to get vendors to support MQA… really makes me wonder whats the money flow around this technology like :P


http://www.youtube.com/v/dgnwxixiM3c&fs=1...

Thanks! I hadn’t seen that vid before.


OT:
Interesting quote from Dave Robinson on  DSD256 (via Merging’s Horus AD/DA);

Quote
To say it’s a knock-out would be an understatement… was actually able to deliver the master tape itself. I did the A/Bs in my own listening room right where I did the transfers, you could not tell the difference between the 15ips master tape…

With this technology, we’re now at the point where the audiophile Holy-Grail is going to be delivered… the ability to have mic feeds and master tapes in our listening rooms with no qualification…

…After that if you don’t like the sound, either your system needs some work, or you gotta go beat up the engineer and tell him to use a different microphone, because the problem is now no longer the compromises in the format itself.


He also mentions a Sony double-DSD streaming trial with no compression over the Internet between Berlin to Japan. (I mentioned in another thread that) IIJ (http://www.iij.ad.jp) in Japan now has a limited service DSD streaming Internet station called PrimeSeat (http://primeseat.net/).  Just before the new year I tested it out from my Macbook Pro and my Chord Mojo; works great even though it’s streaming between Japan-Singapore! (over ViewQwest broadband and over my home .ac WiFi! ;D)

(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/PrimeSeat%20screenshot_zpszzfhy0zg.png~original)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: wbjia on January 10, 2016, 00:35
I  am a big fan of meridian and linn

but think MQA will fail.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 10, 2016, 08:21
I  am a big fan of meridian and linn

but think MQA will fail.

I feel the same way… (having owned various pieces of both brands across the years).

I think MQA might have some limited success within the Internet Streaming community… but certainly not as an archiving process (as originally envisioned), and definitely not as a encoding technology for non Internet streaming. Bandwidth is cheap (and getting cheaper) ;D
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 10, 2016, 19:15
Interview with Bob Stuart;
(I'm feeling HDCD deja vu…)

http://www.youtube.com/v/IS8V2juQMiw&fs=1


By the way, 2L is now making MQA encoded tracks available for download off their test bench site; http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html (http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html)... I tested with Audirvana+.. sees them as standard 44.1/16 FLAC files... for now ;D
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: SilverPS3 on January 10, 2016, 20:20
From what I understand, it is essentially a compression scheme which is great for streaming HD.  How it could improve the sound is really doubtful.  The assumption is below:
It comes down to the fact that the ear-brain doesn't just operate as a frequency analyzer. Evolution has fine-tuned the system to be able to detect temporal differences that are equivalent to a bandwidth considerably greater than 20kHz

The so-called fact needs to be proven. 
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: malsound on January 10, 2016, 20:43
We will see, John Atkinson put his it as a game changer.

http://www.youtube.com/v/xR2mAf7_Szk&fs=1
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 11, 2016, 06:29
From what I understand, it is essentially a compression scheme which is great for streaming HD.  How it could improve the sound is really doubtful.  The assumption is below:
It comes down to the fact that the ear-brain doesn't just operate as a frequency analyzer. Evolution has fine-tuned the system to be able to detect temporal differences that are equivalent to a bandwidth considerably greater than 20kHz

The so-called fact needs to be proven.

While MQA's compression technique seems to generates the most interest and coverage, theres quite a bit more to it. Watch Hans Beekhuyzen’s 2nd MQA video;

http://www.youtube.com/v/T5o6XHVK2HA&fs=1

Also, if you feel the urge to find out even more details ;D, here are some pointers;

- A good overview source of info on what MQA is is Bob Stuart’s AES paper from ’14 - http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=17501 (http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=17501)

- More details on MQA’s Compression technique is documented in the following Meridian Patent filing - http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=GB&NR=2503110A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=20131218&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=GB&NR=2503110A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=20131218&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP). Unlike MLP (on DVD-Audio), with MQA there appears to be both lossless and lossy compressions involved.

- The Filtering employed by MQA is documented in Peter Craven’s original 2004 AES paper - https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/journal/?elib=12992 (https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/journal/?elib=12992).  (AFAK, Peter with Bob/Meridian were pretty much the first to introduce minimum-phase asymmetrical filters with no pre-ringing into their Players and DACs. All other vendors eventually implemented their own versions of the same thing calling it by other names, but they were all based on Peter’s original AES paper. In MQA, they’ve implemented it at the Mastering stage as well, not just at the consumer playback point).

- MQA’s Authentication of tracks, digitally signed at the mastering point, is documented in parts of the following Meridian Patent - http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=worldwide.espacenet.com&II=4&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20140821&CC=WO&NR=2014125285A1&KC=A1 (http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=worldwide.espacenet.com&II=4&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20140821&CC=WO&NR=2014125285A1&KC=A1) 

 
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on January 11, 2016, 10:29

From what I understand, it is essentially a compression scheme which is great for streaming HD.  How it could improve the sound is really doubtful.  The assumption is below:
It comes down to the fact that the ear-brain doesn't just operate as a frequency analyzer. Evolution has fine-tuned the system to be able to detect temporal differences that are equivalent to a bandwidth considerably greater than 20kHz

The so-called fact needs to be proven.


From what I understand, it is essentially a compression scheme which is great for streaming HD.  How it could improve the sound is really doubtful.  The assumption is below:
It comes down to the fact that the ear-brain doesn't just operate as a frequency analyzer. Evolution has fine-tuned the system to be able to detect temporal differences that are equivalent to a bandwidth considerably greater than 20kHz

The so-called fact needs to be proven.

There are studies that apparently show humans reacting as quickly to a sound in as quickly as 7ns. That is not something that is questioned.

I see this as a "steady state" vs impulse measurement. When we measure our ears sensitivity to frequency, we are doing in reality a steady state measurement.

The reaction times studies measure how quickly a brain responds to stimuli.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 23, 2016, 12:11
http://www.stereophile.com/content/mqas-sound-convinces-hardened-showgoers#OuUfigITkDHjjIbm.97 (http://www.stereophile.com/content/mqas-sound-convinces-hardened-showgoers#OuUfigITkDHjjIbm.97)

Quote
There has been a fair amount of pushback about MQA on forums and in our comments section from long-time audiophiles who are either totally dismissive of the process, absolute certain that we are pawns of the MQA organization, or bracing themselves for proclamations that they must now run out and not only replace their third or fourth versions of classic recordings with MQA-encoded versions (when they become available), but also replace their DACs. These, of course, are legitimate concerns.

According to Stuart, MQA technology will make any MQA-encoded recording sound better, even without an MQA decoder. Of course, it will sound even better if you can decode it. But it is not necessary to do so to derive some sonic benefit. That, I might add, is a listening experiment I have yet to witness.

Remains to be seen/heard...

Interesting coverage on Audiostream as well...

http://www.audiostream.com/content/mqa-continued#VAL4SvbGec1VBXox.97 (http://www.audiostream.com/content/mqa-continued#VAL4SvbGec1VBXox.97)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: nfnc on January 23, 2016, 16:33
Assuming that MQA decoding process results in a discernible quality jump, there is still the not insignificant expense of having to replace or duplicate one's music library, unless the top 50/100 is chosen.

Oth, this may be a big boost for streaming as the streamed version ought to sound better than the music library copy.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 25, 2016, 23:25
Assuming that MQA decoding process results in a discernible quality jump, there is still the not insignificant expense of having to replace or duplicate one's music library, unless the top 50/100 is chosen.

Oth, this may be a big boost for streaming as the streamed version ought to sound better than the music library copy.

Spot on!... Which is why I think it'll be a failure as anything other than a streaming encoder.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: malsound on February 14, 2016, 00:51

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/681-my-first-24-hours-mqa/

Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on February 14, 2016, 13:06
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/681-my-first-24-hours-mqa/

Thanks for that!

Quote
“Edit 1: I just received a quote from Alan Silverman, Mastering Engineer on the Judy Collins track When I Go:
...
More specifically about the track When I go Alan said, "I’ve just compared the MQA playback with my original 88.2k 24-bit master and find the MQA to be mystifyingly more satisfying, and not by just a subtle shade. Listening to Willie and Judy, their voices sound much more real, at the same time, they have a textural filigree and detail of tone that I am not hearing in the original master! The same holds for the banjo and the subtle electric guitar in the right channel. I am delighted and extremely enthusiastic about the MQA process.”

“Better” than the original digital master?! :o… Hmmm….
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on February 14, 2016, 16:50
Thanks for that!

“Better” than the original digital master?! :o… Hmmm….

Might be because MQA also includes a reconstructing filter which may be better than the master with a not so good filter?
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on February 15, 2016, 00:27
Might be because MQA also includes a reconstructing filter which may be better than the master with a not so good filter?

I suspect you’re spot on  :)

Assuming this guy is listening via the same Meridian hardware to both tracks, that would suggest Meridian’s MQA Apodizing filters (https://www.meridian-audio.com/products/personal-audio/explorer2/#panel-1605) are more advanced than their normal Apodizing filter which they’ve been refining since ’04.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: malsound on February 17, 2016, 20:37
http://www.youtube.com/v/as_6OqDZVDs&fs=1
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: petetherock on April 11, 2016, 21:47
Been reading a fair bit about this:
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/beyond-high-resolution/


http://www.whathifi.com/advice/mqa-audio-what-it-how-can-you-get-it

Quote
MQA in Practice
Before getting into the technical aspects of MQA, let’s review the basics. Master Quality Authenticated is an innovative and sophisticated new method of encoding digital audio that simultaneously improves fidelity and lowers the bit rate. It’s a suite of technologies that addresses the limitations of conventional digital audio by rethinking the entire chain, from acoustic source to playback device. It was developed by Meridian Audio co-founder Bob Stuart and longtime collaborator Peter Craven of Algol Applications.


In practice, MQA is delivered to listeners as a conventional lossless file, such as FLAC or Apple Lossless at 44kHz or 48kHz at 24 bits. If you play the file though a DAC without an MQA decoder, you’ll hear better-than-CD sound quality. If you play the file through a DAC with MQA decoding, you’ll hear the sound in the studio’s original bit rate, which could be anything from 44.1kHz to 384kHz (or higher), provided that your DAC can handle the studio’s sample frequency. This single-file hierarchical aspect of MQA has important implications for the technology’s adoption by record companies and content distributors.


The decoder can be implemented in many ways—partly integrated into a DAC chip, or as a bit of software in a phone, for examples. Every decoder will indicate to the listener when an MQA file is playing. Here’s where the “Authenticated” part of Master Quality Authenticated comes in; the MQA light or icon assures that what the listener is hearing on playback is exactly what the engineers heard in the studio. How does this happen? MQA ties the studio’s analog-to-digital converter and the listener’s digital-to-analog converter into what is effectively a single system. In addition, MQA’s rich metadata carries information about the particular analog-to-digital converter and encapsulation used to make the recording or transfer so that the decoder can play it back correctly. And if the decoder knows what DAC it’s driving, it can also optimize its sound. This is why MQA can claim to authenticate the studio experience for the listener.


As of this writing, more than fifty companies—from major players to niche high-end firms—plan to support MQA with compatible playback devices. Meridian has already launched its first MQA-capable DAC, the $299 Explorer2. The lossless streaming service Tidal is behind MQA in a big way; it will begin streaming MQA files in Q2 of this year. MQA allows Tidal to give its customers real high-resolution streams in a format that fits Tidal’s existing distribution infrastructure. In an e-mail exchange, Pål Bråtelund, Strategic Partnership Manager at Tidal, said: “At first, I thought the last thing the industry needed was another codec. But then Bob [Stuart] played some recordings I knew extremely well, and I instantly understood that MQA may be what makes people talk about great recordings and great music rather than about ‘hi-res.’”

For Tidal, and also for the world’s record companies, MQA solves the big problem of multiple inventories for different playback applications. A single MQA file works for every listener on every device. This backward compatibility and single inventory are powerful incentives for record companies and content distributors to adopt MQA—quite apart from the improved sound.



Anyone into this?
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on April 11, 2016, 21:56
There's already another thread on this;

http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=190717.msg1037865#msg1037865 (http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=190717.msg1037865#msg1037865)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: CASH on April 11, 2016, 22:33
wow! so my pioneer DAP can do that???
it say's MQA!! Yippee!!!
but 1st things 1st....
I need to find a way to import my CD's n SACD's into it... hahahaha!!!
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: petetherock on April 14, 2016, 13:24
wow! so my pioneer DAP can do that???
it say's MQA!! Yippee!!!
but 1st things 1st....
I need to find a way to import my CD's n SACD's into it... hahahaha!!!
Here bro, an MQA update for your player:
http://www.soundandvision.com/content/mqa-update-now-available-pioneer-and-onkyo-portable-music-players#ylfyU0A6k8O1UkqC.97
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: CASH on April 14, 2016, 15:46
Thks bro.
But sadly now I am oveseas n didnt bring it along with me, as I have nothing stored on it!
 ;D
Once I am back, I will update it n wait for some dsd's to load into it.
Quite a few bros are sharing files with me.
Only thing is that a few of the bros r overseas too!
 ;D
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: malsound on April 16, 2016, 20:05

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/694-comprehensive-q-mqa-s-bob-stuart/

Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on April 18, 2016, 06:18
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/694-comprehensive-q-mqa-s-bob-stuart/

Thanks for that!

Not sure how many of you read this whole piece…. Holy smokes! :o (and not in a good way).

As far as I can tell, there are no parallels anywhere for MQA’s level of complexity in information delivery. That alone tells me MQA, at least in its full form, is doomed to failure.

I also don't like the completely proprietary nature of the MQA chain. IMHO, only a fool would voluntarily want to be locked into such a system. No wonder MQA is trying to claim the end result is "better than the original”; no one would even give them the time of day if it only “matches” lossless high-res at lower transmission bit rates.

Bob & team are very smart cookies, but this just really smells bad. ::)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on April 29, 2016, 19:20
Read the latest May/June’16 issue of The Absolute Sound; Robert Harley is so over-the-top and gushing on MQA, it’s well past absurd..  And not a single word mentioned on the totally proprietary single-vendor locked-in nature of the technology ::).  He’s destroying his reputation and credibility on this IMHO.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: crazysurfer on April 29, 2016, 19:54
Read the latest May/June’16 issue of The Absolute Sound; Robert Harley is so over-the-top and gushing on MQA, it’s well past absurd..  And not a single word mentioned on the totally proprietary single-vendor locked-in nature of the technology ::).  He’s destroying his reputation and credibility on this IMHO.

Tat means the returns must b bery attractive for him to resort to such absurdity.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on May 05, 2016, 22:48
Any proprietary single-vendor locked-in technology is doomed to fail. We don't need another codec which ended up paying loyalty. This extra cost is going to pass down to consumers and we ended paying more! MQA playback requires the knowledge of DAC chipset so it can 'talk' to and optimised 'de-blurring' and other parameters. At the moment MQA playback is hardware based; which means one has to purchase a 'MQA certified' DAC in order to decode MQA. If you already invested an expensive DAC, would you want to upgrade? How many MQA albums are out there available for purchase?

Un-decoded MQA can still be playback coz it is encapsulated in FLAC but do note, without MQA decoder, playback performance is worse than a 16-bit FLAC:
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/blogs/miska/some-analysis-and-comparison-mqa-encoded-flac-vs-normal-optimized-hires-flac-674/

There still un-answered question whether MQA is truly a mathematically lossless codec when compared to FLAC?
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 06, 2016, 08:55
Any proprietary single-vendor locked-in technology is doomed to fail...

There still un-answered question whether MQA is truly a mathematically lossless codec when compared to FLAC?

Spot on!

On the question of lossless compression, IIRC it’s already been answered (indirectly) by Bob Stuart in the detailed ComputerAudiophile interview script…”Section C” in MQA’s origami fold is lossy compression. And he wasn't absolutely clear on section B either... I'm guessing the compression could vary depending on a number of factors.

(http://cdn.stereophile.com/images/120914-MQAFig2-600.jpg)

IMHO, the whole compression issue around MQA is a waste of time... bandwidth (like HD capacity) is cheap these days... there's really no reason so spend so much effort with tricky compression techniques. How many people manually zip files before email? Hardly anyone does that these days. Likewise even for high-rez music streaming, bandwidth will be a non-issue.   
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on May 06, 2016, 09:03
Not everywhere in the world though :(

In larger countries rural areas get their nextgen broadband via 4G even at home and have a monthly cap not like the all you can eat style we have in Singapore.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 06, 2016, 09:05
Not everywhere in the world though :(

In larger countries rural areas get their nextgen broadband via 4G even at home and have a monthly cap not like the all you can eat style we have in Singapore.


True... but which do you think will come faster? Higher/adequate speed broadband to rural locations, or a full MQA catalogue (and with all the costs associated with that?)  ;)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on May 06, 2016, 09:07

True... but which do you think will come faster? Higher/adequate speed broadband to rural locations, or a full MQA catalogue (and with all the costs associated with that?)  ;)

Knowing Australia. MQA on TIDAL would be here sooner :P

I have seen some areas have an ETA on NBN in 2020. And my suburb - Not Planned Yet. Damn you Malcolm, worst NBN Minister ever.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 06, 2016, 09:11
Knowing Australia. MQA on TIDAL would be here sooner :P

I have seen some areas have an ETA on NBN in 2020. And my suburb - Not Planned Yet. Damn you Malcolm, worst NBN Minister ever.

Don't worry, Telstra will be rolling out 5G by 2018/2019; that'll get you 10Gbps (contentionless) peak-rates on your hand-held devices (though T may chose to engineer throughputs below that ;))
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on May 06, 2016, 09:48
Yeah but at 50 bucks a month on a 1.5GB plan... how many HD files could I be streaming in full hires? :) my ADSL at work is even choking with regular TIDAL.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 06, 2016, 16:49
Yeah but at 50 bucks a month on a 1.5GB plan... how many HD files could I be streaming in full hires? :) my ADSL at work is even choking with regular TIDAL.

I'm pretty sure it'll come inline with the rest of the (leading) broadband nations soon enough... IMHO, 5G's going to revolutionize the broadband landscape in markets like Australia thats been languishing for so long  :P
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on May 06, 2016, 18:53
Spot on!

On the question of lossless compression, IIRC it’s already been answered (indirectly) by Bob Stuart in the detailed ComputerAudiophile interview script…”Section C” in MQA’s origami fold is lossy compression. And he wasn't absolutely clear on section B either... I'm guessing the compression could vary depending on a number of factors.

(http://cdn.stereophile.com/images/120914-MQAFig2-600.jpg)

IMHO, the whole compression issue around MQA is a waste of time... bandwidth (like HD capacity) is cheap these days... there's really no reason so spend so much effort with tricky compression techniques. How many people manually zip files before email? Hardly anyone does that these days. Likewise even for high-rez music streaming, bandwidth will be a non-issue.

Looks like anything above 22kHz is considered mathematically 'lossy' this is because the maximum MQA bit-rate is capped at 1.5Mbps.

(http://i1164.photobucket.com/albums/q566/Guy_R/MQA_zpsgqfqoqfo.jpg)


Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 08, 2016, 03:46
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/warner-music-group-mqa-enter-long-term-licensing-deal/ (http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/warner-music-group-mqa-enter-long-term-licensing-deal/)
Quote
WARNER MUSIC GROUP & MQA ENTER LONG-TERM LICENSING DEAL

Munich | May 6, 2016: Warner Music Group (WMG) today announced a long-term licensing deal with music technology specialists MQA. The agreement – the first between MQA and any major music company – will significantly increase music fans’ access to hi-resolution music globally. The agreement paves the way for recordings from WMG’s diverse roster of acclaimed artists and its world-renowned catalogue to be made available in studio master quality through MQA distributors.
...

Not a huge surprise considering Atlantic Records (one of Warner’s largest labels, wholly owned since ’67) has been a supporter of MQA for well over a year now.

http://www.youtube.com/v/VvIGzGWSK48&fs=1

Still, crap  >:(
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on May 08, 2016, 08:21
So far only 2L, a Nordic Sound has released MQA tracks but limited genre...
http://www.2l.no/

Licensing deal is one thing but putting music on wide scale distribution is a huge challenge provided there are sufficient MQA hardware enabled devices to decode with, otherwise is just plain paper agreement. Nobody wants another loyalty paid DRM codec and ended up paying more.

There are already many loyalty free lossless codec such as FLAC, DRM free!!! which has a wide adoption.   
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: malsound on May 27, 2016, 16:56

http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2016/05/schiitting-on-mqa/

Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: SilverPS3 on May 28, 2016, 00:03
http://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=5688

Interestingly, the technology skeptic and critic Mark Waldrep (aka. Dr Aix) couldn't get a test sample from Meridian to do a thorough analysis

Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on May 29, 2016, 23:06
Another DAC manufacturer refuses to support MQA and Why, read on...

http://schiit.com/news/news/why-we-wont-be-supporting-mqa
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: wizardofoz on May 30, 2016, 03:00
http://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=5688 (http://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=5688)

Interestingly, the technology skeptic and critic Mark Waldrep (aka. Dr Aix) couldn't get a test sample from Meridian to do a thorough analysis


Mark is not a big fan on DSD either it seems http://www.3beez.com/video-introduction.html
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on June 02, 2016, 18:17
Interesting piece by JA in the latest issue of Stereophile... First real measurements of MQA by a 3rd party AFAIK;
http://www.stereophile.com/content/inside-mqa (http://www.stereophile.com/content/inside-mqa)

ps: Is it just me or does JA sound distinctly less "enthusiastic" on MQA then he did before? ;D
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: SilverPS3 on June 04, 2016, 23:14
He said he would listen.  I doubt we would be reading the listening notes any time soon.

Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on June 06, 2016, 19:04
He said he would listen.  I doubt we would be reading the listening notes any time soon.

Yeah, I was wondering the same thing when I read his coverage ;-) Such extensive measurements, but not a single word from him on how it sounds, and it’s own recordings!

My guess is JA is going to hedge his bets and not be so over-the-top about MQA like TAS, especially given the recent scandalous piece by AD (http://www.stereophile.com/content/goodness-your-heart-tragedy-one-act) (presumably against TAS and other WebZine’s) over their unethical review methods. I think JA will be looking to tone-down any pro-vendor pitches ;D


Interesting... Meridian is never a supporter of DSD, given the recent uptake of DSD downloads, they have no choice to make their product more competitive? There's a review of Meridian Explorer and MQA playback. Looks like MQA decoding on Explorer have trouble in achieving 24-bit resolution while PCM version 24/192 and DSD64 has the lowest noise in the audible range!


http://archimago.blogspot.sg/2016/02/measurements-impressions-meridian.html

Actually, very few DACs delivery 24 bit resolution, meaning resolution as measured (not datasheet spec) by the likes of Stereophile etc., even the very best DACs have been measured at around 19-to-21 bits at most.
 
That said, IMHO, it makes no sense to have a “next generation” format that is lossy, even if for only the very highest ultrasonic octaves. MQA justifies this via an explanation in the ’14 AES paper http://www.aes.org/e-lib/download.cfm?ID=17501 (http://www.aes.org/e-lib/download.cfm?ID=17501) … to paraphrase, they basically say “we measured the last 60 years of recordings, none have resolution/noise-floor wider than 20bits PCM, so that’s good enough.” ::)
 
MQA is not progress for the Audio industry.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: tane0019 on June 06, 2016, 22:25
Cheaper alternative to Meridian MQA
http://www.youtube.com/v/kfJYHhONdSI&fs=1
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on June 07, 2016, 10:24
http://www.stereophile.com/content/inside-mqa-manufacturers-comment#HDraW96o0ZqfWlDZ.97

Why is run-out noise shot up so abruptly as the frequency response goes down for a decoded MQA? Also, compared with original WAV recording, the noise of decoded MQA is much higher. It looks to me MQA noise floor can only achieve 20-bit of resolution in the audible range despite outputting 24-bit data to the DAC. Such abnormality happens in the audible range and it does play a part in alternating the sound quality of the original WAV recordings.

Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on June 07, 2016, 11:15
http://www.stereophile.com/content/inside-mqa-manufacturers-comment#HDraW96o0ZqfWlDZ.97

Why is run-out noise shot up so abruptly as the frequency response goes down for a decoded MQA? Also, compared with original WAV recording, the noise of decoded MQA is much higher. It looks to me MQA noise floor can only achieve 20-bit of resolution in the audible range despite outputting 24-bit data to the DAC. Such abnormality happens in the audible range and it does play a part in alternating the sound quality of the original WAV recordings.

While these are very low-level signals (-96dB peak), I have to agree, it’s pretty lousy noise floor for a non-decoded MQA signal. With this response, Stuart has validated 3rd party reviews that say MQA scews-up original tracks when not decoded to MQA.

In other words, if your DAC doesn’t support MQA, you’re basically fcuked if your sources are all MQA encoded files or streams ;D


The noise of MQA decoded signal is not higher than the original WAV though… where did you see that it’s higher? (don’t mistakenly compare to dither noise floor references).

(http://cdn.stereophile.com/images/616MQAfig4.jpg)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on June 08, 2016, 17:58
Yes, the decoded MQA followed closely to the original WAV but it seemed to me MQA can only deliver up to 20 bit and not PCM standard of 24 bit resolution. The best converters out there can easily do 22 bit. FLAC and other lossless codecs are capable of doing 24 bit way before MQA. Why limit?
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on June 08, 2016, 22:19
Yes, the decoded MQA followed closely to the original WAV but it seemed to me MQA can only deliver up to 20 bit and not PCM standard of 24 bit resolution. The best converters out there can easily do 22 bit. FLAC and other lossless codecs are capable of doing 24 bit way before MQA. Why limit?

We're going round in circles a little... as I said before, you’re talking about technical spec (24bit)… whereas MQA is referencing general DAC output performance, not spec, when they say 20bit PCM resolution is “good enough”. As you yourself state, “the best” can do 22 bits today... but IMHO not “easily” - care to qualify your statement? Which DAC manufacturer(s) does "easily" 22bit of actual [Edit] measured output resolution?

But we’re on the same page, I think it’s a sham for MQA to offer  such “average” performance in this day and age.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on June 09, 2016, 22:47
Yet another gushing MQA report…

http://www.tonepublications.com/review/why-mqa/ (http://www.tonepublications.com/review/why-mqa/)

What gets me is this part about undecoded listening…
Quote

In addition, files encoded with MQA will still sound better, cleaner on your standard digital setup even if you don’t have a DAC capable of decoding MQA. For now, let’s call the difference about 20% in terms of revealing more music in a less imposing (i.e. digital artifacts, etc) way than a non-MQA file.

If the tracks are being specially handled as part of the MQA encoding process, naturally they’re going to sound good even non-decoded… Just like XRCDs sound much better than normal redbook releases of the same album. So, not sure what the fuss is ::)


Just noticed that last week BlueSound announced firmware update to support MQA on their platform;
http://www.bluesound.com/news/2016/mqa-now-available-on-bluesound/ (http://www.bluesound.com/news/2016/mqa-now-available-on-bluesound/)

http://www.youtube.com/v/3064TY7DWiQ&fs=1


And Highresaudio has started selling MQA encoded music; https://www.highresaudio.com/studio_master.php?fids=153&cr=MQA (https://www.highresaudio.com/studio_master.php?fids=153&cr=MQA)

Almost nothing but Classical… What a drag :P
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on June 10, 2016, 12:44
Just delivered to my office in time for some weekend MQA Exploration ;D

(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/Meridian%20Explorer2_zpsfa0kdx3t.jpg~original)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on June 10, 2016, 23:22
what MQA music did you end up getting to test the Explorer2 with?
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on June 11, 2016, 08:46
Keep us posted :)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: mr.tangco on June 11, 2016, 20:25
Enjoying A-B-ing MQA on bluesound pulse - to these ears I'm enjoying the 2L tracks immensely and am looking forward to hearing more MQA asap. Why not try for yourself? Bluesound Node Gen 1 costs only $399 on sale - http://lenbrook.com.sg/bluesound/30-bluesound-node-n100.html
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on June 12, 2016, 20:01
Let me get straight to the point… this is going to be brief.

(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/1.%20The%20Emperors%20New%20Clothes_zpso1c5rbgk.jpg~original) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor%27s_New_Clothes)



...
Just kidding… here’s lots more ;D

SOME TECHNICAL BITS


LISTENING TO STANDARD PCM TRACKS

I didn’t expect to spend a couple of hours with the Explorer2… but as it turned out, I did, and not because it was good. The Explorer2 sounds nicely full-bodied, but when first listened to with just standard PCM tracks, my initial thought was WTF?…Is there something wrong with my IEMs or Mac? :/

Right out of the box the Explorer2 sounds veiled and quite rolled-off, especially if you’re used to the Chord Mojo. You’ll think there’s something wrong with your IEMs, Laptop, or cables. I switched IEMs between my Westone and FitEar just in case it was some impedance compatibility issue, they both demonstrated the same issue.

I let the Explorer2 run-in for about an hour while I checked a couple of reviews online; no one describes anything remotely similar to what I heard, until I re-read Stereophile’s review from last month. Reading between the lines, Jim Austin does hint at (http://www.stereophile.com/content/meridian-explorer2-da-headphone-amplifier) it;
Quote
…With non-MQA music, the Explorer2 was very pleasant to listen to. It conveyed plenty of information in a relaxed way, which to me is important. It always worked, and it always made nice music. It was a big step up from the headphone jack of my MacBook Pro. Though the sound was a bit soft and rounded compared to that of much more expensive converters, it was good enough for an excellent home system.

I think he was just being polite ;D.

JA’s measurement section (http://www.stereophile.com/content/meridian-explorer2-da-headphone-amplifier-measurements) strangely doesn’t include a standalone frequency response chart (all other recent DAC reviews do)…  So after the hour of run-in, I did a frequency response measurement which didn’t look especially out of the ordinary (except for the interestingly different responses (http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/3.%20E2%20FreqResp%2044-192k_zpsoglrpmfw.png~original) for the various sample rates). A closer look at the 44.1k sample-rate response though, compared to the Chord Mojo’s response, starts to hint at the issue…

(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/4.%20E2%20vs.%20CM%20FreqResp%2044k_zpsp5v2bqnn.png~original)

The Explorer2’s roll-off from 20kHz (Red) is gentle slope which suggests it’s non-linear apodizing nature, all good, but it starts almost right at 20kHz which, depending on the filter type, could have repercussions at lower octaves. I also checked the impulse response (a one-sample 44.1k/16bit -3dBFS pulse), which shows a classic Meridian apodizing FIR filter response with no pre-ringing, but a very long ringing tail.

In JA’s measurement, he compared the Impulse Response of the original Explorer versus Explorer2 (Figure 1 (http://cdn.stereophile.com/images/616Meex2fig1.jpg), vs. Figure 2 (http://cdn.stereophile.com/images/616Meex2fig2.jpg) respectively). Strangely, my measurement shows my Explorer2 behaving like an original Explorer! Specifically, nearly a millisecond long post-impulse ringing, instead of about a-third of a millisecond (according to JA’s measurement anyway).

Have a look;

(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/5.%20E2%20Impulse%20Response_zpsrg4rwcmo.png~original)

I wondered if it was something mistaken with my measurement/method, but I crossed checked against previous measurements taken on my other DACs at home, both linear and non-linear filters with shorter durations.

So, whatever firmware Stereophile received and JA measured with their Explorer2, seems like it’s not what the rest of us consumers are getting :o 

I didn’t measure how non-linear the phase-shift of the Explorer2’s filter is (not quite sure whats the best way to do that yet ;D).

Even though the Explorer2 came with updated MQA firmware, I re-flashed the firmware anyway using Meridian’s dedicated App.

(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/6.%20E2%20Firmware%20Upgrade_zpsm8nfjrqv.png~original)
There wasn’t any appreciable difference even after the update; an overwhelming sense of a veiled and rolled-off sound, and the impulse response wasn’t changed either. Something’s definitely off.

All of this suggest possible impact in the audible lower octaves, which I think is what I’m hearing; much of the “air” around good quality unencoded PCM recordings are missing in action. Technically, the long post-impulse ringing shouldn’t be a problem and should be filtered off naturally by our ears, but theres no clear way to know what other sonic impact this filter has. All I can tell by listening is that it doesn’t sound like a quality DAC at all. Interestingly, listening to tracks at various bit-rates, 176.4k/24bit tracks seem to sound the best, better than 192k/24.


LISTENING TO MQA ENCODED TRAKCS

I used a number of test files from 2L (http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html?) to test out MQA encoded tracks. They make available both the original DXD track and a MQA-encoded version of the DXD (both in FLAC), along with lower bit-rate unencoded versions.

With MQA encoded tracks (FLAC), the Explorer2 sounds significantly closer to the quality of the Mojo.

(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/7.%20Meridian%20Explorer2%20Decoding%20MQA_zpsgcks16fp.jpg~original)

Here’s the rub;
MQA-encoded tracks decoded on the Explorer2 isn’t even on-par with Unencoded 192k versions on the Chord Mojo! It comes close, but not quite. And it gets completely smoked when compared to the DXD Unencoded version on the Chord DAC. 

In other words (“>” = “better than”);
DXD on Mojo > 192k on Mojo > DXD-MQA on Explorer2 > 96k on Mojo
And for just plain PCM, Mojo > Explorer2 at every bit rate

IMHO, if the Explorer2 is how most people are going to hear MQA, the battle’s lost. MQA can balik kampung ;D Ironically, the only attraction is the 10:1 file size reduction, which harkens back to Meridian’s MLP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meridian_Lossless_Packing) days (if that sort of thing is important to you rather than sound quality ;) )

There’s no way to turn-off MQA decoding on the Explorer2 and it doesn’t support DXD, so it’s a little challenging to measure anything thats apples-to-apples comparison based on currently available free MQA files (I don’t plan to buy any MQA encoded material). Achimago’s review (http://archimago.blogspot.sg/2016/02/measurements-impressions-meridian.html) compares DXD MQA-encoded tracks against unencoded 192k version, which IMHO is only marginally useful.


BOTTOM LINE
Like a few online commentary suggests (including on Meridian focused forums (http://www.meridianunplugged.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php)), MQA has the feel of The Emperor’s New Clothes about it.  I can’t shake the feeling that Meridian has intentionally crippled regular PCM playback on the Explorer2 in order to make MQA sound “so much better” (they probably assume that the average user won’t have another portable DAC to compare it to). If MQA becomes significantly more prevalent, like for example if all higher than Redbook streams from the likes of Tidal are exclusively MQA encoded, we’re fucked :-\

I haven’t heard another portable DAC at the same price point as the Explorer2, so, maybe it’s just my expectations being unreasonably high, but at about exactly half the price of the Chord Mojo, the Explorer2 in comparison, is IMHO significantly less than half as good. The Explorer2 is a very disappointing piece of kit from a traditionally strong vendor - I’ve owned multiple Meridian hardware in the past, so I’m not in any way biased against them.

The Explorer2 though, is highly NOT recommended, though YMMV :)

(Edit: Removed spoiler tag on request)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on June 17, 2016, 17:09
Enjoying A-B-ing MQA on bluesound pulse - to these ears I'm enjoying the 2L tracks immensely and am looking forward to hearing more MQA asap. Why not try for yourself? Bluesound Node Gen 1 costs only $399 on sale - http://lenbrook.com.sg/bluesound/30-bluesound-node-n100.html

Can tell a difference between a 24/192 and MQA mastered on same track? Does it playback fully decoded?
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on June 20, 2016, 17:40
Can tell a difference between a 24/192 and MQA mastered on same track? Does it playback fully decoded?

Looks like mr.tangco is just a shill for lenbrook  ::)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on June 24, 2016, 13:16
The jig is up as more people get to hear MQA… Effectively nothing more than modern day compression technique ;D

http://www.avsforum.com/mqa-demo-at-the-show-newport-2016/ (http://www.avsforum.com/mqa-demo-at-the-show-newport-2016/)

Quote

Some audio reviewers claim that MQA-processed and decoded files actually sound better than the original master files because MQA reduces the “temporal blur” found in the upper harmonics of high-res digital recordings. I did not hear any improvement in this listening session. Still, it was remarkable to have heard no difference between the unprocessed and MQA files with a fifth to a tenth of the bit rate; this is akin to bringing uncompressed CD down to 256 or 128 kbps.

Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: mr.tangco on June 27, 2016, 22:27
Hi Andrew, we've never met but you've taken upon yourself to call names on an Internet forum simply because someone (myself) expressed an opinion that you disagree with. Thanks for showing that an old bird with 4000 posts can be as misguided as a newbie with the terimity to express an opinion. Having paid for my equipment with my own hard earned money just like you did and enjoying the musical output does not make me "a shill for lenbrook" as you so carelessly tossed your post into the forum. I cannot pretend to have golden ears backed up with workshop measurements, but I came into the forum thinking that the average local fan of hifi would have higher standards than those that patronize other overseas forums. I read over a period of weeks XP threads with very polite discourse and extremely constructive criticism and feedback, and I must say that many posts which I appreciated were your own. Having had a minute to share what I enjoy on this forum and stating a price tag on a sale item that I bought and enjoyed too was evidence enough to get labeled as a shill. And logging back in to see the response, you, a senior forum member gave was really a nice surprise. Thanks, I really appreciate a "welcome to the forum you shill" response. Well let me not take up more of your time. To each his own, I suppose.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on June 28, 2016, 12:53
Hi Andrew,...

I didn’t disagree with your opinion, I specifically said you "look like a shill" because both of your first 2 posts ends with URL pointers to Lenbrook, plus you didn't bother to answer the simple and genuine question posted by MusicEar; all typical telltale sign of a shill. ;)

If you’re somehow connected to Lenbrook, just come out and say so, no harm no foul, others vendors posts in the forum all the time, but don’t play games pretending. That said, let us know categorically you have absolutely no connection whatsoever to Lenbrook - not an employee, not some shop buddy etc. - and I’ll be more than happy to apologise unreservedly for supposing you might be a shill :)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on June 29, 2016, 18:11
Looks like Universal is also considering MQA, but as expected, their main interest is in streaming only ;)

http://www.mesalliance.org/2016/06/24/industry-execs-more-streaming-remains-key-to-high-res-audio-success/ (http://www.mesalliance.org/2016/06/24/industry-execs-more-streaming-remains-key-to-high-res-audio-success/)

Quote
Industry Execs: More Streaming Remains Key to High-Res Audio Success
...
UMG sees MQA as an “exciting technology” that addresses the bandwidth requirements for the transport of high-resolution audio streaming, Belcher said. UMG has “not officially signed on to MQA yet – we’re still in the business terms” stage, he said. MQA can also be used for mastering, but “we’re not looking at that right now,” just the “transport solution,” he said.
...
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on July 08, 2016, 23:10
Another manufacturer Benchmark has something to said about MQA... DOA?

https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/application_notes/163302855-is-mqa-doa
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: DJQ on July 09, 2016, 01:02
so this is the acclaimed MQA thread.
visited a fellow forumers place to have a go at aurender with mytek.
heard the MQA tracks on mytek... ok so what am i listening to?
i can vaguely tell the difference. ok ok i strain my ears and close my eyes. slightly more life on MQA playback.
my 2 cents i hear more diff playing DSD over USB native Asio.  :P
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 09, 2016, 09:20
Another manufacturer Benchmark has something to said about MQA... DOA?

https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/application_notes/163302855-is-mqa-doa

Excellent piece... thanks for the link! (Not sure I agree with Benchmark's views on the adaptive filters though :P).
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on July 12, 2016, 01:14
so this is the acclaimed MQA thread.
visited a fellow forumers place to have a go at aurender with mytek.
heard the MQA tracks on mytek... ok so what am i listening to?
i can vaguely tell the difference. ok ok i strain my ears and close my eyes. slightly more life on MQA playback.
my 2 cents i hear more diff playing DSD over USB native Asio.  :P

I think we are better off with present PCM/DSD playback.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: malsound on August 12, 2016, 12:20
http://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-questions-and-answers#RXJtRmkywMesc8Rw.97
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: malsound on August 12, 2016, 12:22
http://www.tonepublications.com/review/why-mqa/
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on August 12, 2016, 15:19
http://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-questions-and-answers#RXJtRmkywMesc8Rw.97

I don’t know about you guys, but [edit] I'm definitely sensing an increasing tone of desperation in Bob’s responses in these FAQs. I think he knows [edit] he's fighting a losing battle ;)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on August 14, 2016, 00:13
http://archimago.blogspot.sg/2016/07/a-response-re-mqa-blocking-of-meridians.html

The most intriguing statement was instead of trusting yourself to an A/B comparison, you should 'trust' the sound from a veteran audio guy. That really sounds silly to me.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on August 14, 2016, 21:47
In the latest issue of Stereophile (Sept’16), JA finally gives his subjective opinion about MQA… here’s the interesting bit (page 113);
Quote
After doing all of my formal comparisons, I subjected myself to a sort-of-blind test… I scored four out of seven correct; though this is insufficient to prove formal identification, I feel that it is relevant information.

While he then goes on to be fairly supportive of MQA, but reading between the lines, if even one of the most experienced listeners can only achieve a 57% recognition accuracy, it’s quite clear that MQA falls far far below the claims of Bob Stuart’s (and TAS’s Robert Harley’s) proclamation of MQA as virtually the 2nd coming ;D
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: lcheetec on August 15, 2016, 10:31
Been reading JA's writings and editorials in Stereophile many years (since 1994), and Robert Harley since before he moved to TAS. I must say, these comments are in line with which of these two I respect, and which I think pander to advertisers and reputation.

Daniel
Singapore
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on August 16, 2016, 17:57
Been reading JA's writings and editorials in Stereophile many years (since 1994), and Robert Harley since before he moved to TAS. I must say, these comments are in line with which of these two I respect, and which I think pander to advertisers and reputation.
...

I used to have some respect for Harley, but in the last 2 years or so, he's been so over-the-top (like JV) that its not even fun to read TAS for amusement. I'm planning to let my subscription lapse.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: lcheetec on August 16, 2016, 18:20
I used to have some respect for Harley, but in the last 2 years or so, he's been so over-the-top (like JV) that its not even fun to read TAS for amusement. I'm planning to let my subscription lapse.

I already bought the subscription twice over (because they sent me so many reminders when it wasn't ended yet), but I know exactly what you mean. It's quite tiresome.

daniel
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 06, 2017, 16:07
Here we go… key MQA updates, including new hardware support commitments;

http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/news/post/MQA%20amplifies%20hi-res%20audio%20activity%20at%20CES%202017 (http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/news/post/MQA%20amplifies%20hi-res%20audio%20activity%20at%20CES%202017)

The AudioQuest support is interesting, anyone with the DragonFly would instantly have an MQA capable playback DAC  ;)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 07, 2017, 10:28
Audirvana announces Plus 3 with built-in MQA decoder; https://audirvana.com/?p=4153 (https://audirvana.com/?p=4153).
Available from late this month (unclear if there’s a path for existing Plus 2.6 customers. :P)

(https://audirvana.com/expov2/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/AudirvanaPlus_pre3_screenshot-1500x1113.jpg)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 07, 2017, 10:33
Sounds like MQA's gonna get some serious competition soon  ;D... But unclear what technology (if any), is to be used for this "Stream the Studio" campaign.

http://www.billboard.com/articles/business/7647454/major-labels-pandora-riaa-announce-support-hi-res-streaming-mqa (http://www.billboard.com/articles/business/7647454/major-labels-pandora-riaa-announce-support-hi-res-streaming-mqa)

Quote
All Three Major Labels, Pandora and RIAA Announce Support for Hi-Res Audio Streaming
...
A large swath of the music business, including all three major labels (Universal Music Group, Sony Music and the Warner Music Group), the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and music platforms such as Pandora, Rhapsody/Napster and HD Tracks, all in concert with the Digital Entertainment Group (DEG), today announced their support for studio-quality hi-res audio for music streaming.
...
The DEG, which advocates for entertainment products supporting music, film, television, consumer electronics and IT industries, and whose members include Amazon and Google Play, also revealed today a new "Stream the Studio" marketing campaign. The initiative is aimed at millennials, the largest music consumer demographic, and will promote the benefits of hi-res compatible devices, technologies and music .
...
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: lcheetec on January 08, 2017, 07:17
Audirvana announces Plus 3 with built-in MQA decoder; https://audirvana.com/?p=4153 (https://audirvana.com/?p=4153).
Available from late this month (unclear if there’s a path for existing Plus 2.6 customers. :P)

(https://audirvana.com/expov2/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/AudirvanaPlus_pre3_screenshot-1500x1113.jpg)

I don't use a Mac, so it looks like I'll have to wait till it comes to a Windows player. Thanks for the info.

daniel
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 08, 2017, 08:00
I don't use a Mac, so it looks like I'll have to wait till it comes to a Windows player.
...

You might not have to wait that long actually! … Seems clear MQA have flip-flopped on their previous position of not allowing software decoding. Now that they do, the floodgates seem to be opened, with Tidal and Audirvana decoding in software. Roon also just announced software decoding support in a future version (I’m guessing Roon 2.0). Won't be long before we see the rest like JRiver etc. supporting software decoding.  ;)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 08, 2017, 08:00
MQA’s laying it on very thick … :P

http://www.youtube.com/v/5U-D_4DK6to&fs=1
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: lcheetec on January 08, 2017, 08:39
You might not have to wait that long actually! … Seems clear MQA have flip-flopped on their previous position of not allowing software decoding. Now that they do, the floodgates seem to be opened, with Tidal and Audirvana decoding in software. Roon also just announced software decoding support in a future version (I’m guessing Roon 2.0). Won't be long before we see the rest like JRiver etc. supporting software decoding.  ;)
I have a question.

I currently have a laptop running Tidal, outputting PCM via USB (xmos converter) to an external DAC.

What does this mean, when I am playing an MQA-encoded album?

What I think is, since the laptop's DAC is bypassed, the PCM that's reaching the external DAC (not MQA-enabled) is the regular stream without MQA.

Daniel

Sent from my Redmi Note 2 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 08, 2017, 09:03
..I currently have a laptop running Tidal, outputting PCM via USB (xmos converter) to an external DAC.

What does this mean, when I am playing an MQA-encoded album?

What I think is, since the laptop's DAC is bypassed, the PCM that's reaching the external DAC (not MQA-enabled) is the regular stream without MQA.
...

If you chose your external DAC as the output on Tidal playback via the laptop, it won't use your Laptop's DAC for Digital-to-Analog conversion. Then, as long as you don’t enable “Passthrough” on the settings within Tidal for your DAC, then Tidal will decode the MQA stream, and output an “unfolded” version of the high-resolution PCM stream to your USB DAC. You should be able to see the DAC showing the incoming stream as a 88.2/24 or 96/24 PCM.

As an example, to get the highest resolution MQA stream playback out of my Mojo, I need to ensure the Tidal settings are;

(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/Passthrough-disenaged_zpswvja4yuj.png~original)

(I haven't tested if the "Force Volume" setting has any sonic benefits... technically I suspect it should if enabled).
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: lcheetec on January 08, 2017, 09:16
If you chose your external DAC as the output on Tidal playback via the laptop, it won't use your Laptop's DAC for Digital-to-Analog conversion. Then, as long as you don’t enable “Passthrough” on the settings within Tidal for your DAC, then Tidal will decode the MQA stream, and output an “unfolded” version of the high-resolution PCM stream to your USB DAC. You should be able to see the DAC showing the incoming stream as a 88.2/24 or 96/24 PCM.

As an example, to get the highest resolution MQA stream playback out of my Mojo, I need to ensure the Tidal settings are;

(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/Passthrough-disenaged_zpswvja4yuj.png~original)

(I haven't tested if the "Force Volume" setting has any sonic benefits... technically I suspect it should if enabled).

Useful! Thank you. Never knew.

daniel
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on January 11, 2017, 20:28
There's been report that Tidal desktop app only does partial fold back up to 24/96k whereas a MQA USB-DAC can fold back to 24/192k via using Tidal desktop in 'Passthrough MQA' mode.

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/tidal-master-albums-are-downsampled-in-roon-to-24bit-48khz/18160/7
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on January 11, 2017, 23:42
Finally, 'the cat is out from the bag'! Read this...
http://www.audiostream.com/content/mqa-decoding-explained#yWY1YAh7CZ4E89sl.97

Guessed if you want a full blown MQA you need a buy a new MQA DAC!!! What a smart way to make lot of $$$!
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 12, 2017, 05:39
Finally, 'the cat is out from the bag'! Read this...
http://www.audiostream.com/content/mqa-decoding-explained#yWY1YAh7CZ4E89sl.97

Guessed if you want a full blown MQA you need a buy a new MQA DAC!!! What a smart way to make lot of $$$!

Exactly as I said days ago on the Tidal thread here, well before Audiostream and you caught on ;D...

Seems like MQA software decoding on the Tidal App is limited to 96/24 encodes only (at this time?)… 176.4/24 and above encodes require a hardware based MQA decoder like the Explorer2.

Obviously its an artificial limit placed on App developers by MQA… (I’m guessing so as to not cannibalise Meridian’s high-end hardware platform sales, and/or to protect their MQA decoder licensing to 3rd party hardware developers. ::))

...
So, no, bit rate is not likely the issue. More likely they’re restricting higher bitrate output from software decoders due to content licensing restrictions, or their own commercial interest :)



It’s an obvious move by Bob Stuart/Meridian since missing out on licensing revenues from MLP for DVD-Audio. Except of course MLP was completely lossless, but this time he’s figured away to extract licensing from a lossy packaging… and the Record execs and Audio Journalist are suckers to fall for it ::)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on January 12, 2017, 10:35
Yeah, I agreed, it's all about making $$$ from a format that force you to buy a new hardware. Let's see how far Tidal and MQA can really go. Most of MQA tracks are from Warner Bros, we have see Sony and Universal, these two heavy weights are willing to jump in.

To me it feel like sub standard when using software decoding and this create a bad outlook on the format.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 13, 2017, 06:30
Yeah, I agreed, it's all about making $$$ from a format that force you to buy a new hardware. Let's see how far Tidal and MQA can really go. Most of MQA tracks are from Warner Bros, we have see Sony and Universal, these two heavy weights are willing to jump in.
...

They've already declared at CES that they're going to jump in, but whether with MQA or something else is yet to be announced...

Sounds like MQA's gonna get some serious competition soon  ;D... But unclear what technology (if any), is to be used for this "Stream the Studio" campaign.

http://www.billboard.com/articles/business/7647454/major-labels-pandora-riaa-announce-support-hi-res-streaming-mqa (http://www.billboard.com/articles/business/7647454/major-labels-pandora-riaa-announce-support-hi-res-streaming-mqa)



...
To me it feel like sub standard when using software decoding and this create a bad outlook on the format.

The counter argument is that you can't get 96/24 from any other mainstream Streaming services anyway, and you're not paying anything extra for the service,... So, MQA with software-based decoding seems better than nothing.  ;)
Title: MQA & Tidal – where are we now?
Post by: InnocentBlood on January 14, 2017, 12:11
this is a good read that breaks it down for a layman like me :)

http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2017/01/mqa-tidal-where-are-we-now/

now what i am really looking fwd to are comparisons of MASTER vs HIFI of a known bad mastering. Something modern with a really poor DR, such as Metallica's Death Magnetic, Black Sabbath's 13, RHCP's Californication, etc. It would be interesting to know if the MASTER version actually improves upon the original HIFI version that suffers from very bad compression.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: malsound on January 19, 2017, 22:48
https://parttimeaudiophile.com/2017/01/16/mqa-software-decoding-in-roon-days-away-once-meridian-delivers-data/
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on February 04, 2017, 12:16
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iF9_3DLEbk

http://www.youtube.com/v/1iF9_3DLEbk&fs=1

It's interesting to hear how Bob Ludwig describes what he hears with MQA.

Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on February 04, 2017, 13:40
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iF9_3DLEbk

http://www.youtube.com/v/1iF9_3DLEbk&fs=1

It's interesting to hear how Bob Ludwig describes what he hears with MQA.


Hate to say this, but many of his statements are complete marketing-talk off the MQA playbook no doubt… (notice comments are disabled for that YouTube video)…

@ 2.00min he says;
Quote
The thing about the Authentication aspect of MQA, is that I can know that the listener at home is listening to the identical analog sound that I’ve approved and that the artist has approved.

Hello! Not so! ;D

MQA Authentication ensures that the digital bitstream fed into the final D-to-A stage on a DAC is what’s been approved by the Mastering engineer and the Artist, NOT the analog output.   The Analog output is entirely depending on the rest of the system chain including the actually D-to-A stage, the output filters, the Pre-Amp, the Amp, the Speakers, the cabling, etc… All of which MQA has absolutely no control over.   In other words, what the listener at home hears of an MQA’ed track is not identical to what’s been approved, unless one has the exact same playback-chain as from the Mastering studio!

And when Ludwig goes on about MQA’s “de-blur algorithm”… all he’s talking about is Meridian’s Apodizing filters; minimum-phase with no pre-ringing, applied at both the mastering stage and playback; thats literally been around for a decade without MQA! Hardly a revolution. They’re really doing a major marketing spin. If you haven’t seen the new MQA spin-off website; http://bobtalks.co.uk (http://bobtalks.co.uk)

IMHO MQA supporters can’t see the forest for the trees; MQA is simply a modern day Proprietary DRM/Copy-Protection scheme with compression to aid streaming. Which makes Meridian/Bob Stuart & Reinet Investments (majority shareholder of Meridian) a lot of money.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on February 04, 2017, 15:13
I don't know if Ludwig is a techie but I don't doubt his earnestness about what he's heard with MQA.

I do think the tech works but I'd love to hear how Meridian's flagship speakers implement it.

Last I heard, Berkeley is working a field upgrade solution to implement MQA and there's even rumors PS Audio is implementing some form of MQA support using the Bridge.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on February 04, 2017, 19:55
I don't know if Ludwig is a techie but I don't doubt his earnestness about what he's heard with MQA.
...

You’re right, he’s not really a techie as such, he’s educated in Music from Eastman, but he is a Lifer at the AES.  You’d expect though, at a minimum he’d remember that the output-chain including the speakers have such a huge impact on the final analog sound. Or at best, counter check into MQA’s marketing-speak and not just regurgitating Stuart’s pitch.

Here’s another Mastering Engineer/MQA vid that has the same B.S. point being shovelled ;D

http://www.youtube.com/v/YZ9yvoRN63c&fs=1


...
I do think the tech works but I'd love to hear how Meridian's flagship speakers implement it.
...

I don't believe the Meridian speakers will decode MQA (not enough horse power in them). Their Ultra DAC decodes MQA and spits out encrypted high-rez PCM as MHR stream to the digital speakers.


...
Last I heard, Berkeley is working a field upgrade solution to implement MQA and there's even rumors PS Audio is implementing some form of MQA support using the Bridge.

As is dCS. MSB already supports it (requiring an internal module upgrade). Depending on how pervasive MQA streaming becomes, we’ll see other top-end manufacturers also looking to support it. It wouldn’t be radically different than how FLAC or ALAC is natively support by DACs today, though probably requires a little more grunt, compute cycles wise.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on February 14, 2017, 02:12
Oh man! I can't believe these guys going to pocket so much $$$ by the marketing tactics!!!

https://www.linn.co.uk/blog/mqa-is-bad-for-music
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: jayou on February 17, 2017, 20:29
https://parttimeaudiophile.com/2017/02/16/mqa-and-universal-music-group-announce-multi-year-deal/

Sent from my Redmi Note 3 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: engjoo on February 17, 2017, 22:51
https://parttimeaudiophile.com/2017/02/16/mqa-and-universal-music-group-announce-multi-year-deal/

Sent from my Redmi Note 3 using Tapatalk



Hello to Tersa Teng on MQA ! :-)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on February 20, 2017, 06:55
Yippeee!! PS Audio just announced MQA support in Bridge 2. Free de
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: malsound on February 25, 2017, 02:43
http://www.youtube.com/v/EVwonOkFHsY&fs=1
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on February 25, 2017, 09:32
Yippeee!! PS Audio just announced MQA support in Bridge 2. Free de

(Not that I’m a big fan of MQA obviously… but… )

You do realise of course that Paul McGowan is so full of sh*t? ;D

(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/PSA-P1_zpsfc35wwfg.png~original)

Hello! ::) … The Bridge II board OEM Supplier is implementing MQA on their board. PS-Audio is just incorporating that update load for the DS DAC. In the above post and in subsequent posts Paul makes it appear as if PS-Audio is doing the actual MQA code work themselves… Kekekek  ;D, talk about stretching the truth, what a wanker!

Not just that, take a look at this;

(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/PSA-p2_zpsbkgluued.png~original)

Did Paul just try to suggest that Ted knows more about DACs than Meridian/Bob Stuart?? Hahaha…. hilarious ;D. McGowan’s turning into a real clown. Bob Stuart and the crew at Meridian are far smarter than Paul, and significantly more experienced (by decades) about DACs than Ted. Paul could learn a thing or two about how to be humble ::)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on February 25, 2017, 14:51
(Not that I’m a big fan of MQA obviously… but… )

You do realise of course that Paul McGowan is so full of sh*t? ;D

(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/PSA-P1_zpsfc35wwfg.png~original)

Hello! ::) … The Bridge II board OEM Supplier is implementing MQA on their board. PS-Audio is just incorporating that update load for the DS DAC. In the above post and in subsequent posts Paul makes it appear as if PS-Audio is doing the actual MQA code work themselves… Kekekek  ;D, talk about stretching the truth, what a wanker!

Not just that, take a look at this;

(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/PSA-p2_zpsbkgluued.png~original)

Did Paul just try to suggest that Ted knows more about DACs than Meridian/Bob Stuart?? Hahaha…. hilarious ;D. McGowan’s turning into a real clown. Bob Stuart and the crew at Meridian are far smarter than Paul, and significantly more experienced (by decades) about DACs than Ted. Paul could learn a thing or two about how to be humble ::)

I agreed Paul and Ted, these guys know what they are doing. Their PS DirectStream DACs up-sampling PCM and DSD to 'high bit-rate DSD' which is converted to analogue. Putting MQA decoder into DSD DAC will simply destroy the code and renders it sound worse. Note: MQA decoder must always be connected directly to a 'PCM DAC' when doing multi-bit conversion to analogue' It is strictly a PCM playback.

The area where MQA can do is in the 'bridge' which can either be a first decode or a 'renderer'. Depending on the user, if one choose to do first decode say for example in Tidal desktop app, then the 'bridge' will behave like a renderer, second unfolding the information. This second unfolding information (PCM) can then be convert by any DAC. (not optimised)

However, for MQA to work at its optimal level, the MQA decoder needs to built-in directly to a PCM DAC, the decoder can better know what type of DAC chip it uses and optimise the 'de-blurring' to the digital filters found inside the DAC chip. Because of the tight integration between the MQA decoder and the DAC chip, 3rd unfolding and maximum effect of 'de-blurring' (reducing the 'ringing' effect in over-sampling digital filter') effect can now takes place. This is called 'hardware decoding'

The 'ringing' caused by over-sampling digital filter in modern DAC chip called 'Time Domain Distortion' is becoming a real issue, it effects how instruments sound, its tonal characteristics in the audible range. Very little is known in the early day of digital audio. 'Frequency Domain Distortion' of course has been re-solved by over-sampling digital filter in the past.     
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on February 25, 2017, 17:51
I agreed Paul and Ted, these guys know what they are doing...

Errmmm… dude, you completely missed the point of my post  ::)

Let me put in simple terms - Paul McGowan implies PS Audio made a choice of “implementing” MQA on the DirectStream DAC on their Bridge II board. When in fact, it’s their OEM supplier of that board who are actually doing the implementation. PS Audio is not doing anything themselves except wrap their OEM supplier’s firmware update into a DirectStream Bridge II update.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on March 04, 2017, 11:34
Beware they are many recordings done in the early days of CDs are mastered in 16/44.1 and are streamed/downloads as upsampled 24/96 or higher. People who don't know the mastering process will assume they are listening to HiRes recordings!

This misleading and therefore I don't pay for such a digital downloads and streaming. I'll keep away until they are honest about what they are offering. Such incident happened at HiResaudio.com recently. The format is completely withdrawn from the selves and issues the followings:- (which has been deleted with request from format developer)

1st statement:

Breaking News: HIGHRESAUDIO to stop offering MQA. Proprietary system solutions and licensing models aren't what customers want. MQA is NOT lossless, the original signal is never recovered, estimate to recover at most 17bits (reduces the sampling rate), reduces the frequency range, SNR reduced by 3bit, aliasing with artifacts at 18kHz. MQA encoding filters manipulate drastically the original source. No analysis tools are available to verify the encoded MQA content. Therefore no quality control is possible. highresaudio.com stands for offering purity, original mastering source, none manipulated, tweaked or up-sampled content and codecs that are widely supported and offer use of freedom.
"We hope that MQA will adjust all the above issues. We are truly disappointed, the way MQA has progressed in the past year. We have been mislead and blinded by trust and promises."

2nd statement:

HIGHRESAUDIO to stop offering MQA. We decided not to offer and support MQA any longer. We will take MQA out of the shop by 01.03. We already have taken down the MQA icon and search function in our shop.
HIGHRESAUDIO stands for offering purity, original mastering source, none manipulated, tweaked or up-sampled content and codecs that are widely supported and offer use of freedom. You can trust us in what we do and have to offer!
We sincerely hope for the future, that MQA will supply analysis and verification tools in order to ensure the quality of product.
P.S. This is a revised version from our post yesterday! Which was not a fake. Upon request from MQA, we deleted that post.



Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on March 04, 2017, 11:48
Beware they are many recordings done in the early days of CDs are mastered in 16/44.1 and are streamed/downloads as upsampled 24/96 or higher. People who don't know the mastering process will assume they are listening to HiRes recordings!

This misleading and therefore I don't pay for such a digital downloads and streaming. I'll keep away until they are honest about what they are offering.


this happened with HDTracks also when they were selling fake hi-res files. they simply claimed that they could only sell what the record companies were giving them. that claim didn't look too good on them & eventually they did remove the fake hi res files. until today, it's quite a chore to verify what you're buying on HDTracks because the liner notes don't always tell you what the source of the files are. the consumer will have to rely on the kindness of strangers on various audiophile forums who purchase these files & then verify them for their authenticity.

i do hope that with MQA, the record companies really do give the MQA folks access to the actual master tapes so that they can create these files sourced directly from the record company's master tapes. otherwise, what's the point? MQA will also turn out to be snake oil in a different bottle.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on March 05, 2017, 14:45
The entire catalogue (the format) from HiResAudio.com is withdrawn, this is really a serious issue here. It does not appear to just a few 'up sampling' but there are many other things that does not look very good on the format itself. This may already send a very clear message to other music download providers.

Hi-Res recordings are now available in form of PCM and DSD and I don't see the reason why one has to invest (time and money) in another audio gadget just to playback this format.   
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: macrotrust on March 06, 2017, 23:25
http://www.youtube.com/v/JPempOn1QgY&fs=1

Interesting view on MQA. It seems just a marketing BS to milk consumer.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: wizardofoz on March 09, 2017, 13:20
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2017/03/highresaudio-com-calls-for-a-deeper-technical-analysis-of-mqa/
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on March 09, 2017, 18:19
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2017/03/highresaudio-com-calls-for-a-deeper-technical-analysis-of-mqa/

Looks like cat will be out from the bag sooner than expected. Doesn't look when manufacturer is not forthcoming on their revelations.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on March 11, 2017, 07:02
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2017/03/highresaudio-com-calls-for-a-deeper-technical-analysis-of-mqa/

Thanks for the link!

Darko wasn't saying anything that isn't already public elsewhere, but Wow! That 44-page technical analysis paper (http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/163618/MQA-Technical%20Analysis-Hypotheses-Paper.pdf) is pretty serious. I’ve only had an initial quick flip-through, these guys seem to have done their home work! :)

It was quite obvious to me from early on that MQA is really an amalgamation of the last 10 years of Meridian's development, all wrapped into a nice licensing bundle. ;D Unfortunately for us Consumers, the dumbo Audio Media jumped in hook line and sinker to propogate rubbish  ;D
Title: Meridian MQA
Post by: Boxerfan88 on March 11, 2017, 07:41
After reading the recent posts in this thread, I'm even more convinced to stay with FLAC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on March 11, 2017, 19:41
i had a chance to listen to MQA files for the very first time today using the Meridian Explorer v2 which was streaming Tidal Masters from a MBP 2016 touch bar model. I was listening with my Oppo PM-3 plugged in and I was pleasantly surprised. if MQA is indeed an elaborate con job, then I didn't realize it during the 40mins or so I spent listening to Deep Purple, Led Zep, Opeth and Iron Maiden. I'll be going back again tomorrow to give it a few more spins. not sure how much the Meridian Explorer v2 is going for @ CanJam but @ Amazon it's USD199.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on March 11, 2017, 19:47
i had a chance to listen to MQA files for the very first time today using the Meridian Explorer v2 which was streaming Tidal Masters from a MBP 2016 touch bar model. I was listening with my Oppo PM-3 plugged in and I was pleasantly surprised. if MQA is indeed an elaborate con job, then I didn't realize it during the 40mins or so I spent listening to Deep Purple, Led Zep, Opeth and Iron Maiden. I'll be going back again tomorrow to give it a few more spins. not sure how much the Meridian Explorer v2 is going for @ CanJam but @ Amazon it's USD199.

Ditto.

I've been marveling at even software decoded MQA on the TIDAL app running on my Devialet Expert 200 in the store.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on March 11, 2017, 20:07
... I was pleasantly surprised. if MQA is indeed an elaborate con job, then I didn't realize it during the 40mins or so I spent listening to Deep Purple, Led Zep, Opeth and Iron Maiden. I'll be going back again tomorrow to give it a few more spins. not sure how much the Meridian Explorer v2 is going for @ CanJam but @ Amazon it's USD199.

Give it a careful listen… If you’re hoping for better than Redbook (sounding) streamed music, then MQA’s about the only game in town. If you’re mainly interested in downloaded high-rez tracks, then MQA’s a major scam; stick with full high-resolution from HDTracks or HighResolution Audio, etc. IMHO, you’d be wasting your money with the Explorer2, it’s lousy on anything but MQA tracks. And even then, get yourself a Chord Mojo if you need something portable. Couple it with Tidal’s MQA (partial) software decode, it’s way better than Tidal + Explorer2 full MQA decode.  :P


That said, I had more time to read up on XiVero’s analysis paper against MQA , it’s just excellent! Based on sound (pun unintended) engineering principles and validation in typical German style, it really demolishes MQA’s sales pitch.

The 2 most damaging areas;

(1) that the effective bit-rate bit-depth for any MQA encoded track file can only ever be 17 bits, whereas MQA is leading the industry to believe it’s effectively 20bits

(2) that MQA’s “de-blurring” filter technic used during both encoding and decoding in fact negatively impact temporal resolution of high-rez tracks (fattening impulse responses) - most interesting is their case for native high-resolution (or up-sampled) and using linear phase FIR filters well past the audio-band (>24kHz), instead of Meridian’s Apodizing filters at or under 20kHz.

I hope they distribute this paper to all the Studios. Let’s see of Bob Stuart responds to the shot across his bow ;D
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on March 11, 2017, 23:09
What is "fattening impulse response"?

 ;D
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on March 12, 2017, 07:28
What is "fattening impulse response"?

 ;D

I meant that an impulse’s transient response is literally lengthened in time post MQA de-blurring filter, not to mention it’s phase shifted (since it’s non-linear type). No pre-ringing unnaturalness, but not sharp anymore (maybe it sounds pleasing to some ears, but its no longer accurate ;) )
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on March 12, 2017, 13:52
My hands are off from MQA... Better stick to PCM FLAC and DSD!
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on March 18, 2017, 07:07
FFS! ::)

http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/news/post/pioneering-mqa-audio-technology-used-in-mastering-process (http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/news/post/pioneering-mqa-audio-technology-used-in-mastering-process)

Quote
A recording by Astor Piazzolla “the single most important figure in the history of tango” will be the first MQA recording to be released on compact disc in Japan.  The album “A. Piazzolla 
by Strings and Oboe” – recorded by the UNAMAS Piazzolla Septet and mastered by respected producer and mastering engineer Mick Sawaguchi – will be released by the Ottava label on 17 March.

Apparently playable exclusively only on Meridian's latest 808v6 CD player (https://www.meridian-audio.com/en/products/cd-players/reference-808v6/)... although if it's redbook standard, can't imagine why it can't be ripped and played back via something like Audirvana 3.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on March 18, 2017, 17:29
FFS! ::)

http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/news/post/pioneering-mqa-audio-technology-used-in-mastering-process (http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/news/post/pioneering-mqa-audio-technology-used-in-mastering-process)

Apparently playable exclusively only on Meridian's latest 808v6 CD player (https://www.meridian-audio.com/en/products/cd-players/reference-808v6/)... although if it's redbook standard, can't imagine why it can't be ripped and played back via something like Audirvana 3.

I read this news too and as I understand it, the CD can be played back on any CD player but to get the full 100% MQA "benefit", your CD player must be connected to a MQA certified DAC. Not sure what happens when you rip the CD though but I believe the ripped files will still be encoded with the MQA tech and you can then decode the files on Audirvana with a MQA certified DAC. does that make sense to you?
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on March 18, 2017, 19:28
I read this news too and as I understand it...

You’re on the right track… But, when played back on non-MQA CD-Players, the encoded CDs will have compromised sound quality compared to normal redbook disc, especially the dynamic range due to folded-in higher resolution content  :-\

In any case, I don't think this is going to take-off. MQA is heading towards a ditch from the looks of it.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on March 19, 2017, 06:36
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/Kaching_zpsfeozai36.jpg~original)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on April 02, 2017, 07:08
I’m not generally a fan of PFO, but this piece from Andreas Koch is hilarious ;D

http://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/questions-answers-mqa-interview-andreas-koch/ (http://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/questions-answers-mqa-interview-andreas-koch/)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: 13CashewNuts on April 02, 2017, 09:26
I’m not generally a fan of PFO, but this piece from Andreas Koch is hilarious ;D

http://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/questions-answers-mqa-interview-andreas-koch/ (http://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/questions-answers-mqa-interview-andreas-koch/)
Thanks for forwarding the link. I enjoyed reading the 'creative' part of the interview!
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: malsound on April 02, 2017, 13:58

http://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php/opinion/1057-mqa-one-year-later-suddenly-more-questions (http://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php/opinion/1057-mqa-one-year-later-suddenly-more-questions)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on April 03, 2017, 09:09
i believe there are quite a number of us here who subscribe to Tidal. while not many of us have MQA hardware enabled DACs, we definitely are using pretty cool stuff to stream Tidal with. so what has been your experience streaming MQA (software decoding) via Tidal Masters?

I've been doing this over the weekend via Audirvana 3 and I have to say it sounds pretty good to my ears. i still don't feel compelled to rush out and buy a MQA hardware enabled DAC until I know for sure that whatever I'm hearing is the genuine stuff straight from the studio masters, as originally advertised by MQA. this vital piece of information is still strangely missing from the packaging and presentation. and yet MQA seems to be getting traction...

nevertheless, I've been listening to the new Mastodon album, "Emperor of Sand" and the new Jethro Tull album "The String Quartets", via Tidal Masters. using Audirvana's 1st level software decoding, the data is sent to my WA8 Eclipse and then to my Focal Utopia cans. it's nice to see the sample rate showing up as the same one being sold on HDTracks, for both albums. i have not had a chance to compare these 2 albums to the regular HiFi versions on Tidal because for now, it's quite enjoyable to just listen to the Tidal Masters and simply enjoy the music :)

i don't know why i didn't activate my 3 month trial with Audirvana and Tidal until now but I'm glad I waited. looking fwd to do more listening to decide for myself if Tidal Masters and MQA is all that it is hyped up to be.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on April 08, 2017, 15:38
... so what has been your experience streaming MQA (software decoding) via Tidal Masters?
...

I've posted my views in a couple of previous threads...

http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=195546.msg1187101#msg1187101 (http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=195546.msg1187101#msg1187101)

http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=195546.msg1187231#msg1187231 (http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=195546.msg1187231#msg1187231)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on April 15, 2017, 07:32
Another one bites the dust...  ;D

http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2017/04/auralic-firmware-v5-0-adds-dsp-engine-web-browser-control/ (http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2017/04/auralic-firmware-v5-0-adds-dsp-engine-web-browser-control/)
Quote
...
Here’s (AURALiC's CEO) Wang with more information:

“This pretty much means we at AURALiC are saying no to MQA. We are no longer interested in their technology. We want to keep everything open but they want to keep it closed. We are not in the same boat. I don’t believe the very High End will benefit from MQA as it only degrades sound quality, not improve it.”
...
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: MusicEar on April 17, 2017, 21:01
i believe there are quite a number of us here who subscribe to Tidal. while not many of us have MQA hardware enabled DACs, we definitely are using pretty cool stuff to stream Tidal with. so what has been your experience streaming MQA (software decoding) via Tidal Masters?

I've been doing this over the weekend via Audirvana 3 and I have to say it sounds pretty good to my ears. i still don't feel compelled to rush out and buy a MQA hardware enabled DAC until I know for sure that whatever I'm hearing is the genuine stuff straight from the studio masters, as originally advertised by MQA. this vital piece of information is still strangely missing from the packaging and presentation. and yet MQA seems to be getting traction...

nevertheless, I've been listening to the new Mastodon album, "Emperor of Sand" and the new Jethro Tull album "The String Quartets", via Tidal Masters. using Audirvana's 1st level software decoding, the data is sent to my WA8 Eclipse and then to my Focal Utopia cans. it's nice to see the sample rate showing up as the same one being sold on HDTracks, for both albums. i have not had a chance to compare these 2 albums to the regular HiFi versions on Tidal because for now, it's quite enjoyable to just listen to the Tidal Masters and simply enjoy the music :)

i don't know why i didn't activate my 3 month trial with Audirvana and Tidal until now but I'm glad I waited. looking fwd to do more listening to decide for myself if Tidal Masters and MQA is all that it is hyped up to be.

You can use software decoding(max 2x decode) found in Tidal app to do the comparison between 16/44.1 FLAC and MQA. When you subscribe to Tidal Hi-Fi, you get Tidal Master for free. Even though Tidal app support up to 2x decode, up to 96kHz, this is more than enough to reproduce all the sub-sonic frequencies up to 48kHz. In fact most studio recordings hardly go beyond 50kHz bandwidth.

I don't any reason to invest a hardware MQA DAC, the rest which just un-fold to 384kHz is just 're-sampling', due to nature of lossy compression algorithms, there's no enough bit rate to code the additional information above 48kHz bandwidth and beyond. MQA is still in its infancy, investing a hardware that playback just that is a big risk.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: malsound on April 20, 2017, 16:50

http://www.stereophile.com/content/meridian-audio-ultra-dac-da-processor#T9EzmrAlXeEvK55v

Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on April 22, 2017, 08:18
http://www.stereophile.com/content/meridian-audio-ultra-dac-da-processor#T9EzmrAlXeEvK55v

In the conclusion, JA rates the Ultra as the best DAC he’s heard alongside dCS’ Vivaldi/Rossini … I’ve no reason to doubt that view since I share his love for dCS ;D

That said, his review of listening to MQA on this DAC is noticeable more muted (pun unintended) than any of his previous MQA reviews… Maybe I’m reading between the lines mistakenly, I think JA has tempered his MQA views substantially in light of the very real criticisms about the technology ;).  The measurement section is even more interesting … Figure 6. shows the DAC’s performance with 384kHz source response rolling off more than with 192kHz source… which ironically is what I experienced with Explorer2; one data rate lower than the maximum supported sounds better on Meridian DACs.
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on April 29, 2017, 08:06
MQA continues to get slammed  ;D

https://music-room.com/magazine/insight/mqa-the-lossy-codec-no-end-user-asked-for-or-needs (https://music-room.com/magazine/insight/mqa-the-lossy-codec-no-end-user-asked-for-or-needs)
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on April 29, 2017, 10:15
The last thing record labels want - is a mass produced product out there that could flawlessly reproduce the original master. they would much rather keep on pumping out those intentionally-dumb down remasters in new formats. Also, they want you to pay per use. Never be able to own those digital data, never be able to replicate them, never be able to share them with your peers.

To them, MQA is a god send.

 ;D

For a new format to succeed, it needs the music labels to support the hardware makers. Unfortunately, the 3 major labels seem to have taken aliance with MQA.
Title: Meridian MQA
Post by: Boxerfan88 on April 29, 2017, 11:12
Another way to look at it... is MQA trying to be a better MP3? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 06, 2017, 11:00
Stereophile’s AXPONA snapshots of MQA opinions (good to see them at least attempt to not take sides, unlike TAS :P)

http://www.youtube.com/v/erMFQt5_HoM&fs=1

Ps: WTF is a “part-time Audiophile”?!
Title: Re: Meridian MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on May 06, 2017, 11:58
THAT final comment from VPI :) LMAO
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 13, 2017, 12:34
http://www.stereophile.com/content/munich-milestones-mqa (http://www.stereophile.com/content/munich-milestones-mqa)

Quote
Munich Milestones for MQA

In anticipation of next week's Munich High End, which takes place May 18–21, MQA has announced several breakthroughs. The first involves its hardware partners, who have expanded to include AudioQuest, CanEver Audio, dCS, Esoteric, IAG, Krell, Lumin, Mark Levinson, Moon by Simaudio, Pro-Ject Audio Systems, TEAC, and Wadax. These are in addition to its existing partners, who include Aurender, Bel Canto, Bluesound, NAD, Brinkmann, Meridian, MSB, Mytek, Onkyo, Pioneer and Technics. All of the latter are expected to demonstrate MQA at the Munich show.



Surprisingly no mention of PS-Audio… but, this is how they're getting it, via their streaming board supplier;

Quote

MQA also has new integration partners. StreamUnlimited is implementing MQA into their modular software solution, and Conversdigital will implement into their mconnect module. Manufacturers whose products include either company's modules will now be able to market MQA-ready products.

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on May 13, 2017, 12:50
Apparently it is going to be full unfolding up to 24/192 on the Bridge 2 now
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 13, 2017, 17:44
Apparently it is going to be full unfolding up to 24/192 on the Bridge 2 now

Not surprised by the 192k limit, seems to be a hard-limit on the Conversedigital board PS-Audio (and Ayre) use. :P
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on May 13, 2017, 18:21
Not surprised by the 192k limit, seems to be a hard-limit on the Conversedigital board PS-Audio (and Ayre) use. :P

Which is better than the original plan which was just up to 24/96. Isn't MQA up to 24/192 anyway
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 13, 2017, 19:09
... Isn't MQA up to 24/192 anyway

Not quite. Technically, it can hierarchically “fold” pretty much any PCM rate, even 384k/24bits… Unfortunately the only technical papers that covers any level of MQA detail are;
- Stuart & Craven’s AES paper; ”A Hierarchical Approach to Archiving and Distribution” (http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=17501), and
- Stuart & Keith Howard’s paper; JAS Journal 2015 Vol.55 No.5 (http://www.jas-audio.or.jp/jas_cms/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/201509-008-019.pdf)

Quote
The process is hierarchically scalable, so if the source were, for example, a 352.8 kHz file then we use three folds to reach the final transmission rate of 44.1 kHz. Similarly, if the source were only 96 kHz, then we start with the lossless process of Figure 14. MQA is also hierarchically scalable so that each type of fold can be used one octave higher to enable double-speed transmission options.

That said, in all the marketing material, including MQA YouTube videos, they only talk to 96k rates, but the Explorer2 can do 192k (hardware decode limit), but the Ultra DAC supports all the way to 384k MQA. 2L has sample MQA files of 352.8k source files; http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html? (http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html?)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on May 13, 2017, 19:54
Maybe it was a limitation to fit it into the CD Quality bandwidth for streaming that limited it to 24/192
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 14, 2017, 09:10
Maybe it was a limitation to fit it into the CD Quality bandwidth for streaming that limited it to 24/192

Did you mean on the Bridge II board? If so, no, it's the Bridge II board that has a limitation of only being able to support up to 192k, nothing to do with MQA decode implementation (there was a previous discussion (http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=243538.msg1183806#msg1183806) about it here on X’Place on a DAC thread :P

By the way, I just read-up Paul’s posts about the Huron release that supposedly includes full MQA decode on Bridge II… and Dennis’ confirmation that it would work on PWD II as well. Well done Conversdigital  ;)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on May 14, 2017, 09:16
Did you mean on the Bridge II board? If so, no, it's the Bridge II board that has a limitation of only being able to support up to 192k, nothing to do with MQA decode implementation (there was a previous discussion (http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=243538.msg1183806#msg1183806) about it here on X’Place on a DAC thread :P

By the way, I just read-up Paul’s posts about the Huron release that supposedly includes full MQA decode on Bridge II… and Dennis’ confirmation that it would work on PWD II as well. Well done Conversdigital  ;)

Huron is thanks to Ted Smith.

Which tracks are 24/384 on Tidal?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 14, 2017, 09:23
Huron is thanks to Ted Smith.

Which tracks are 24/384 on Tidal?

Yes, but I'm guessing the release package also includes code to support MQA from ConversDigital that gets installed on Bridge II.

There aren't too many 384k provenance tracks on Tidal... in fact I can't recall any other than maybe the 2L albums :P None of the Naxos DXDs are on MQA, they're not on Tidal anyway.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 15, 2017, 23:47
...
Which tracks are 24/384 on Tidal?

Decided to take a closer look and verify what bit rate the 2L album on Tidal “Masters” was encoded in… Turns out it is from DXD sources  ;)  Ironically, Tidal’s desktop App doesn’t show the original bit rate of the MQA tracks. The only way I can tell for sure right now seems to be via Audirvana 3+ Tidal streams.  Majority of the “Masters” material seem to be sourced from either 24/96, or 24/44.1, and a few 24/192. The only 24/384 one seems to be the 2L album.

Here’s the 2L MQA’ed album streaming via A3+… the original PCM master bit-rate labelled up-top on the right next to the Audirvana branding/logo (the 2L Album also happens to be "MQA Studio Authenticated" - top left below the transport buttons)
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a436/andrewc888/A3plus-Tidal_zpssldhokap.png~original)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on May 16, 2017, 06:35
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 21, 2017, 20:07
dCS Rossini running beta firmware with MQA decode;

(https://www.audiostream.com/images/styles/600_wide/public/51917dcs.jpg?itok=HKXxm1oM)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 27, 2017, 22:51
Like the Meridian Explorer2, looks like the AudioQuest DragonFly USB DACs do full MQA decodes up to 384k encodes!

http://www.youtube.com/v/P3mQA_EmHNI&fs=1
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on May 31, 2017, 23:49
http://www.youtube.com/v/3r_VRxcwODI&fs=1
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on June 03, 2017, 07:23
http://www.youtube.com/v/3r_VRxcwODI&fs=1

Bob trying to convince viewers that all we can hear is 17 bits of resolution because of air (@0.40 min)… is just rubbish ::) … Of course he’d say so; because MQA effectively reduces high-rez audio down to 17bit depths only, i.e. only marginally better than redbook resolution.

And us poor consumers have to put up with fake high-rez audio streams no thanks to the bloody Record companies adopting MQA :(
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on June 03, 2017, 08:59
Forward half an hour in video.
http://www.youtube.com/v/QjMjyeJe48U&fs=1
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on June 04, 2017, 15:14
Forward half an hour in video.
http://www.youtube.com/v/QjMjyeJe48U&fs=1

Ironic that an AES video has ground loop buzzing all over the place ;D

“The first rule in Mastering is to do no harm.” — Bob Ludwig.

Seems he’s now contradicting himself  ;)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on July 04, 2017, 01:06
Funny, all those links, but no description of personal experiences. A heyday for vendors when consumers trust their purchases on articles? Can anyone describe what is different with their ears, of Mqa?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 04, 2017, 06:10
Funny, all those links, but no description of personal experiences. A heyday for vendors when consumers trust their purchases on articles? Can anyone describe what is different with their ears, of Mqa?

Funny, so quick to judge even before bothering to read this thread properly.

http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=190717.msg1150528#msg1150528 (http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=190717.msg1150528#msg1150528)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on October 05, 2017, 18:29

http://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php/opinion/1104-mismatched-masters-and-false-frequencies-is-mqa-better-worse-or-just-different

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on October 10, 2017, 23:15
Bob trying to convince viewers that all we can hear is 17 bits of resolution because of air (@0.40 min)… is just rubbish ::) … Of course he’d say so; because MQA effectively reduces high-rez audio down to 17bit depths only, i.e. only marginally better than redbook resolution.

And us poor consumers have to put up with fake high-rez audio streams no thanks to the bloody Record companies adopting MQA :(
unless you can prove you can tell the differences in actual hear tests, what do you have to proffer? a bunch of mumbo slated for an engineering publicate? I can do these, but I do not even attempt to do these, much less for an idiot who for years base things on measurements. sorry, your actions invited that pejorative.
to be fair, join me in a session where your ears can know, then have the damning results published here, before you start to spout opinions again, informed although there by technical suggestions
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on October 10, 2017, 23:17
you will have many excuses before you even agree to a ear test
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 11, 2017, 18:30
unless you can prove you can tell the differences in actual hear tests, what do you have to proffer? a bunch of mumbo slated for an engineering publicate? I can do these, but I do not even attempt to do these, much less for an idiot who for years base things on measurements. sorry, your actions invited that pejorative.
to be fair, join me in a session where your ears can know, then have the damning results published here, before you start to spout opinions again, informed although there by technical suggestions

you will have many excuses before you even agree to a ear test


Let me get this straight... You haven’t even heard any MQA hardware yourself, but based on my review and posts, you want me to prove to you that I can hear a difference?!?!?

Hahaha... Yeah... right... sure. By the way, which fcuking planet are you from? ;D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on October 11, 2017, 19:02
i thought triple dots here is rather pissed that you've elucidated all the flaws of MQA by measurable means.
i take it that then he must involved with people or biz who are into sales of equipment that are MQA-enabled?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 11, 2017, 19:06
i thought triple dots here is rather pissed that you've elucidated all the flaws of MQA by measurable means.
i take it that then he must involved with people or biz who are into sales of equipment that are MQA-enabled?

Nah... I think Mr. Yeo just has some bug up his arse :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: calamity on October 12, 2017, 08:17
After briefly skimming through the discussion here about MQA hardware can't help but be reminded of THX.

But I for one is still trying to explore the truth about MQA.

To begin with, the man behind MQA said (I paraphrase):
1. MQA is borne out of the understanding of digital processing, digital sampling and neuroscience,
2. The need to squeeze the audio file for streaming.
3. The song is mastered with points 1 & 2 in mind.
4. The artist would then authenticate (approve) the master, satisfied that this is how it would be delivered to the listener.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Hass on October 12, 2017, 09:16
all 4 is a problem for hi fidelity especially no.4 cos artist would actually mean record labels who wants to sell as much records as possible to the mass audience who's using beats like headphones and boom boxes
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on October 12, 2017, 12:07
People is fed up of MQA claims. MQA trade off resolution over higher sampling frequency, i.e. >20kHz, thus the bit rate can be capped without increasing in the case for PCM higher sampling rate. 17 bit of resolution at 96kHz is still considered Hi-Res, but one can still adopted a lossless FLAC. Here is some maths:

MQA lossy compression bit-rate is capped around ~ 1.5Mbps regardless of input sampling frequencies through its encoder, i.e ,88.2kHz all the way to 384kHz from the A/D converter is lossy compressed to 44.1kHz/48kHz (undecoded files for distribution).

Now if MQA is going to deliver 17 bit of resolution at 96kHz (after fully decoded), then a lossless FLAC at 17 bit/96kHz will likely to cap at 1.636Mbps, slightly more. This is one way to deliver lossless FLAC through streaming. I don't see why this cannot be accomplished.     
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: calamity on October 12, 2017, 13:02
all 4 is a problem for hi fidelity especially no.4 cos artist would actually mean record labels who wants to sell as much records as possible to the mass audience who's using beats like headphones and boom boxes

Hmm your claims are likely to be right since MQA is widely available for pop songs, which are incidentally targeted for the masses. So then the question should be, does MQA sound better than MP3/AAC when listened through Beats?

With this argument it looks like then, MQA is not targeted to improve sound quality of sources (CD, FLAC, etc) that "real" hifi is getting. MQA is only to improve MP3/AAC that the masses are getting.

Like to hear other sides of the coin.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Hass on October 12, 2017, 13:34
seem like it to me. For audiophiles, there's enough information in traditional sources that only recently we are able to retrieve the details and there might be more. imo, the limitation is not in the source but on the reproduction.. plenty of things for us to play with.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 12, 2017, 13:48
Yes, if you look at the theory side of it, it sucks but I have listen to MQA and find it rather good sounding....sorry but it's true.

192K file bought from HD Tracks.
(http://audio.sg/pic/bluebayou-01.jpg)

MQA Master streaming on Tidal
(http://audio.sg/pic/bluebayou-02.jpg)

MQA sounded superior....sorry.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on October 12, 2017, 14:26
Yes, if you look at the theory side of it, it sucks but I have listen to MQA and find it rather good sounding....sorry but it's true.

192K file bought from HD Tracks.
(http://audio.sg/pic/bluebayou-01.jpg)

MQA Master streaming on Tidal
(http://audio.sg/pic/bluebayou-02.jpg)

MQA sounded superior....sorry.

(Audio)

192K file (bought from HD Tracks) playback from storage device?
MQA is streamed in real time from Tidal?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on October 12, 2017, 14:33
Reported recently on Super Best Audio Friends forum.
Someone compared MQA files to 44/16 files, both streamed by Tidal.
Was shocked at how big the difference was.
Loaded them into Audiacity and found that they came from two completely different masters:

1) The MQA file had 4 to 5 dB greater dynamic range.

2) The MQA file is roughly 6 dB louder (the post shows results with a linear scale, so it is difficult to judge precisely).

3) The MQA file had treble frequencies above 5kHz attenuated by 3dB to 6dB, depending on frequency.

Walaoeh, like that must do spectral analysis on the HDTracks version to know whether the re-EQ was done by Prince (before his death he apparently re-mastered much of his early work), or if MQA performed the re-EQ.

In the first case, MQA's deception would be cause for great concern - their files apparently won't sound better if they don't use a better master.

If it is second case, then knn, this is deliberate deception by MQA.

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/mqa-op-ed.3817/page-3#post-166101


Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Hass on October 12, 2017, 15:13

MQA sounded superior....sorry.

(Audio)

great if its better. It doesn't make the 192k worse just that there's a better option now.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on October 12, 2017, 15:32
Record companies are publicly held companies.
The mission statement of record labels is that they have to maximize their profits.
The only reason they are reintroducing vinyl now is because people will pay more than $40 a copy and it is "pirate-proof".

The situation that will develop in the future is that if MQA ever becomes established that the labels will drop both un-molested high-res and  CD, both of which can be pirated. In that scenario all of us will not only need to replace our hardware with MQA-compatible equipment, but they will stop selling discs altogether and only allow streaming (renting). There will be no limits to the prices they charge, and there might be no limits (in the future) to how much undecoded MQA files are degraded to protect their intellectual properties.

If they did it all at once, it would be instantly rejected by everybody. But if they sneak it in, piece-by-piece (first under the guise of "improved sound quality for no increase in your rental fees"), they can slowly screw the consumer once it is established.

Haha! No more CD's ripping and re-selling on the internet in the future.
No more downloads with file sharing to all of your friends.
The current situation is driving the labels fcuking crazy.
No wonder many record labels are accepting MQA with very little resistance....

but wtf sinkies care, right?
they allow the PAP to screw them left, right, centre and they still can continue to vote PAP....
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 12, 2017, 16:31
But the fact is, I am spending less.

I paid over US$100 for a few CDs worth of Linda Ronstadt at 192K 24 bits.

I paid $18 a month for any 3000+ MQA Masters now.  Linda Ronstadt, Lorde, Fleetwood Mac,......

To me, the MQA is the real deal right now.  Sorry.  I have not think long term about the record industry politics yet.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on October 12, 2017, 16:39
But the fact is, I am spending less.

I paid over US$100 for a few CDs worth of Linda Ronstadt at 192K 24 bits.

I paid $18 a month for any 3000+ MQA Masters now.  Linda Ronstadt, Lorde, Fleetwood Mac,......

To me, the MQA is the real deal right now.  Sorry.  I have not think long term about the record industry politics yet.

(Audio)

Are you able to download mqa files?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 12, 2017, 16:43
Are you able to download mqa files?

No I can't download but I have access 24/7 to these MQA files.....I have access to those I never bought yet...so that US$18 a month goes a long long way because I can access new albums. Bonus is that they sounded superior. Sorry.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on October 12, 2017, 16:45
I paid $18 a month for any 3000+ MQA Masters now.  Linda Ronstadt, Lorde, Fleetwood Mac,......

7000+

Tidal MQA List:
http://www.meridianunplugged.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=268355
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on October 12, 2017, 16:48
You only "renting" those files.
You dun own those files.
Whereas with cds and downloads you actually own them.

The thing is this - when mqa is de facto standard, whats to stop the record labels from withdrawing un-molested hi res files and cds and then jack up their music content rental charges?

Haha! Its like the 69.9% and our hdb flats ownership bullsh1t all over again
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Hass on October 12, 2017, 16:59
to most, it doesn't matter if u rent or own as long as u can listen to it.

and about the price, I guess they learn fm Netflix. The best way to fight piracy is to keep prices low.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 12, 2017, 17:03
...
MQA sounded superior....sorry.

(Audio)

Thats a fair comparison, but the fact is that (a) HDTracks is notorious for upsampling rebook files and selling them as high-rez, and (b) MQA has an unfair advantage of using a different master as the source file.

Net of it all though, consumers like us do benefit from availability of MQA streams on Tidal. But if there comes a day that studios decide to distribute exclusively in MQA only - on streams, downloads and disc (I’ve got 2 MQA CDs by the way), we’d be royally fcuked :P
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 12, 2017, 17:12
(1) Go CD shop, I spend about $200 per trip....
(2) Need to rip but worse only at 44K 16 bit.....
(3) Need to find space to store CD...buy IKEA racks, take up my HDB, apartment space, cost money also.

If listen to MQA...
(1) US$18 per month
(2)  No need ripping
(3) No need storage space
(4) If not available on MQA, you are back to 44Khz 16 bits, it also sound good (I don't know why).  Have you heard "Despacito" - Luis Fonsi, Daddy Yankee feat Justin Bieber on Tidal via Roon....surprisingly good....and I never get to buy this single.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 12, 2017, 18:11
No I can't download...


By the way Audio, just for kicks, for an apples-to-apples comparison of high-rez PCM vs. MQA, you can pull files down from 2L - http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html (http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html) … And don’t forget to avail yourself to your Ayre’s Minimum phase filter in “Listen Mode” against it’s “Measure Mode”.

I’m guessing the Ayre/.wav high-rez is going to trash Lumin/MQA (as it did for me when I compared Chord Mojo/.wav high-rez vs. Meridian Explorer2/MQA :) )
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: calamity on October 12, 2017, 18:23
Yes, if you look at the theory side of it, it sucks but I have listen to MQA and find it rather good sounding....sorry but it's true.

192K file bought from HD Tracks.

MQA Master streaming on Tidal

MQA sounded superior....sorry.

(Audio)



It's possible.

Often a times, at home, I find music that come along with movie end credits are fabulously mastered with pinpoint sound staging and musicality even when it's of a lower bitrate than its original high-res music format. Very easily enjoyable. Very much more superior.

In my opinion, mastering is more than just specifications. It's an art form, and it's also a craftsmanship. The guy who mastered your HD Track and the guy who mastered your MQA are two different craftsmen.

Hollywood and MQA mastering engineers must be really skilful.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 12, 2017, 18:59
By the way Audio, just for kicks, for an apples-to-apples comparison of high-rez PCM vs. MQA, you can pull files down from 2L - http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html (http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html) … And don’t forget to avail yourself to your Ayre’s Minimum phase filter in “Listen Mode” against it’s “Measure Mode”.

I’m guessing the Ayre/.wav high-rez is going to trash Lumin/MQA (as it did for me when I compared Chord Mojo/.wav high-rez vs. Meridian Explorer2/MQA :) )

Sorry, Charles Hanson is just as paranoid as you guys over MQA.....he didn't implement the MQA filter.  I asked him to implement because I know it will sound even greater on the Ayre but he refused to answer for obvious reasons.

So, the Lumin S1 now earned it's place on my Hi-Fi rack.

(Audio)
Title: MQA
Post by: milk_vanilla on October 12, 2017, 19:44
I’m still in 2 months tidal hifi trial, going to finish soon. I think i will continue them with subscription. Now I don’t have to turn on my nas for listening the digital.

Let the collection just limited to analogs
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 12, 2017, 19:47
Sorry, Charles Hanson is just as paranoid as you guys over MQA.....he didn't implement the MQA filter.  I asked him to implement because I know it will sound even greater on the Ayre but he refused to answer for obvious reasons.

So, the Lumin S1 now earned it's place on my Hi-Fi rack.

(Audio)

Audio, you misunderstood.. I'm suggesting that .wav high-rez on the Ayre with its minimum-phase filter should sound far better than full-MQA decode on Lumin, when the master source are identical. Chord Mojo (non-MQA decoding DAC) wipes the floor with Meridian Explorer2.

ps: For MQA "Masters" on Tidal; my guess is MQA core decode on Tidal + Ayre DAC should also sound better than full decode via Lumin alone. :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on October 12, 2017, 19:57
7000+

Tidal MQA List:
http://www.meridianunplugged.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=268355

Are all 7000+ MQA titles available to Tidal subscribers in Singapore?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 12, 2017, 22:27
Are all 7000+ MQA titles available to Tidal subscribers in Singapore?

Yes....

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on October 12, 2017, 22:29
Yes....

(Audio)

browsing through the titles listed under Tidal Masters in Roon and Audirvana, it doesn't look like it... but I'll try searching for titles at random, based on that list.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 12, 2017, 22:30
Audio, you misunderstood.. I'm suggesting that .wav high-rez on the Ayre with its minimum-phase filter should sound far better than full-MQA decode on Lumin, when the master source are identical. Chord Mojo (non-MQA decoding DAC) wipes the floor with Meridian Explorer2.

ps: For MQA "Masters" on Tidal; my guess is MQA core decode on Tidal + Ayre DAC should also sound better than full decode via Lumin alone. :)

I tried tonight....no, Lumin sounded better with MQA 96K...when the same MQA master track was forced to play on Ayre, the sample rate was 48K.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 12, 2017, 22:42
Here...select the "Masters and then "view all'

(http://audio.sg/pic/tidalmaster.jpg)

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 12, 2017, 22:57
I tried tonight....no, Lumin sounded better with MQA 96K...when the same MQA master track was forced to play on Ayre, the sample rate was 48K.

(Audio)

If you were using Roon for Tidal playback, it doesn’t yet do core decoding when streaming into the Ayre (via RAAT). You’ll need Tidal natively (or Audirvana 3+) directly via USB into the Ayre.

Not the most convenient, but thats the only way to really compare on a non-decoding DAC at this point  :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 12, 2017, 22:59
If you were using Roon for Tidal playback, it doesn’t yet do core decoding when streaming into the Ayre (via RAAT). You’ll need Tidal natively (or Audirvana 3+) directly via USB into the Ayre.

Not the most convenient, but thats the only way to really compare on a non-decoding DAC at this point  :)

....and that's why I use the Lumin S1.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 12, 2017, 23:02
....and that's why I use the Lumin S1.

(Audio)

Right, so when you say "MQA is better", you're really talking about better for the convenience... (not ultimate sonic better ;D)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 12, 2017, 23:29
....I really meant MQA sounds better...not convenient....really and sorry.

All these for just US$18....why not?

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 12, 2017, 23:40
Lumin S1 and Ayre QX-5 play AIFF 192K 24 bit Blue Bayou - Ayre sounds better.

Lumins S1 and Ayre QX-5 plays MQA 96K Blur Bayou - Lumin Sounds better...Ayre shows 48K sampling, not native MQA.

Constantly MQA 96K Blue Bayou on Lumin sounds best.

That is why I requested Charles Hanson to implement MQA as soon as possible because clearly if Ayre implement, it will sound better than Lumin.

But MQA is very taboo everywhere.....

(Audio)

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: DJQ on October 12, 2017, 23:47
taboo indeed... no no MQA for me...  :-X
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 13, 2017, 01:42
taboo indeed... no no MQA for me...  :-X

Open your mind....you will be surprised how good it sounded....

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: calamity on October 13, 2017, 06:42
What's MQA, Lumin and Ayre? How come can play here play there?
Title: MQA
Post by: milk_vanilla on October 13, 2017, 07:22
What's MQA, Lumin and Ayre? How come can play here play there?

http://www.luminmusic.com/streaming-services.html

Like common dac setup, ayre being fed by lumin / other sources digital out
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on October 13, 2017, 07:27
Need to do spectral analysis on both versions of blue bayou...
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on October 13, 2017, 10:13
Are all 7000+ MQA titles available to Tidal subscribers in Singapore?

Different music is licensed differently to different countries, so there'll be slightly less.

Note that the Tidal top-level masters list is a human-edited recommended list with several hundred albums only.  Therefore someone created the spreadsheet.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on October 13, 2017, 10:18
Different music is licensed differently to different countries, so there'll be slightly less.

Note that the Tidal top-level masters list is a human-edited recommended list with several hundred albums only.  Therefore someone created the spreadsheet.

thanks to you and Audio for the clarification :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: calamity on October 13, 2017, 11:34
http://www.luminmusic.com/streaming-services.html

Like common dac setup, ayre being fed by lumin / other sources digital out


Thanks for the info.

Does MQA sing to its full potential only if played on a device with core decoding like the Lumin?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 13, 2017, 11:43
Need to do spectral analysis on both versions of blue bayou...

There’s no need to do any spectrum analysis;

The only 192K PCM version of "Blue Bayou" appears to be from the 2014 “Linda Ronstadt - The ‘70s Collection” (on HDTracks). While the MQA version on Tidal is from the “Simple Dreams” (40th Anniversary Edition)” remastered and re-issued in 2017.

As expected they’re totally different masters. Audio’s comparing Apples to Oranges  :)

ps: There doesn't appear to be any PCM native high-rez version of the 40th Anniversary release, so it's impossible to do a proper comparison. The Audiophile world is worse off with MQA around - http://www.rhino.com/product/simple-dreams-40th-anniversary-edition (http://www.rhino.com/product/simple-dreams-40th-anniversary-edition)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on October 13, 2017, 11:56
Does MQA sing to its full potential only if played on a device with core decoding like the Lumin?

Lumin S1 / A1 / T1 / D1 offers selectable MQA Full Decoding (better than Core Decoding only) and MQA Core Decoding to analog outputs and digital output respectively.  You get the full benefits of MQA with MQA Full Decoding to analog outputs.

Lumin U1 only offers MQA Core decoding to 96 or 88.2kHz to digital outputs, because U1 does not have any analog output.

Tidal desktop app and Audirvana also offers MQA Core decoding to 96 or 88.2kHz.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 13, 2017, 13:31
There’s no need to do any spectrum analysis;

The only 192K PCM version of "Blue Bayou" appears to be from the 2014 “Linda Ronstadt - The ‘70s Collection” (on HDTracks). While the MQA version on Tidal is from the “Simple Dreams” (40th Anniversary Edition)” remastered and re-issued in 2017.

As expected they’re totally different masters. Audio’s comparing Apples to Oranges  :)

ps: There doesn't appear to be any PCM native high-rez version of the 40th Anniversary release, so it's impossible to do a proper comparison. The Audiophile world is worse off with MQA around - http://www.rhino.com/product/simple-dreams-40th-anniversary-edition (http://www.rhino.com/product/simple-dreams-40th-anniversary-edition)

So, with US$18, i get to listen to the BEST version of Linda Ronstadt Blue Bayou on MQA 96K.  Whereas, there is NO high-res version available, not even the US$132 HDTracks version, which you claim it's inferior.

So what is wrong with MQA?   Available, sound great, cost US$18?

(Audio)
Title: MQA
Post by: calamity on October 13, 2017, 13:44
Lumin S1 / A1 / T1 / D1 offers selectable MQA Full Decoding (better than Core Decoding only) and MQA Core Decoding to analog outputs and digital output respectively.  You get the full benefits of MQA with MQA Full Decoding to analog outputs.

Lumin U1 only offers MQA Core decoding to 96 or 88.2kHz to digital outputs, because U1 does not have any analog output.

Tidal desktop app and Audirvana also offers MQA Core decoding to 96 or 88.2kHz.

Does that mean MQA has planted hidden bits that only Lumin's Full Decoding can extract?

Or does the term "Full Decoding" really mean Lumin decodes and adds filters in a different way so that the MQA sounds better?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on October 13, 2017, 13:55
There’s no need to do any spectrum analysis;

The only 192K PCM version of "Blue Bayou" appears to be from the 2014 “Linda Ronstadt - The ‘70s Collection” (on HDTracks). While the MQA version on Tidal is from the “Simple Dreams” (40th Anniversary Edition)” remastered and re-issued in 2017.

As expected they’re totally different masters. Audio’s comparing Apples to Oranges  :)

ps: There doesn't appear to be any PCM native high-rez version of the 40th Anniversary release, so it's impossible to do a proper comparison. The Audiophile world is worse off with MQA around - http://www.rhino.com/product/simple-dreams-40th-anniversary-edition (http://www.rhino.com/product/simple-dreams-40th-anniversary-edition)

Actually if you can please do it.

It would be enlightening to see if there're any significant deviations from eq manipulations, overall mastering level increment, and changes in the envelop of ultrasonic spectral contents.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on October 13, 2017, 14:15
Does that mean MQA has planted hidden bits that only Lumin's Full Decoding can extract?
Or does the term "Full Decoding" really mean Lumin decodes and adds filters in a different way so that the MQA sounds better?

MQA Core decoding results in 96 or 88.2kHz audio.  Full decoding means there is a next step of MQA rendering after Core decoding.  MQA rendering is DAC-specific to optimize for time domain performance, and unfolds to higher sample rates.

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/ca/ca-academy/mqa-for-civilians/

https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/mqa-time-domain-accuracy-digital-audio-quality
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: calamity on October 13, 2017, 20:16
MQA Core decoding results in 96 or 88.2kHz audio.  Full decoding means there is a next step of MQA rendering after Core decoding.  MQA rendering is DAC-specific to optimize for time domain performance, and unfolds to higher sample rates.

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/ca/ca-academy/mqa-for-civilians/

https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/mqa-time-domain-accuracy-digital-audio-quality

Ok got it, kind of. It's like my old discman that had 18x oversampling "decoding" a native CD.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 14, 2017, 08:28
Actually if you can please do it.

It would be enlightening to see if there're any significant deviations from eq manipulations, overall mastering level increment, and changes in the envelop of ultrasonic spectral contents.

I took a quick look this morning, not really a Linda Ronstadt fan, so I wasn’t about to buy that $93 HDTracks 192k album to compare… BUT, it turns out HDTracks does have the “Simple Dreams (40th Anniversary Edition)” version in 24/96k which I verified is not an upsample from Redbook and looks to be from the same master used for the MQA version! ;D

To do an apples-to-apples comparison, I listened to both via my Meridian Explorer2 connected to my Macbook… both meaning; MQA version (via Tidal), and HDTracks PCM 24/96 version (via Audirvana 3+), so identical hardware, but granted, different playback software - through my Macbook, the 24/96 PCM version sounded marginally better, especially the upper octave. MQA’s supposed deblurring benefits hardly makes a significant difference, but I have to admit it’s a pretty faithful reproduction with a lower bit-rate, so ideal for streaming.

To take a more objective peek, I ripped both via the Explorer2’s line-level output into my TASCAM Recorder at 24/192k PCM .wav… Here’re a couple of notes;

o    The Tidal MQA track shows up as an “MQA Studio“ 24/96k (Blue LED lit) - same as on Audio’s Lumin.

o    There’s no doubt this 40th Edition is from an excellent master, the transfer was done with very little compression, the dynamic range is excellent

(http://i68.tinypic.com/315z8yh.jpg)

o    I can tell that both the Tidal MQA version and the HDTracks versions are from the same master as they both have a frequency spectrum profile that is practically identical, and they both have an identical artefact at 28.875kHz in recording - which is in itself interesting since the MQA encoding process captured the artefact, they didn’t clean it up or anything.

(Spectrum analysis of the original HDTracks 24/96 .wav file)
(http://i66.tinypic.com/2hrzqxk.png)

o    I can tell neither is an upsample from Redbook as the spectrum goes up nicely to 48kHz (the Nyquist frequency for a 96kHz sample rate) without major discontinuity.

o    Interestingly, the HDTracks version has marginally higher harmonic distortion in the lower bass compared to the Tidal MQA version, I’m not sure if thats an effect of pre-ringing in the original PCM versus deblurring in the MQA version, but the difference is not really audible (at least not via the Explorer2 on my Macbook :) )
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 14, 2017, 08:30
So, with US$18, i get to listen to the BEST version of Linda Ronstadt Blue Bayou on MQA 96K.  Whereas, there is NO high-res version available, not even the US$132 HDTracks version, which you claim it's inferior.

So what is wrong with MQA?   Available, sound great, cost US$18?

(Audio)

Absolutely no argument with what you’ve stated above. In fact, I’ve been enjoying Tidal and it’s service from since its availability in Singapore!

But what Tidal offers is not the main issue people have with MQA, you’re missing the main point of contention against MQA (the format). Given the proprietary and dubious technical benefits of MQA, your earlier post claiming MQA “sounds better” compared to high-rez PCM when the source material is different, is misleading. If you want to try a proper apples-to-apples comparison, use the HDTracks 24/96 “Simple Dreams (40th Anniversary Edition)” (http://www.hdtracks.com/simple-dreams-40th-anniversary-edition) - it’ll be interesting to see if you still think the MQA version is better :P

Putting aside the benefits of Tidal based streaming - we all agree thats a good thing - if you’re given a choice from the same master of a non-lossy high-rez PCM transfer with no proprietary encoding, versus a lossy proprietary MQA encoded version that doesn’t have any substantial sonic benefit and yet requires specialised hardware, which would you buy? — All of the negativity against MQA is exactly on this point :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Knight_Rider on October 14, 2017, 11:59
Streaming now ................

http://www.deezer.com/album/47344672?utm_source=deezer&utm_content=album-47344672&utm_term=1765440962_1507953135&utm_medium=web
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Knight_Rider on October 14, 2017, 12:57
And this will sound unbearable.  ;D

https://open.spotify.com/album/5w3ja5yMrh5jgReXdF2n8J
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ks on October 14, 2017, 16:44
So, whats the lowest cost entry to the world of MQA?
1. DAC
2. music either by subsription to stream sites or downloaded copies MQA decoded music.
3. software players? ie play through computer audio.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Knight_Rider on October 14, 2017, 17:22
So, whats the lowest cost entry to the world of MQA?
1. DAC
2. music either by subsription to stream sites or downloaded copies MQA decoded music.
3. software players? ie play through computer audio.

This one looks cheap enough.

http://lenbrook.com.sg/bluesound/99-bluesound-node-2.html

http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/our-partners/bluesound-partner-page
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: calamity on October 14, 2017, 17:32
This one looks cheap enough.

http://lenbrook.com.sg/bluesound/99-bluesound-node-2.html

http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/our-partners/bluesound-partner-page

I can't find MQA being mentioned in the Bluesound Node 2 product page, not on Bluesound's website itself either.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 14, 2017, 17:43
So, whats the lowest cost entry to the world of MQA?
1. DAC
2. music either by subsription to stream sites or downloaded copies MQA decoded music.
3. software players? ie play through computer audio.

1. Meridian Explorer2 USB DAC @ USD$199 - available from Amazon (https://www.amazon.com/Meridian-SP3333ZZ-Explorer2-USB-DAC/dp/B00Q6VQGS2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1507971879&sr=8-1&keywords=explorer2) (ships to Singapore) 

2. Tidal High Definition Subscription @ S$19.99 per month - http://tidal.com/sg/try-now (http://tidal.com/sg/try-now)

3. Tidal comes with it’s own Free Player for your Laptop or Mobile.

Enjoy :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Knight_Rider on October 14, 2017, 17:51
I can't find MQA being mentioned in the Bluesound Node 2 product page, not on Bluesound's website itself either.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

http://www.bluesound.com/news/2016/mqa-now-available-on-bluesound/?cl
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Knight_Rider on October 14, 2017, 19:34
So, whats the lowest cost entry to the world of MQA?
1. DAC
2. music either by subsription to stream sites or downloaded copies MQA decoded music.
3. software players? ie play through computer audio.

or this (coming)

https://www.samma3a.com/tech/en/ifi-audio-reveals-nano-idsd-black-label/

http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/news/post/deezer

https://www.deezer.com/en/offers/
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on October 14, 2017, 20:55
i would add AudioQuest Dragonfly to the list of entry level DACs if you're planning to toy with MQA. it costs the same as Meridian Explorer V2. i've been using the Red for the past 2 weeks and it sounds decent :) it pairs well with Audirvana and my iOS devices.

do be aware that it maxes out @ 24/96 and it will not do DSD.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 15, 2017, 18:38
1. Meridian Explorer2 USB DAC @ USD$199 - available from Amazon (https://www.amazon.com/Meridian-SP3333ZZ-Explorer2-USB-DAC/dp/B00Q6VQGS2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1507971879&sr=8-1&keywords=explorer2) (ships to Singapore) 

2. Tidal High Definition Subscription @ S$19.99 per month - http://tidal.com/sg/try-now (http://tidal.com/sg/try-now)

3. Tidal comes with it’s own Free Player for your Laptop or Mobile.

Enjoy :)

3. Do Tidal with Roon.  This is , I believe , is the best option.  JRiver suppose to be the first media player to do Tidal but you know their boss lah, so temperamental, they do not want to give a page to Tidal.......they screw up big time.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 15, 2017, 21:28
3. Do Tidal with Roon.  This is , I believe , is the best option.  JRiver suppose to be the first media player to do Tidal but you know their boss lah, so temperamental, they do not want to give a page to Tidal.......they screw up big time.

(Audio)

Unfortunately I have to disagree… :P

(a) my post was addressed to ks who’s looking for the lowest-cost entry point, Roon is not free unlike the Tidal App

(b) Roon’s Tidal playback doesn’t support MQA core decoding (yet), so if ks decides to buy say the AudioQuest Dragonfly for MQA, it won’t work as AudioQuest’s DACs rely on core decoding by Tidal followed by it’s own MQA rendering for final unfold. It does work with the Meridian Explorer2 though which does full decode on DAC. And,

(c) I find Roon as a transport does not provide the best sonic quality … my dCS native transport client, which also support Tidal streaming, sounds significantly better. As does Audirvana. All better sounding than Roon! I’ve stopped using Roon for now after hiring the difference in my system. YMMV of course :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 16, 2017, 00:38
Unfortunately I have to disagree… :P

3. Tidal comes with it’s own Free Player for your Laptop or Mobile.

(a) my post was addressed to ks who’s looking for the lowest-cost entry point, Roon is not free unlike the Tidal App


I reckon ks is not asking to playback Tidal thru his mobile phone or listen to it on his laptop.  Further more, ALL my Lumin MQA playback is through Roon,  MQA playback on Meridian explorer or Audioquest is poor....I only recommend playing back on Lumin or Berkeley DAC.

Also if your dCS transport could support MQA, you might like it!   :)

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 16, 2017, 19:59
I reckon ks is not asking to playback Tidal thru his mobile phone or listen to it on his laptop.  Further more, ALL my Lumin MQA playback is through Roon,  MQA playback on Meridian explorer or Audioquest is poor....I only recommend playing back on Lumin or Berkeley DAC.

Also if your dCS transport could support MQA, you might like it!   :)

(Audio)

Errmmm... I think you may have missed the last portion of ks' post ... "3. software players? ie play through computer audio.  As for whether Meridian and audioquest are good enough or not, its really up to ks, not you or I, and even then, I hardly think a Lumin can be considered as a “low cost entry into the world of MQA” ;D

W.r.t dCS, MQA support is already in the works, currently in beta firmware; official update release for the entry platform (Rossini) is expected this quarter, while for the flagship (Vivaldi2) in early '18 :)

(https://www.audiostream.com/images/51917dcs.jpg)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 16, 2017, 22:30
Errmmm... I think you may have missed the last portion of ks' post ... "3. software players? ie play through computer audio.  As for whether Meridian and audioquest are good enough or not, its really up to ks, not you or I, and even then, I hardly think a Lumin can be considered as a “low cost entry into the world of MQA” ;D

W.r.t dCS, MQA support is already in the works, currently in beta firmware; official update release for the entry platform (Rossini) is expected this quarter, while for the flagship (Vivaldi2) in early '18 :)

(https://www.audiostream.com/images/51917dcs.jpg)



Congrats....even dCS loves MQA!!

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 17, 2017, 23:28


....even dCS loves MQA!!

(Audio)

Not at all… I’ve actually spoken to dCS directly about MQA; they see it as a "[ed]necessaryily evil", merely a streaming wrapper/filter driven by customer demand, practically just another one of their over 8 different filters :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 18, 2017, 09:38
Not at all… I’ve actually spoken to dCS directly about MQA; they see it as a "necessarily evil", merely a streaming wrapper/filter driven by customer demand, practically just another one of their over 8 different filters :)

No respectable hi-end Hi Fi manufacturer would want to be associated with a lossy format unless it is really that good, this much, I can tell you.  There must be "enough" customer demand that forces them to do it.  There must be more "fools" like me  in this world, than I thought.   :)   Maybe listening to MQA on your dCS might convert you......   

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 18, 2017, 12:18
No respectable hi-end Hi Fi manufacturer would want to be associated with a lossy format unless it is really that good, this much, I can tell you.  There must be "enough" customer demand that forces them to do it.  There must be more "fools" like me  in this world, than I thought.   :)   Maybe listening to MQA on your dCS might convert you......   

(Audio)

Once again, IMHO, you’re mistaken my friend :)

I don’t know how many manufacturers you’ve directly spoken to about MQA, I have, to quite a few. I can tell you categorically what’s driving it’s adoption is not sound quality but commercial interest!! Though they won’t say so in public, there’s a general growing concern among 3rd party hardware manufacturers, and many end-users like us, that increasingly, access to higher-than-Redbook resolution mass-market music will be exclusively via streamed lossy MQA. This view is validated by the publicised intent of pretty much all the main music labels. In other words, audiophiles and consumers alike will gravitate towards hardware that supports MQA for accessibility reasons, not sonic quality.

And there’s another factor driving MQA adaption by manufacturers; Bob Stuart (Meridian/MQA) learnt from his mistakes during the DVD-Audio saga with his MLP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meridian_Lossless_Packing). This time, instead of focusing on industry open standards like MPEG-4 SLS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4_SLS) (heavily supported by Singapore’s A*STAR ironically) which can delivery much the same results as MQA, he took his proprietary sh*t and went directly after the music labels, and just as importantly, to the subsystem OEM suppliers!

If you look at the list of MQA Partners (http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/our-partners), except for a couple, majority use one or two OEM suppliers for their streaming boards. Like your Ayre QX-5 for example, they use South Korea’s ConversDigital's CDMCM-210 module (http://www.conversdigital.com). (Thanks to Bob) Convsedigital is adding MQA on that mconnect streaming board (http://www.conversdigital.com/kor/product/product01.php) (which is how PS Audio is able to deliver MQA support)! I’m pretty damn sure it won’t be long before Charlie Hansen capitulates and supports MQA on Ayre... just watch; it’ll just be a firmware update for the mconnect module to support MQA core decode. And just like PS Audio, Charlie can ignore the remaining lossy unfold and not have to share his upsampling/filter code design with MQA ;)

I'm already listening to MQA via my dCS system! Pretty much exactly as described above, but Tidal based 24/96 core decode, and then into my dCS upsampler followed by native upsampling/filtering up to DXD. dCS’ eventual native support for MQA (without the Tidal decode) will make playback slightly simpler, but not very different. I can assure you, native high-rez PCM/DSD on dCS slays MQA every.single.time :)

So, have you done a proper apples-to-apples comparison yet? Still think MQA sounds better than native high-rez PCM (with the right filters applied)? Come on, open your ears (or dig out that wax)! ;D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 18, 2017, 13:37
It is very simple.   :)

You don't like MQA, OK, don't listen to it.

If you are open and want to give MQA a try, go ahead. 

I am not here to preach or convince anyone.  I just gave my feedback to share, whether wrong or right, you decide.   :)

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 18, 2017, 19:52
... I just gave my feedback to share, whether wrong or right, you decide.   :)

(Audio)

You’re entitled to your feedback of course (despite it being based on a false premise :P).

(http://i65.tinypic.com/35lya86.jpg)

ps: I’d be more happy to WeTransfer you a sample of that 24/96 PCM “Blue Bayou” HDTrack so that you can do a proper comparison. If you still think the Tidal MQA stream sounds better to you, then just tell us so and I promise not to debate your view on MQA anymore. Deal? :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on October 19, 2017, 10:46
There are multiple aspects to evaluate SQ of music, and different people have different tastes.
http://www.audioshark.org/computer-digital-audio-11/my-take-mqa-11498.html
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Kiek on October 19, 2017, 13:03
There are multiple aspects to evaluate SQ of music, and different people have different tastes.
http://www.audioshark.org/computer-digital-audio-11/my-take-mqa-11498.html

I read somewhere, the reason why we could hear the sound waves is because of outer ears (reflecting sound waves to the inner ears), without it, we hear nothing, (or little???). ;D ;D ;D

The structure of our outer ears is all different therefore we wouldn't be able to agreed to each others!  ;D

Listen to headphone, I wasn't sure because not study on this! ;D simple test -  moving single/both palms around the ears, sound change.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 19, 2017, 18:00
There are multiple aspects to evaluate SQ of music, and different people have different tastes.
http://www.audioshark.org/computer-digital-audio-11/my-take-mqa-11498.html

I read that post when it first appeared (though not that entire thread)….

His post describes virtually exactly what people experience when they first hear a system with an “Apodizing”/Minimum-phase filter. Removal of the unnatural pre-ringing impulse response has a well known acoustic effect which MQA adopted and branded with a marketing term “Deblurring” ;D (The concept of an Apodizing filter was first described in Peter Craven’s 2004 AES paper (http://www.aes.org/journal/online/JAES_V52/jaes.cfm?file=JAES_V52_3/JAES_V52_3_PG216.pdf), and in practical systems since at least 2008. Peter Craven is of course Bob Stuart’s technical partner-in-crime at Meridian)

If you don’t believe me, read John Atkinson’s 2009 review of the Meridian 808.2 CD player (https://www.stereophile.com/cdplayers/meridian_8082808i2_signature_reference_cd_playerpreamplifier/index.html)… where he first describes listening via Meridian’s Apodizing filter. His description reads pretty much exactly like how people describe listening to MQA.

IMO, there’s no acoustic magic in MQA that hasn’t already been around for years (albeit some introduced by Meridian themselves). It’s just been re-spun in a shiny new streaming context :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 19, 2017, 20:12
Coincidentally, officially announced today;

https://www.facebook.com/notes/data-conversion-systems-ltd/dcs-launches-mqa-support-across-product-ranges/534452690234215/ (https://www.facebook.com/notes/data-conversion-systems-ltd/dcs-launches-mqa-support-across-product-ranges/534452690234215/)

Quote
dCS LAUNCHES MQA SUPPORT ACROSS PRODUCT RANGES

dCS announces the release of a software update that provides MQA compatibility to all current product ranges – bringing the MQA experience into what many regard as the best digital music source in the world.

Availability: 
dCS Rossini – October 2017 
dCS Vivaldi One – November 2017
dCS Network Bridge – November 2017
dCS Vivaldi DAC & Upsampler – December 2017
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: calamity on October 22, 2017, 14:53
I understand why MQA is built inside DACs.

My question is why do pre-amps and CD players also have MQA? Does that mean they have built-in DACs?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on October 26, 2017, 13:13
It takes almost 4 years (since 2014 introduction) for someone to summarise MQA in a few very comprehensive paragraphs …

http://archimago.blogspot.sg/2017/10/mqa-final-final-comment-simply-put-why.html#more

I'm done with it. Enjoy the Music!
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Knight_Rider on October 26, 2017, 14:18
b. Blind listening test with 83 listeners show no clear preference. (In fact, in some situations, standard hi-res was preferred.) (http://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/img/forums/hwz/smilies/laugh.gif)
Title: MQA
Post by: calamity on October 26, 2017, 14:28
I read that post when it first appeared (though not that entire thread)….

His post describes virtually exactly what people experience when they first hear a system with an “Apodizing”/Minimum-phase filter. Removal of the unnatural pre-ringing impulse response has a well known acoustic effect which MQA adopted and branded with a marketing term “Deblurring” (The concept of an Apodizing filter was first described in Peter Craven’s 2004 AES paper (http://www.aes.org/journal/online/JAES_V52/jaes.cfm?file=JAES_V52_3/JAES_V52_3_PG216.pdf), and in practical systems since at least 2008. Peter Craven is of course Bob Stuart’s technical partner-in-crime at Meridian)

If you don’t believe me, read John Atkinson’s 2009 review of the Meridian 808.2 CD player (https://www.stereophile.com/cdplayers/meridian_8082808i2_signature_reference_cd_playerpreamplifier/index.html)… where he first describes listening via Meridian’s Apodizing filter. His description reads pretty much exactly like how people describe listening to MQA.

IMO, there’s no acoustic magic in MQA that hasn’t already been around for years (albeit some introduced by Meridian themselves). It’s just been re-spun in a shiny new streaming context


I agree with you.

My thoughts is that Meridian has all along been using DSP or filter or what ever you want to call it in their products. And now to expand the business, they re-packaged the technology as MQA to be licensed in other brands' products, and even created an ecosystem that brought music labels and audio Engineers into the picture. Very smart.

My car's stock audio system sounds damn good even on FM radio. There's definitely DSP in there. It's probably supplied by Meridian or the likes. I'm rather amused as radio doesn't sound that good on my home hifi.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on October 27, 2017, 11:45

https://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/t.mpl?f=critics&m=88167

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on October 27, 2017, 12:00
Wow, this is a global  hi-fi war.  :o



Title: Re: MQA
Post by: calamity on October 28, 2017, 07:20
https://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/t.mpl?f=critics&m=88167


The person whining about seeing a difference in spectral analysis of an MQA file vs its 16/44.1 equivalent is totally missing the point.

Of course there is a difference. Meridian and the mastering engineers already said they will adjust the master till the artist is happy to authenticate it, then proceed to stamp the three letters MQA on the new master and releasing it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ks on October 28, 2017, 11:12
Wow, this is a global  hi-fi war.  :o

no la, the only war is fighting for money in their pockets or in our pockets.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 28, 2017, 15:46
The irony is I am not paying MQA an extra cent than what I am paying now....i wonder what's the issue?

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on October 28, 2017, 15:51
I don't think Charles  Hanson's product is getting  any good review  from stereophile any time soon.  :D

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Knight_Rider on October 29, 2017, 09:20
no la, the only war is fighting for money in their pockets or in our pockets.

Node 2 no USB out so that might save you some money to subscribe MQA.  :P
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on October 29, 2017, 15:18
Was listening to the new NAD T758 v3 AVR with built in BluOS and DIRAC. Have to say it is very very very good. Much better than the PowerNode 2.

And it supports MQA!
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 30, 2017, 08:45
The irony is I am not paying MQA an extra cent than what I am paying now....i wonder what's the issue?

(Audio)


(Kinda reminds me of the myopic ignorant 70% who continue to vote for the PAP... Kenna smoked easily ;D)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 30, 2017, 08:58

(Kinda reminds me of the myopic ignorant 70% who continue to vote for the PAP... Kenna smoked easily ;D)

It's OK, as long as MQA doesn't affect the Singapore Nation and my future generations and I can continue to listen to shiok shiok Linda Ronstadt MQA, that's all that matters.

"......that familiar sunrise through sleepy eyes how happy I'd be...."

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 30, 2017, 09:10
It's OK, as long as MQA doesn't affect the Singapore Nation and my future generations and I can continue to listen to shiok shiok Linda Ronstadt MQA, that's all that matters.
...

Sure... But would you still have the Lumin if (when?) your Ayre does MQA? 

So, MQA's not that "Free" after all...(Just like Singapore's not that "low Tax" when you take into consideration overall living costs)  ;) 

And once MQA uptake increases, who know whether the streaming services will charge more for "MQA Masters" (just like PAP starts to increase all sort of costs once they've been voted in yet again).

Would you pay Tidal an additional tier charge just for MQA?

ps: Hopefully by now you've realised that MQA doesn't actually sound any better than originals high-rez version of the same masters!! ;D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 30, 2017, 09:37
Sure... But would you still have the Lumin if (when?) your Ayre does MQA? 

So, MQA's not that "Free" after all...(Just like Singapore's not that "low Tax" when you take into consideration overall living costs)  ;) 

And once MQA uptake increases, who know whether the streaming services will charge more for "MQA Masters" (just like PAP starts to increase all sort of costs once they've been voted in yet again).

Would you pay Tidal an additional tier charge just for MQA?

Absolutely, I will pay more for Masters as long as it continue to sound better than what I have ripped from thousands of CDs from my library. 

Each CD shopping session is already costing me hundreds of dollars and these are just miserable 16 bit 44.1KHz samples of the Masters or sub-standard high res files from HD Tracks...don't know what they did to degrade it so that we continue to buy and buy better copies of the recording.  Like this one:-

(http://audio.sg/pic/stgpepper50-01.jpg)

Further more, we need to buy racks and allocate living spaces to store them.  Yes I would certainly pay for MQA if it continues to be this good.

MQA is international.......PAP is local......

MQA will fail if they don't deliver as the international audience is smart enough to judge.

PAP will continue to prosper as the population continue to get cosy and be blindsighted.

That's life.

By the way, if you read enough, Charles Hanson will not support MQA...he said it many times.  He is kinda like a Andrew C...LOL...and I am not saying you guys are correct ... again, I am not letting myself to be bias against a lossy format that seems to have a low bit rate.   I will automatically join you guys when I am convinced that MQA sounds inferior.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 01, 2017, 05:48
Absolutely, I will pay more for Masters as long as it continue to sound better than what I have ripped from thousands of CDs from my library. 
...
By the way, if you read enough, Charles Hanson will not support MQA...he said it many times.  He is kinda like a Andrew C...LOL...and I am not saying you guys are correct ... again, I am not letting myself to be bias against a lossy format that seems to have a low bit rate.   I will automatically join you guys when I am convinced that MQA sounds inferior.

(Audio)

I probably would too in all honesty (pay for MQA exclusive streams I mean)... That said, on my system with well mastered Redbook disc or streams, upsampled to DXD they sound incredible. At the end of the day, its the mastering quality thats still the most significant factor to sound quality, not MQA or any other coding/format per se.

I‘m pretty sure Charlie will capitulate on MQA if it gains more momentum - just like he did with DSD in its early days… IIRC, he raged against DSD but in the end supported it on Ayre platforms anyway! :P For a taste of his views on DSD, see; http://www.ayre.com/insights_dsdvspcm.htm ... (despite his claims, he was NOT the first to do a proper PCM vs. DSD comparison by the way).

Coming back to You and MQA; You really need to do a proper sonic comparison. If you don’t believe Charlie (or me), do you need some Audio Journalist to tell you MQA sounds inferior before you see the light? MQA gained its early momentum by misleading sonic comparisons (including comparing to MP3s!!), seems like you’ve fallen into the same trap :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 01, 2017, 06:04
I don't think Charles  Hanson's product is getting  any good review  from stereophile any time soon.  :D

Coincidentally! ;D

https://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=critics&m=88590 (https://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=critics&m=88590)

Quote
John Atkinson
Reviewer
Posts: 3821

>Recently the new review of the Benchmark 3 DAC by Jim Austin was published
>in Stereophile. This is probably the single most incompetent review I've
>ever seen in my life.

I read your comment with interest, Charley. However, I deleted two
sentences that, in my opinion as the moderator of the Stereophile website,
were nothing more than flames. I let stand your actual criticisms, of course.

I was going to email you the following comment, but as you are making such
a public issue of Stereophile's competence, I am responding here.

As you are aware, I am working on a review of the Ayre KX5 Twenty preamplifier.
I can promise you and my readers that the review will be as fair, as is always the
case. However, I am becoming increasingly concerned that you are significantly
muddying the waters. If my review is positive, readers who are aware of your
Asylum postings may well assume that I am trying to placate you. On the other
hand, if I make any negative comments in the review, readers might then assume
that I am trying to punish you for your unbridled comments on this forum.

I am beginning to feel that I should recuse myself from this review, but
that would not be fair, given the KX5 Twenty's significance in the market.

As always, I welcome your thoughts.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 03, 2017, 06:16
More manufacturers coming out to whack MQA and it’s associated minimum-phase filters :P. The latest being Benchmark, who take a very similar position to Chord w.r.t filters. In the “Manufacturer’s Comments” to their DAC3 review (which by the way has absolutely stunning measurement results  :o… totally off the charts!).

Quote
Minimum-phase filters are a Band-Aid on top of a wound. In my opinion, it is better to prevent the wound and eliminate the need for the Band-Aid. We do this by establishing the correct time alignment using wide-bandwidth analog stages. We preserve this alignment throughout the digital stages by using linear-phase filters.

John Siau
Benchmark Media Systems
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on November 03, 2017, 13:03
how many mqa titles are available on tidal now?

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on November 03, 2017, 14:22
About 7500.  With duplicates removed, roughly 6400.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Squeaky on November 03, 2017, 18:07
Singapore’s very own JJ Lin has at least 3 albums in mqa.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: calamity on November 03, 2017, 18:49
About 7500.  With duplicates removed, roughly 6400.

You actually made a count?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 03, 2017, 18:53
About 7500.  With duplicates removed, roughly 6400.

I guess you might not be Singapore based Peter… Tidal Singapore has far far fewer than that! It’s region specific. At last count, there’re only about 436 MQA albums via Tidal Singapore.  :-\
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on November 03, 2017, 19:26

http://www.hifiplus.com/articles/dcs-launches-mqa-support-across-product-ranges-1/

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on November 03, 2017, 20:58
I guess you might not be Singapore based Peter… Tidal Singapore has far far fewer than that! It’s region specific. At last count, there’re only about 436 MQA albums via Tidal Singapore.  :-\

that's what i thought too...
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: eze73 on November 03, 2017, 23:34
hello
Still no news abour mqa support in Aroes ou Vega G2 ?
Cheers
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on November 04, 2017, 11:04
You actually made a count?

Not by me.  In meridianunplugged forum someone maintains a list.  I'd would have provided a link to there but the forum seems to have some problem and is not accessible right now.  (Edit: the forum is not accessible but the list can be downloaded: www.meridianunplugged.com/downloads/MQA_List.csv  )

Accessibility of any streaming music (MQA or not) is region dependent.  Yes, in any region other than US the accessible titles would be a little fewer.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on November 04, 2017, 11:07
I guess you might not be Singapore based Peter… Tidal Singapore has far far fewer than that! It’s region specific. At last count, there’re only about 436 MQA albums via Tidal Singapore.  :-\

The 436 title in Tidal Masters section is a human-edited Tidal recommended list, that represents a few percent of the available MQA titles.  There is no way to find the complete list from Tidal automatically, therefore someone has to manually maintain a spreadsheet.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 04, 2017, 23:21
The 436 title in Tidal Masters section is a human-edited Tidal recommended list, that represents a few percent of the available MQA titles.  There is no way to find the complete list from Tidal automatically, therefore someone has to manually maintain a spreadsheet.

Oookay... so based on your note I tried to search for a couple of random albums from that Meridian Unplugged list of MQA titles that aren’t one of the 436 currently under the “Masters” tab… 

- “Impulse!”, Art Blakey & the Jazz Messenger; indeed the MQA version was accessible!
- “Machine Head”, Deep Purple; no luck
- “Black Celebration”, Depeche Mode; no luck
- “50 Words for Snow”, Kate Bush; no luck

So, looks like either the list is spectacularly wrong? Or are those albums not actually accessible from Singapore? Or its just my bad luck in selecting albums that are now taken off? (75% failure rate seems like extraordinary bad luck ;D). Here’s what the failure looks like (doesn’t say the album is out of reach in this region though);

(http://i66.tinypic.com/2z9b2io.png)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on November 05, 2017, 10:43

- “Machine Head”, Deep Purple; no luck
- “Black Celebration”, Depeche Mode; no luck
- “50 Words for Snow”, Kate Bush; no luck


I found and tested one track from each of these albums using Lumin app and player with a Tidal US account.  All indicate MQA Studio.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 05, 2017, 22:44
I found and tested one track from each of these albums using Lumin app and player with a Tidal US account.  All indicate MQA Studio.

Right, so that confirms it then, many are just not available from Tidal Singapore. I tested another couple of random albums, access appears to fails on more than half.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 07, 2017, 20:33
MQA kenna bashed yet again ;D… by Mastering Engineer Brian Lucey (worked on projects from established icons like Lucinda Williams, Marylin Manson, Depeche Mode, The Pretenders and Dr. John, but also with the most relevant artists of today including Royal Blood, The Kills, Arctic Monkeys, Ryan Bingham, Ray Lamontagne, Cage The Elephant, and of course The Black Keys..)

http://fairhedon.com/2017/11/05/an-interview-with-mastering-engineer-brian-lucey/ (http://fairhedon.com/2017/11/05/an-interview-with-mastering-engineer-brian-lucey/)

(Juicy bits)
Quote
Where as mastered for iTunes is harmonically cold and loses some low volume/low end information, actually altering the groove to make everything sound like a nerdy white wedding band, MQA brightens the high-mids in the Mid section while thinning the low-mids on the Sides. There’s also some harmonic distortion which some people could find pleasing,  If I want that distortion in the master I would’ve put it there in the first place. The results of MQA I would call fatal to the source material even as they are very subtle.

MQA has been targeting the weakest players in our world, the audiophiles.  And they’re targeting those most dependent on pimping new tech, the audiophile press.  Meanwhile, one sided presentations at trade shows leave no time for deep Q and A and any real discussion panels are eschewed by MQA.

I’m most concerned about the bogus claims that MQA is fixing approved masters.  Not possible, and a rude assertion to trillions of hours of hard work by teams of people making records for decades.  Pure marketing hyperbole.

MQA has no future in the world of serious engineers in my view, it’s a corporate money scheme at this point.  Yet we will see how it turns out, most people are lazy and greed goes a long way on it’s own power.

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on November 08, 2017, 12:25
It is not in the record labels' interest to have their customers get access to their pristine, unmolested studio masters.

 ::)

Who gives a sh1t what the recording/mastering engineers think...

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 08, 2017, 22:14
...
Who gives a sh1t what the recording/mastering engineers think...

YOU may not give a shjt, but every artists does!! They absolute care who the recording/mastering engineer is, and the tools of their trade! :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on November 09, 2017, 00:38
Who gives a sh1t what the artist wants. As long as the record labels (the major ones like Sony, Warner, UMG) can continue to make money from their music year after year, that's all they care about. They are one of the major push factor why MQA has managed to have gotten this far, with no foreseeable sign of being stopped. Even if Bob Stuart were to die in a plane clash this year, the juggernaut will carry on relentlessly.

 ;D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: calamity on November 09, 2017, 04:21
Who gives a shoot about what everybody wants as long as I know what I want. But I don't know what I want so I follow what everybody want.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on November 09, 2017, 08:32
Some recording artists are starting to voice up about MQA...

http://fairhedon.com/2017/11/05/an-interview-with-mastering-engineer-brian-lucey/
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Zerstorer on November 09, 2017, 14:23
Some recording artists are starting to voice up about MQA...

http://fairhedon.com/2017/11/05/an-interview-with-mastering-engineer-brian-lucey/
It has been posted previously by AndrewC. That's what the last few posts are about.

Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on November 09, 2017, 14:35
Anybody into buying a new dac this moment - would you choose one that won't be compatible with mqa (and roon) right now or in the foreseeable future?

 ::)

You know right there and then. mqa has won.
You are all going to help Bob Stuart makes lots of money.

 :P

The future for digital is bleak.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Squeaky on November 09, 2017, 15:06
Anybody into buying a new dac this moment - would you choose one that won't be compatible with mqa (and roon) right now or in the foreseeable future?

 ::)

You know right there and then. mqa has won.
You are all going to help Bob Stuart makes lots of money.

 :P

The future for digital is bleak.
I am looking at buying a DAC at the moment and you are right, having MQA would be a plus for the DAC.  Although I am unsure about Roon. When they have cornered the market, I see prices going up (up and away!).
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 09, 2017, 20:18
... As long as the record labels (the major ones like Sony, Warner, UMG) can continue to make money from their music year after year, that's all they care about. They are one of the major push factor why MQA has managed to have gotten this far, with no foreseeable sign of being stopped....
 ;D


Unfortunately, I can’t argue with the above, fact is, the quality of music that we get is mostly controlled by the money men. :-X


Anybody into buying a new dac this moment - would you choose one that won't be compatible with mqa (and roon) right now or in the foreseeable future?

...

Not so quick. The same thing could have been said about a number of technologies, including DVD-Audio back in 2001 when all the rage was about multi-channel high-rez. Or look at Audio DRM! Totally disappeared now ;D…

MQA does not sound better, it’s effectively just another Audio DRM, and it hasn’t won just yet!… If Spotify and Apple Music adopt it, then I’ll concede that MQA has won. Until then, the battle is not over :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on November 10, 2017, 07:49
Thats funny. DVD-A lost because the major record labels were alarmed that their piracy scheme could be so easily cracked by that Norwegian teenager, and got cold feet. Situation is in favour of mqa this time. Another drm is just what the labels want!

 ;D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on November 10, 2017, 07:57
We will probably see record labels withdrawing their (pristine) hi-res downloads in a matter of months...

 ::)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on November 10, 2017, 08:01
Anybody has a list of who are the dac makers that are fighting in the queue to get their products authenticated...?

Be sure to buy dac only from that list!

If not, later resale value go down the drain...

 ;D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 11, 2017, 10:32
... Another drm is just what the labels want!

 ;D

True. And they found it in this pseudo-beneficial wrapper.

Lets see which side history falls on this time. I’m betting against MQA. Even for streaming, something open and better will emerge :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on November 11, 2017, 10:38
(https://s17.postimg.org/ts5a56lgf/1z48mw-2.jpg)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: lcheetec on November 12, 2017, 10:00
Been following the discussions here, thought I'd just add something...

I've noticed for some time, when I searched for an album I wanted to listen to on Tidal (BluOS on Bluesound Node 2), I'd find two copies of some albums.

I thought this was a glitch, never thought more of it, until a few weeks ago when I looked closer, and found that the second copy is usually an MQA copy! Happening more now, than before.

Happened to Buble's Christmas, and Boston's Third Stage!

Sent from my Lenovo TB3-710F using Tapatalk

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wizardofoz on November 12, 2017, 18:34
https://www.oppodigital.com/blu-ray-udp-203/UDP203-firmware-54-1108B.aspx


MQA now supported on 203/205 Oppo UHD players
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 12, 2017, 20:11
Been following the discussions here, thought I'd just add something...

I've noticed for some time, when I searched for an album I wanted to listen to on Tidal (BluOS on Bluesound Node 2), I'd find two copies of some albums.

I thought this was a glitch, never thought more of it, until a few weeks ago when I looked closer, and found that the second copy is usually an MQA copy! Happening more now, than before.

Happened to Buble's Christmas, and Boston's Third Stage!

Sent from my Lenovo TB3-710F using Tapatalk

Yeah, likewise on Mobile devices too, search shows-up two albums but on the mobile Tidal client, there's no indication which is the MQA version! So, one version ends up sounding normal while the other sounds crappy (the MQA). I think it's intentional, sooner or later they might only make one version available, the MQA version, that's probably when we might start seeing blow-back from people like Apple. And apparently the likes of Google are going to fight MQA big time. Let's see, *finger-crossed*
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on November 12, 2017, 20:45
Sony, Warner, UMG owns 21% share in MQA.....

 :o
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 13, 2017, 19:13
Sony, Warner, UMG owns 21% share in MQA.....

 :o

I was curious so I tracked down the source of that info... MQA Limited’s Corporate filing (https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09123512/filing-history), seems;
Adding up to just over 21% by the Music labels. No wonder the labels are happy to jump in-bed with MQA ::)

Bob Stuart owns 5.00%
And the largest shareholder with 52.87% is the shady outfit Reinet Investments (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinet_Investments) and their wholly own subsidiary Muse, which happens to own just under 50% of Meridian Audio, an investment they made in 2007.

http://www.youtube.com/v/qMxX-QOV9tI&fs=1
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Knight_Rider on November 13, 2017, 21:06
MQA version.  ;D

http://www.youtube.com/v/ncerabLgrEY&fs=1
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on November 24, 2017, 14:07
Dun be upset if your desired music is not yet found on your preferred streaming service.... rather, think of the results of blood, sweat, and tears being given away, for practically nothing, and only very minuscule returns back to the musicians.

 ::)

Quote

This post is exclusively aimed at musicians who follow me. I’ve received several dozen messages asking me to comment on the fact that a major jazz label recently chose to put its entire catalog up on streaming after holding out for years. People want to know what it means and if they should also capitulate and put their catalogs up on streaming given the prestige and monumental influence of said label. My response to all of you musicians is these aren’t the correct questions you should be asking yourselves. What you need to contemplate is the fundamental fact that the vast majority of you will never, ever be able to meaningfully monetize your recorded works again. The tiniest fraction of you may hit the jackpot with a sync (television, movie or video game) placement, but other than that, the era of recorded music revenue is largely over. The most the majority of you will ever earn is pizza and beer money—and that’s if you’re very lucky. I know many of you reading are not musicians too, so I want to underline the point I just made. It’s not “my” point. It’s not something I just pulled out of thin air for shock value or to make myself look clever or controversial. It is a fact. The vast majority of my friends are musicians, from struggling artists, right up to some of the world’s biggest superstars. I assure you they are all in agreement on this point. So, what is the correct question? It’s this: “What do I do going forward to survive?” And the simple answer to that is you need other sources of income. The entire concept of depending on recordings as a tangible source of income is moot. You’re going to have to do something like teach, consult or work for equipment manufacturers, provide engineering, production and mastering services (I am well aware these professions have been decimated too), take gigs you aren’t necessarily interested in, or just plain get a job in another area outside of music. This isn’t rocket science as they say. So, stop worrying about being on streaming. Start worrying about how you feed yourself and your family. Recorded music revenue is never coming back in any sustainable way. The grand theft perpetuated by the streaming companies and their media conglomerate partners, in concert with entitled, narcissistic, solipsistic consumers has ensured this is the case. Go assess your options and create an economic reality that lets you make the music you want without having to worry about whether or not it generates revenue. And if any consumer/listener responds to this with the idiotic clichés that go “It was inevitable because the era of recorded music income was always destined to be finite and musicians were always destined to struggle. Content should be free! Copyrights are dead! I love my free content utopia and so should you!” I assure you I will block you instantly because you are an ignorant, self-serving moron and a big part of the reason we ended up here.

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 24, 2017, 16:06
Dun be upset if your desired music is not yet found on your preferred streaming service.... rather, think of the results of blood, sweat, and tears being given away, for practically nothing, and only very minuscule returns back to the musicians.

 ::)

Where was this from?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on November 24, 2017, 23:39
Where was this from?

https://www.facebook.com/innerviews/posts/10155975909318594
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 25, 2017, 08:43
https://www.facebook.com/innerviews/posts/10155975909318594

Thanks! It's quite well known in the music industry that streaming hosts are rip-off artists.... especially people like Spotify, they pay peanuts to actual artists. I'm surprised more big artists aren't banding together against them. Jay-Z (and gang) buying Tidal was motivated by this.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on November 25, 2017, 13:40
Anil seldom mentions Tidal in his posts. his main beef is with Spotify. in my personal opinion, streaming services have actually encouraged me to buy more CDs. i think the average joe is still going to be stealing music regardless of whether streaming services exist or not. instead of berating streaming services, artistes could/ should focus on negotiating better royalties from their record companies when their works are hosted on streaming services.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on November 25, 2017, 22:41
fcuk the world!!!

(http://audio.sg/pic/hotelcaliforniamqa-01.jpg)

(http://audio.sg/pic/hotelcaliforniamqa-02.jpg)

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jdc115 on November 25, 2017, 23:51
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-JlmvtAHhnc
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 26, 2017, 22:54
fcuk the world!!!

...(Audio)

fcuk-MQA! :)

Bet you don’t realise that the year-2001 released lossless 192/24 PCM version (off the “Hotel California” DVD-Audio disc) is audibly superior sounding to this lousy lossy MQA version! Don’t settle for mediocre my friend, at least not at home on your main rig! ;D

(http://i65.tinypic.com/t9uxyp.jpg)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on November 27, 2017, 00:10
I got the DVD-A and the Japanese SACD with Multichannel 5.1

But Andrew, the new remastered version is so dynamic and shiok....yes, there is a 24 /96 version of the remastered version on HD Tracks....your old DVD-A and SACD lose lah!!

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: DJQ on November 27, 2017, 00:17
depends on the equipment playing it. so easy lose?  :D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on November 27, 2017, 07:24
Up until now, there is a possibility that no one yet has the lucidity of thoughts to contemplate
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on November 27, 2017, 10:41
depends on the equipment playing it. so easy lose?  :D

Remastering always win!!  Every few years they just let you go closer to the Masters....and then milk you along the way.....

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 27, 2017, 17:06
I got the DVD-A and the Japanese SACD with Multichannel 5.1

But Andrew, the new remastered version is so dynamic and shiok....yes, there is a 24 /96 version of the remastered version on HD Tracks....your old DVD-A and SACD lose lah!!

(Audio)

Just for you, I took a much closer (objective) look at this… I compared the Remastered versions; MQA (@192/24), HDTracks (@96/24), against my 2001 DVD-Audio PCM version at 192/24 (forget the Japanese SACD, I’ve got that too, Warner mastered that from PCM Masters).

The MQA and HDTracks versions are from the same master, they have the exact same frequency spectrum signature. Not sure why HDTracks doesn’t carry this 192/24 2017 Remaster, it’s carried by Acoustic Sounds (http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/130858/Eagles-Hotel_California-FLAC_192kHz24bit_Download) (so clearly Warner/Rhino/Elektra has released high-rez PCM it into the wild, not just MQA).

The 2001 DVD-A 192/24 PCM though, is measurably (via MusicScope & Adobe Audition); more dynamic (by between 1-2dB), has a deeper and wider sound-stage, but exhibits some clipping (loudened). The Remastered MQA/HDTracks versions appear to have no clipping or loudness signature, but has a limited resolution/hard roll-off from about 22kHz, and it exhibit aliasing (albeit in the ultrasonic frequencies). The DVD-A 192/24 version on the other hand shows really good frequency extension of actual musical elements well into the ultrasonic range (You can also see the DR.Loudness ratings online for this 2001 192/24 version;  http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/112445)

While I subjectively much prefer the 2001 DVD-A 192/24 version, the only proper comparison against the MQA version would the Acoustic Sounds Remastered 192/24 FLAC release… but I’m not about to spend US$35 on that just to prove you wrong yet again ;D


Remastering always win!!  Every few years they just let you go closer to the Masters....and then milk you along the way.....

(Audio)

Not always!!!… Some Remasters are worse than their originals as they’re sometimes either "loudened" for playback over cheap consumer players/MP3s, or otherwise manipulated to be quite different from the original masters.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: qflyer on November 27, 2017, 20:16
Quote
Some Remasters are worse than their originals as they’re sometimes either "loudened" for playback over cheap consumer players/MP3s, or otherwise manipulated to be quite different from the original masters.
Agreed. I have stopped buying remastered CDs.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on November 27, 2017, 23:59
Remastering always win!!  Every few years they just let you go closer to the Masters....and then milk you along the way.....

(Audio)

that's not exactly true... Dynamic Range is often compromised in these remastered recordings. the loudness wars database is a good source of info that actually proves this theory.

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on November 30, 2017, 12:35
http://audiomatters.blogspot.sg/2017/11/charlie-hansen-ayre-rip.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+blogspot/IPuyM+(AudioMatters)&m=1
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on November 30, 2017, 14:08
OK, as a respect to Charles Hanson, I will refrain from discussing about MQA, from now on.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on December 02, 2017, 07:53
http://audiomatters.blogspot.sg/2017/11/charlie-hansen-ayre-rip.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+blogspot/IPuyM+(AudioMatters)&m=1

Shocking news! Pity :o

Ayre posted on their website; http://ayre.com/news/index.php?/archives/41-Charles-Hansen-1956-2017.html (http://ayre.com/news/index.php?/archives/41-Charles-Hansen-1956-2017.html)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on December 05, 2017, 21:10
http://www.youtube.com/v/vTT7tApFnJs&fs=1
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on December 06, 2017, 06:43
http://www.youtube.com/v/vTT7tApFnJs&fs=1

Thats one of the absolute worst presentation about MQA; Danny Kaey is wholly incompetent to be talking about MQA.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on December 12, 2017, 16:37
https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-some-claims-examined

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on December 12, 2017, 21:05
https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-some-claims-examined

Downloaded the latest issue and read both JA's and Jim's pieces once ... so far they're mostly carefully avoiding the negatives, just justifying MQA's spin. I was a little surprised though that Jim uncoxavered that on the Mytek Brooklyn DAC, MQA allowed their proprietary filter algorithm to be applied to non-MQA encoded PCM, which then gave the same impulse response as an MQA encoded pulse!

(http://i65.tinypic.com/2iuzsxk.jpg)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on December 15, 2017, 07:07
www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-tested-part-1

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on December 17, 2017, 08:58
www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-tested-part-1

Besides JA’s and Jim’s piece, there’s also MQA coverage in the Aurender A10 review… In the measurement section, there’s some ominous comments from MQA in response to some issues identified in the measurements. Here’s the snippet;

(http://i66.tinypic.com/972srm.jpg)

What MQA is effectively saying is … “If you license MQA, then all PCM has to run through the MQA algorithms”. Which probably explains why with the A10 seems one can’t turn off MQA filters from being applied to everything. Pretty scary!! :o (the folks on AA haven’t caught onto this yet… I expect another raging storm on [Critic’s Corner] when they do ;D)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on December 17, 2017, 09:00
Speaking of MQA Licensing... Just released on Wednesday.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/data-conversion-systems-ltd/mqa-rossini-update-released/559297727749711/ (https://www.facebook.com/notes/data-conversion-systems-ltd/mqa-rossini-update-released/559297727749711/)

(http://i66.tinypic.com/20sjdlf.jpg)

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:31
I feel an understated sorrow, for the people here. converter technology had breached the once called improbably never to be done divide, yet people are still are arguing on what they read, rather than what they receive> Some bullies here had their way too flamboyantly
Take a blind test, double blinds are for medical/industrial initiatives
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:32
Been waiting for months for a description of MQA
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:40
analogously-when looking for a wife, you decide, at least that last ditch plunging(why am I wrong grammatically?)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on December 18, 2017, 21:41
While some people like to spout nonsensical incoherent bullsh1t  ;D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:43
While some people like to spout nonsensical incoherent bullsh1t  ;D
Another no conclusion(non conclusive) piece of nuts?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:44
other than resort to insults, your mum never taught you more?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:45
engage in international forums, andrew
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:46
I backed away once because I thought i might do others  a turn, not any more
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on December 18, 2017, 21:48
other than resort to insults, your mum never taught you more?

You don't deserve any consideration whatsoever :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:48
so quiet
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:49
you didn't even subscribe to the topic at hand, I pity the self imposed alpha(runt) puppy?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:51
A cogent challenge, until you can tell in a publicised exhibition your  pronouncement of you thinking numbers are more important............
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:51
I can make it international?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:52
an idiot who thinks it knows
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:54
I wanted low key, but whadayanow, the rabid came out to bite(squeeeeeeeeel
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:54
what now, we split the cost?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:56
silence means having somewhat higher ground?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 21:57
cat got your tongue? A hole?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 22:02
owning dcs only shows ignorance, not a right to move opinion
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 22:03
1st time a name vanishes from the users register....
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 22:06
I never needed to regroup
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 18, 2017, 22:07
now, any helpful info?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on December 19, 2017, 09:44
What MQA is effectively saying is … “If you license MQA, then all PCM has to run through the MQA algorithms”. Which probably explains why with the A10 seems one can’t turn off MQA filters from being applied to everything. Pretty scary!!

It seems that Stereophile also suggests another manufacturer to be doing the same, which I'm not surprised because this way it is easier.  However, I need to state that Lumin does not do that.  Lumin playback of non-MQA music does not go through MQA processing, while maintaining seamless switching between MQA, non-MQA PCM and DSD music.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on December 19, 2017, 10:18
It seems that Stereophile also suggests another manufacturer to be doing the same, which I'm not surprised because this way it is easier.  However, I need to state that Lumin does not do that.  Lumin playback of non-MQA music does not go through MQA processing, while maintaining seamless switching between MQA, non-MQA PCM and DSD music.

Good for you....the right way to go, Lumin!!

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on December 19, 2017, 19:36
It seems that Stereophile also suggests another manufacturer to be doing the same, which I'm not surprised because this way it is easier.  However, I need to state that Lumin does not do that.  Lumin playback of non-MQA music does not go through MQA processing, while maintaining seamless switching between MQA, non-MQA PCM and DSD music.

Hmmm… I missed that about another manufacturer, where did you see that (page/para)?

Thinking about this issue earlier today, I reviewed how Pacific Microsonics (PM) did this with HDCD. Ironically, reading Prof. Keith Johnson’s original HDCD AES paper (http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=7387) from ’’96, it’s pretty apparent to me that the MQA literally lifted key ideas off PM! For example, check this out;

Quote
A conjugate digital encode/decode system is described which allows recording an audio signal of greater than standard resolution and sonic accuracy on standard linear pulse code modulation (PCM) recording formats, such as the compact disc (CD). The conjugate decoding process is used to recover the full improvement in fidelity, but compatibility and some sonic benefits are maintained for standard linear playback on non-decoding equipment.

That was written in 1996 about HDCD!… Pretty much describes exactly what MQA claims to do today (minus fancy words like “Authenticated”, “Deblurring” etc.)

However, HDCD had clear markers embedded into redbook LSB to trigger a HDCD decoder. Whereas based on what I’m reading, looks like “Alan at MQA” is suggesting to Stereophile that MQA markers in rebook streams are proprietary and only reliably detectable by MQA’s Decoder!? Is that why it’s “recommended” to put all PCM streams through MQA’s decoder!  :o

Whats your/Lumin perspective? Is that what you meant by “this way it’s easier”?

I can see this problem manifesting elsewhere too; one of my buddies with an updated dCS Rossini is experiencing “issues” on certain MQA tracks, where the MQA decoder doesn’t kick-in properly. Seems like dCS uses it's own algorithm's to detects MQA but it’s not yet reliable, resulting in occasional glitches at the start of MQA tracks. That said, Tidal & A+ seems to have pretty mature support for on-the-fly MQA decoding of streams (albeit, it’s quite possible Tidal has separate flags for MQA streams, making it easier to switch decoders in or out).
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on December 19, 2017, 20:18
Hmmm… I missed that about another manufacturer, where did you see that (page/para)?

https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-tested-part-1

However, HDCD had clear markers embedded into redbook LSB to trigger a HDCD decoder. Whereas based on what I’m reading, looks like “Alan at MQA” is suggesting to Stereophile that MQA markers in rebook streams are proprietary and only reliably detectable by MQA’s Decoder!? Is that why it’s “recommended” to put all PCM streams through MQA’s decoder!  :o

Whats your/Lumin perspective? Is that what you meant by “this way it’s easier”?

It's technically easier to simply pass all PCM data to MQA decoder, because extra effort is needed to pre-determine whether a PCM stream is MQA encoded or not, or in some cases realtime requirements dictate that cannot be done.  Roon actually pre-determined that and notify endpoints about it via RAAT 1.1.20 or newer.

Tidal MQA streams or MQA CD contain something that can only be understood and authenticated by the proprietary MQA decoder.  Normal CD rips (of non-MQA CD) do not pass MQA authentication.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on December 21, 2017, 06:04
https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-tested-part-1

Ahhh… you meant with the Mytek. It’s hinted, though hard to tell for sure as Mytek’s own linear-phase filters (fig. 2, fig, 3) do work, just that the measurement indicated that once the MQA Filter is enabled, it works on both MQA and non-MQA PCM streams. With Aurender, seems whether you like it or not, the MQA filter is applied to everything.


It's technically easier to simply pass all PCM data to MQA decoder, because extra effort is needed to pre-determine whether a PCM stream is MQA encoded or not, or in some cases realtime requirements dictate that cannot be done.  Roon actually pre-determined that and notify endpoints about it via RAAT 1.1.20 or newer.

Tidal MQA streams or MQA CD contain something that can only be understood and authenticated by the proprietary MQA decoder.  Normal CD rips (of non-MQA CD) do not pass MQA authentication.

I’m sure it is… MQA doesn’t make it easy though. I’d imagine only manufacturers without adequate resources would resort to “handing over their keys” to MQA for all PCM… Imagine giving away the core of your platform to a 3rd party supplier… recipe for extortion ;D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 22, 2017, 20:21
Ahhh… you meant with the Mytek. It’s hinted, though hard to tell for sure as Mytek’s own linear-phase filters (fig. 2, fig, 3) do work, just that the measurement indicated that once the MQA Filter is enabled, it works on both MQA and non-MQA PCM streams. With Aurender, seems whether you like it or not, the MQA filter is applied to everything.


I’m sure it is… MQA doesn’t make it easy though. I’d imagine only manufacturers without adequate resources would resort to “handing over their keys” to MQA for all PCM… Imagine giving away the core of your platform to a 3rd party supplier… recipe for extortion ;D
a coward, loud when, and when challenged, kept mum. a person attacks in lieu of logic exhibits a person with that much at least to hide. I won't go away
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 22, 2017, 20:25
andrew represents somone, an interest, non profit
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 22, 2017, 20:30
a person intuits no attack when balance(understanding) dictates his way
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on December 22, 2017, 21:27
why bother whence you know not the effects of 20k? describe if you know
live and let live, although andrew may have more reasons. may i be wrong?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on December 28, 2017, 06:05
Interesting nugget on MQA in the latest issue of TAS, which by the way has RH waxing lyrically about MQA all over the place ::)... Specifically in the piece on the Berkley Audio Reference 2 DAC (which does just MQA rendering only, no unfolding! :-X);

Quote
All MQA licensees are given the rendering code by MQA in a computer language called C++, which the licensee incorporates into its product.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on January 05, 2018, 01:15
why bother to contribute, when you can't? one needs only to accrue past behaviour. let us pay the cost of determining whether the difference you claim on science means anything to audiophiles(most of whom are delusional unless they proffer opinion after education)
I think it's at least 50000sgd a piece
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on January 05, 2018, 01:25
andrewc had been a bully here long enough:say that to my face, you punk(andrewc)?
or a better proposition, I'm willing to pay 50000(cost of venue, ensemble, experts to fly here: I remember Fremer a wreck among recording engineers. Then final collation through a consensus of people in my panel, and people in your panel. Then the prognosis goes out to people who can define sound)
you will never get to heaven with? a retort stinking of insecurity purporting what..........an attutude. go demonstrate your attitude in a ring that will have at least credible gladiators. gosh. don't be left behind, like the fool who cannot smile bacause of hell
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ... on January 05, 2018, 01:41
PS I never liked mqa, too focused
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 10, 2018, 19:17
(Back to some real MQA news/issues ;))

MQA on iOS via live gig streaming service, nugs.net (http://nugs.net)

http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/news/post/mqa-streaming-on-ios-with-nugsnet (http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/news/post/mqa-streaming-on-ios-with-nugsnet)

Quote
Nugs.net, the home of live music from iconic touring artists such as Pearl Jam, Bruce Springsteen, Metallica, Dead & Company and Phish, is launching the first-ever iOS implementation of MQA.  From 10 January 2018, subscribers to nugs.net’s HiFi tier will be able to enjoy native MQA playback of thousands of full-length concerts on iOS devices. 

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 13, 2018, 07:08
https://www.pr.com/press-release/741071 (https://www.pr.com/press-release/741071)
Quote
Sonore & Small Green Computer: Play MQA on Any DAC with the Rendu Series Network Audio Players / Streamers

Sonore and Small Green Computer are pleased to announce the ability to play MQA on any DAC with the Signature Rendu SE, ultraRendu and microRendu network players / streamers.

By upgrading to Sonicorbiter software version 2.6 on the Sonore Rendu series network players / streamers, users are now able to play MQA to any DAC.


Gives non-MQA capable USB DACs a new lease of life  :P
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on January 13, 2018, 12:47
https://www.pr.com/press-release/741071 (https://www.pr.com/press-release/741071)
Gives non-MQA capable USB DACs a new lease of life  :P

Probably for the first unfold, subsequent unfolds require to happen inside the DAC itself.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on February 12, 2018, 12:22
https://www.audiostream.com/content/mqa-drm

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wbjia on February 13, 2018, 01:17
i am a big fan of meridian. G08 and 808 cd players are great products. i was user of 808 for a while.

but as a matter of fact, we all know boss of meridian tried very hard on promoting dvd-audio format (24/192 audio file on DVD) and he FAILED...  and i am pretty sure mqa will FAIL too!

we do NOT need another compressed audio format:

when u are in office using lan you do NOT need compressed audio format ...

when u are outside using 4g (soon will be 5G) you do NOT need  compressed audio format ...

when u are at home using wifi you do NOT need compressed audio format ...
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on February 14, 2018, 07:04

https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-contextualized

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on February 14, 2018, 17:36
https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-contextualized

First they tried to hide the fact that MQA is lossy... Then they claimed that the lossy "folds" are in the barely audible frequency range... Now they're trying to claim its about protecting the Studio's IPR... WTF. And to top if off, Stereophile is totally complicit in all this B.S from MQA. >:(
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on February 14, 2018, 17:58
Quote

...consumers no longer have access to those high-resolution PCM masters.

That, anyway, is the vision of MQA Ltd.

 


Need say anymore...?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: francishuang on February 14, 2018, 20:11
Wtf.. 



Need say anymore...?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on March 03, 2018, 02:42
A good articles from CA, a must read!

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/ca/reviews/mqa-a-review-of-controversies-concerns-and-cautions-r701/
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Boxerfan88 on March 03, 2018, 07:43
Nicely written article.
“A solution looking for a problem.”
Ha ha.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on March 10, 2018, 07:07
Stunning reversal… Almost PAP prata flipping like ;D

Quote
… I don’t believe that, over long term, MQA is in the best interest of audiophiles. I just hope it’s not too late — Jon Iverson, “As We See It”, Stereophile, April 2018
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on March 14, 2018, 13:24
https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-benefits-and-costs

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on March 16, 2018, 08:08
https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-benefits-and-costs

Iverson’s not the only one flipping against MQA… Just finished KR's piece, one by one they’re all flipping (finally) ;D

Quote
”Today, I’m less enthusiastic about MQA than I was. High-resolution streaming and downloads are now readily available …. MQA requires the purchase of compatible equipment, and holds the potential to eventually control all signal processing, such as room EQ. I don’t see a need for it, therefore, and I hope it doesn’t force the elimination of high-resolution, non-MQA downloads.” — Kalman Rubinson. “Multichannel MQA”, Stereophile, March 2018
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on March 16, 2018, 10:36
Take money already then flip, ah?

 ::)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: francishuang on March 19, 2018, 14:47
Maybe this yr neva take up ads space

Take money already then flip, ah?

 ::)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on March 25, 2018, 12:37
Insidious...

http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/news/post/mqa-live-launch (http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/news/post/mqa-live-launch)
Quote
MQA is launching its “Live” product to enable music fans to connect in studio quality to their favourite artists, wherever and whenever the artists are performing. Fans can listen to a live concert in its original quality, as if they were standing in the venue. MQA Live offers access to gigs across different countries and time zones for loyal fans, as well as opening up concerts to new audiences.

Huge dollop of extreme hyperbole.  ::)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on March 26, 2018, 19:17
http://www.youtube.com/v/xl3LDwQ1pVs&fs=1
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on April 20, 2018, 12:27

https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-drm-and-other-four-letter-words

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Knight_Rider on May 09, 2018, 14:45
https://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/tech-news-ess-technology-will-integrate-mqa-rendering-its-sabre-dacs
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wizardofoz on May 09, 2018, 16:18
Roon v1.5 now does first mqa unfold in software and still allows for dsp related functionality to be done after unfolding.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on May 10, 2018, 21:44
Roon v1.5 now does first mqa unfold in software and still allows for dsp related functionality to be done after unfolding.

The trick is it extract the renderer instructions before doing the DSP, after that, it embedded back into the stream. If no DSP is applied, then the stream already contains the embedded renderer instructions after the decoding stage.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on May 11, 2018, 09:09
Neat trick with Roon and MQA

I have an old iFi micro iDSD and the latest firmware version adds MQA.

The iOS TIDAL app doesn’t support MQA but with Roon, I can set the iPhone as an end point and enable full MQA compatibility and also DOP.

Both methods worked fine over the USB camera connector with the status LED showing MQA and DSD correctly when playing those files.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on May 11, 2018, 09:57
Neat trick with Roon and MQA

I have an old iFi micro iDSD and the latest firmware version adds MQA.

The iOS TIDAL app doesn’t support MQA but with Roon, I can set the iPhone as an end point and enable full MQA compatibility and also DOP.

Both methods worked fine over the USB camera connector with the status LED showing MQA and DSD correctly when playing those files.

...........and how did it sound?

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on May 11, 2018, 10:03
Honestly I preferred the MojoPoly even though it wasn’t MQA
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: kaydee6 on May 11, 2018, 18:37
Turn off MQA.
http://www.iar-80.com/page170.html
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 11, 2018, 20:02
Turn off MQA.
http://www.iar-80.com/page170.html

It's the written equivalent of Verbal Diarrhea  ;D... The entire piece essentially hinges on just one point; the debate around the reconstruction filter ;)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 23, 2018, 09:47
http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=19396 (http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=19396)

Quote
A Comparison of Clarity in MQA Encoded Files vs. Their Unprocessed State as Performed by Three Groups — Expert Listeners

This paper aims to examine perceived clarity in MQA encoded audio files compared to their unprocessed state (96-kHz 24-bit). Utilizing a methodology initially proposed by the authors in a previous paper, this study aims to investigate any reported differences in clarity for three musical sources of varying genres.

A double-blind test is conducted using three groups—expert listeners, musicians, and casual listeners—in a controlled environment using high-quality loudspeakers and headphones. The researchers were interested in comparing the responses of the three target groups and whether playback systems had any significant effect on listeners’ perception.

Data shows that listeners were not able to significantly discriminate between MQA encoded files and the unprocessed original due to several interaction effects.


Finally, results from a proper scientific study... At least as far as clarity is concerned, AES' listening test results show that there's no statistically signfiicant difference with MQA vs. source PCM. So, all the BS from MQA, Stereophile, and TAS about how amazing it sounds etc, is bogus (or just in comparison to low-rez MP3) :)

(http://i68.tinypic.com/ndwiyq.jpg)
Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and Technology (https://www.cirmmt.org/) Critical Listening Room @ McGill University
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on May 23, 2018, 10:59
Finally, results from a proper scientific study... At least as far as clarity is concerned, AES' listening test results show that there's no statistically signfiicant difference with MQA vs. source PCM. So, all the BS from MQA, Stereophile, and TAS about how amazing it sounds etc, is bogus (or just in comparison to low-rez MP3) :)

So?  What does that means?  MQA DID deliver.    

MQA made no claims that they enhanced the source PCM file.  MQA want to transport the "master tape experience" to the consumers....so now, you listen to master tape with "no statistically significant difference with MQA vs. source PCM".....isn't this the goal of MQA?

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on May 23, 2018, 12:59
So?  What does that means?  MQA DID deliver.    

MQA made no claims that they enhanced the source PCM file.  MQA want to transport the "master tape experience" to the consumers....so now, you listen to master tape with "no statistically significant difference with MQA vs. source PCM".....isn't this the goal of MQA?

(Audio)


It is not what they can't deliver but there are many 'claims' that were made over the years that MQA mastered version actually 'sound' better than the original mastered version, mostly claimed through 'de-blurring' technique.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on May 23, 2018, 13:23

It is not what they can't deliver but there are many 'claims' that were made over the years that MQA mastered version actually 'sound' better than the original mastered version, mostly claimed through 'de-blurring' technique.


No, that is not my understanding.  I think I was in a session in RMAF where Meridian was doing the demonstration and explain the process and their policy.  They are simply trying to convey the "Master Tape experience".  The record company will never provide the consumers a "Master Tape" copy of the album.   But MQA allows the transfer of that file though MQA process to your living room, while protecting the copyright of the original source file.  MQA will receive the "Master Tape" quality files from the record company and will keep inventory in their server.  There is no talk about enhancing the source file.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 23, 2018, 13:36
So?  What does that means?  MQA DID deliver.    

MQA made no claims that they enhanced the source PCM file.  MQA want to transport the "master tape experience" to the consumers....so now, you listen to master tape with "no statistically significant difference with MQA vs. source PCM".....isn't this the goal of MQA?

(Audio)

Of course they did!! Thats one of the main arguments against MQA! Either you forgot or missed that whole point :P

They - meaning MQA, ST, TAS and other media types - claim that MQA improves the sound and makes it better than the high-rez PCM they originated from because of MQA's "de-blurring" techniques at both encoding and decoding stage.

Their views are typified by coverage such as this;

https://www.stereophile.com/content/meridians-mqa-one-listeners-impression (https://www.stereophile.com/content/meridians-mqa-one-listeners-impression)

Quote
...Next I heard Herbie Hancock's version of Joni Mitchell's "The River" in 24/96. Not only were the subtle inflections of Corinne Bailey Rae's voice more audible with MQA, but the color and roundness of Hancock's piano also really stood out. The sound of brushes on drums seems far more defined and realistic than without MQA.
...


https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqas-sound-convinces-hardened-showgoers (https://www.stereophile.com/content/mqas-sound-convinces-hardened-showgoers)

Quote
...
Next up was McGrath's 24/88.2k recording of Michael Tilson Thomas and the New World Symphony performing the start of Mahler's Symphony 5. Because MQA encoding is most effective when the recording and mastering equipment are known, McGrath had previously informed Stuart and the MQA team that he had used a Meitner ADC and Grado mikes.

It was immediately apparent how much deeper I could listen into the soundstage with MQA. Due to MQA correction of minute timing errors, special relationships were clarified to a significant extent.
...


https://darko.audio/2016/06/an-inconvenient-truth-mqa-sounds-better/ (https://darko.audio/2016/06/an-inconvenient-truth-mqa-sounds-better/)

Quote
...
Put simply: because it sounds convincingly better than the normal, non-MQA’d 24bit/96kHz file. Lest you thought MQA was just a way to pack, transmit and then unpack hi-res audio via what Bob Stuart calls “audio origami” or “encapsulation”, it isn’t. It’s that. But also more.
...

The AES paper proves this is bogus, at least as far as clarity is concerned :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on May 23, 2018, 14:03
I am sorry.  But you are mixing MQA with ST, TAS.

MQA is MQA.  ST and TAs are publications.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 23, 2018, 14:14
I am sorry.  But you are mixing MQA with ST, TAS.

MQA is MQA.  ST and TAs are publications.

(Audio)

Alamak Audio, I'm talking about MQA the company, not the technology, when I say that they're claiming it sounds better than original high-res PCM.  i.e. http://www.mqa.co.uk/ (http://www.mqa.co.uk/) - I think you're missing alot of Stuart/MQA's early commentary on their technology.

ps: May I suggest you re-read this thread from the beginning :)

pps: by the way, MQA themselves, and many of the media have now backed off (or toned down) claims that MQA sounds better than the original PCM masters.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Knight_Rider on May 23, 2018, 14:32
Sorri sorri call me slow but if MQA = PCM then what is master tape experience?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Knight_Rider on May 23, 2018, 14:37
https://ifi-audio.com/mqa-firmware/

The updated firmware works across all their products.

Magenta is the official MQA LED colour on iFi machines. However, on legacy machines without the Magenta LED option, when an MQA file is played, the LED colour will be White/Yellow corresponding to the 384kHz file being played
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on May 23, 2018, 14:44
Like I said, MQA = Master Quality Authenticated.

MQA holds the Master Tape quality PCM file and transport it into your living room using the lossy protocol.  If the AES paper's findng is true then they would had achieved their goal because what you hear in your living room is as best as the Master Tape would sound because there is "no statistically significant difference with MQA vs. source PCM"

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on May 23, 2018, 17:36
Like I said, MQA = Master Quality Authenticated.

MQA holds the Master Tape quality PCM file and transport it into your living room using the lossy protocol.  If the AES paper's findng is true then they would had achieved their goal because what you hear in your living room is as best as the Master Tape would sound because there is "no statistically significant difference with MQA vs. source PCM"

(Audio)

Then we don’t need MQA, the existing PCM is good enough... with no lossy components to worry about!
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on May 24, 2018, 07:38
Like I said, MQA = Master Quality Authenticated.

MQA holds the Master Tape quality PCM file and transport it into your living room using the lossy protocol.  If the AES paper's findng is true then they would had achieved their goal because what you hear in your living room is as best as the Master Tape would sound because there is "no statistically significant difference with MQA vs. source PCM"

(Audio)

What do you think FLAC is? ::)

If MQA’s purpose is purely to transparently transport the original high-rez PCM with lower bit-rate, other technologies already exist to do that!!

I’m guessing you haven’t actually read the AES paper… Here’s a quote, the very first paragraph in the Introduction of the paper;

Quote
Master Quality Authenticated (MQA) encoding has garnered attention and discussion within the audio community. The MQA encoding process reportedly reduces the inherent “blur” in digital audio files, introduced during the initial conversion from analogue, with some listeners reporting having heard a greater clarity and definition to the sound, particularly in transient information.

The focus of this investigation is whether listeners – particularly casual listeners – would report hearing significant differences between the two audio files

[/b]

In other words, the very intent of the paper was to validate the sonic claims of MQA’s proponents, i.e. whether MQA sounds better than the original high-rez PCM. And the paper proves those claims false (as far as "clarity" is concerned anyway... more tests are pending).

Get it now?? :)
Title: MQA
Post by: Boxerfan88 on May 24, 2018, 08:49
In the post above, I see MQA use words like “reportedly” / “reported”; which is absolutely unverifiable. MQA like to fold here fold there, unfold here unfold there. Sounds like marketing talk.

...I’ll stay with FLAC.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jerome_the_lang on May 24, 2018, 08:59
"no statistically significant difference with MQA vs. source PCM" - doesn't mean no difference hor.

It might mean certain number of the people on test dun hear difference evening out the overall statistics.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on May 24, 2018, 09:08
Yes, I would also stay with Source PCM files too, no need MQA.....if I can get my hands on the Master Tapes....

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Knight_Rider on May 24, 2018, 09:20
In the post above, I see MQA use words like “reportedly” / “reported”; which is absolutely unverifiable. MQA like to fold here fold there, unfold here unfold there. Sounds like marketing talk.

...I’ll stay with FLAC.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://support.tidal.com/hc/en-us/articles/115000397069-TIDAL-MASTERS

96 kHz / 24 bit ...........Yeah until something better comes out and I tot ifi does 384 for MQA  ???
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on June 28, 2018, 22:27
http://www.youtube.com/v/m31r1GHPPdA&fs=1
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on June 30, 2018, 20:09
fcuk THE WORLD!!!

(http://audio.sg/pic/mqacd.jpg)


(http://audio.sg/pic/broinarmmqa-01.jpg)

(http://audio.sg/pic/songkeylifemqa-01.jpg)

(http://audio.sg/pic/thesinglesmqa-01.jpg)

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on July 01, 2018, 00:58
It f'ing works!!

Playback on Oppo 205.
(http://audio.sg/pic/mqacd-02.jpg)

Audio source information
(http://audio.sg/pic/mqacd-03.jpg)

Sounds very promising.  Cannot blast; it's past midnight now.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on July 01, 2018, 01:50
So you ripped the CD and played it in Oppo 205?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 01, 2018, 08:23
I’ve got a couple of these Universal disc arriving this week, including ones I’ve already got on SACD, should be an interesting comparison. I’ve already got Chesky’s Rebecca Pidgone’s “Raven” on MQA … But I'm still waiting for the firmware update to unfold and render these disc natively on my dCS deck though, no point having to rip them as they're already available as MQA streams on Tidal.

No doubt in my mind these discs will be “collectables” like my HDCD, DAD, and DVD-Audio discs ;D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on July 01, 2018, 18:53
do we know the provenance of these MQA CDs? as in mastering information?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on July 01, 2018, 23:14
Must be something there....people who hates MQA are actually buying these MQA CDs....    :)

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 02, 2018, 08:36
do we know the provenance of these MQA CDs? as in mastering information?

I’m not sure about the Universal discs, but Stereophile had coverage about the Chesky Rebecca Pidgeon MQA release; https://www.stereophile.com/content/chesky-release-mqa-cds-may (https://www.stereophile.com/content/chesky-release-mqa-cds-may)

It’s not exactly clear, but appears to be from an identical master used for the highres 176/24 PCM (and DSD] releases that have been available for awhile. That said, the source of the original highres itself is unclear; most people believe Chesky recorded the session in Redbook and upsampled to 176 for the SACD and HDTracks highres PCM releases.


Must be something there....people who hates MQA are actually buying these MQA CDs....    :)

(Audio)

Oh come now Audio, I'm sure you're not so naive as to not know the difference between an Audiophile's techno-interest versus actually liking an audio format? Same reason many have DVD-Audio discs when SACD was always preferred. Too bad for you though, there’s already objective evidence that MQA is an inferior format despite your support, and is likely to die pretty soon when Tidal shuts it down and more hardware vendors rejecting the format :P
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on July 02, 2018, 10:01
I’m not sure about the Universal discs, but Stereophile had coverage about the Chesky Rebecca Pidgeon MQA release; https://www.stereophile.com/content/chesky-release-mqa-cds-may (https://www.stereophile.com/content/chesky-release-mqa-cds-may)

It’s not exactly clear, but appears to be from an identical master used for the highres 176/24 PCM (and DSD] releases that have been available for awhile. That said, the source of the original highres itself is unclear; most people believe Chesky recorded the session in Redbook and upsampled to 176 for the SACD and HDTracks highres PCM releases.


Oh come now Audio, I'm sure you're not so naive as to not know the difference between an Audiophile's techno-interest versus actually liking an audio format? Same reason many have DVD-Audio discs when SACD was always preferred. Too bad for you though, there’s already objective evidence that MQA is an inferior format despite your support, and is likely to die pretty soon when Tidal shuts it down and more hardware vendors rejecting the format :P

So inferior a format but still can have people buying the discs.  And then seeing them vigorously defending their purchase.

LOL, well that's good enough for me.   :)

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on July 02, 2018, 15:23
I’m not sure about the Universal discs, but Stereophile had coverage about the Chesky Rebecca Pidgeon MQA release; https://www.stereophile.com/content/chesky-release-mqa-cds-may (https://www.stereophile.com/content/chesky-release-mqa-cds-may)

It’s not exactly clear, but appears to be from an identical master used for the highres 176/24 PCM (and DSD] releases that have been available for awhile. That said, the source of the original highres itself is unclear; most people believe Chesky recorded the session in Redbook and upsampled to 176 for the SACD and HDTracks highres PCM releases.

that's what I suspected too. sounds like old wine in a new bottle. if these MQA CDs are indeed the Second Coming, then I would seriously consider buying the Oppo 205 just so that I can spin these discs 😁

meanwhile I'm still waiting on MQA's promise of having access to the original master tapes and creating the MQA masters from the original source. is this still their intention? or have they drifted away from that to simply piggyback on existing hi-res sources and apply their proprietary MQA filters to those files?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: DJQ on July 03, 2018, 09:29
Must be something there....people who hates MQA are actually buying these MQA CDs....    :)

(Audio)
So can play on their preferred CD players. This better than SACD? Or just different.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 03, 2018, 10:23
So inferior a format but still can have people buying the discs.  And then seeing them vigorously defending their purchase.

LOL, well that's good enough for me.   :)

(Audio)

Hahaha... Audio... aiyo, so desperate for little victories?... Come on man, don't be so lame (like that ccb fella ;) ) In any case, don't worry, I have a lot of patience; when MQA finally takes it's last gasping breadth, I'll be right here waiting to remind you... ;D
 
http://www.youtube.com/v/S_E2EHVxNAE&fs=1
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 03, 2018, 10:28
that's what I suspected too....

It's mostly bogus... MQA conversions have been an automated process based on whatever existing digital source is supplied to them by the Studios. For the mainstream releases there's no attempt to re-start from master tapes except for a couple of key ones they’ve been using to demonstrate to (and hoodwink) the high-end media. At the end of the day, it’s just yet another proprietary format to make money selling literally crippled content - that final rendering of the MQA stream involves injecting completely bogus noise in the upper octaves... like WTF?!  (and some people think it's sound good?!?!!... ::) )
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on July 03, 2018, 18:01
OK, I have not tried playing the MQA CD on the Oppo players yet.  I only ripped the MQA CD and playback via the Oppo USB input.

The results are mixed and there are no clear winners.

(1) Dires Straits - Brothers in Arms.  I can hardly make out the differences between the normal CD, the DSD and the MQA CDs.  Very slight difference.

(2) Stevie Wonder - Songs in the Key of Life.  Surprisingly close between the Japanese SACD and the MQA CD.  The DSD one has an edge, just a little bit more refined.

(3) Carpenters- The Singles -  Totally different masters.  The MQA CD sounds like having vocals boasts up totally.  Very obviously during "Top of The world" chorus with Karen and Richard harmonising.  The Japanese SACD DSD version is still OK, without Karen vocal thickening up the overall sound.  I also tested with the same track from the Mobile Fidelity SACD, the one with the funny Karen face.  This version is the most superior.

Mind you, the fidelity of the various versions are still OK, it's only up to your preference.  No, I won't be rushing out to buy more.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on July 03, 2018, 18:03
Seems to me, it doesn't matter MQA sounds good or bad.....

The trick is they tried to make you part with your money.....and they succeeded!!    :)

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 04, 2018, 07:25
OK, I have not tried playing the MQA CD on the Oppo players yet.  I only ripped the MQA CD and playback via the Oppo USB input.

The results are mixed and there are no clear winners.

(1) Dires Straits - Brothers in Arms.  I can hardly make out the differences between the normal CD, the DSD and the MQA CDs.  Very slight difference.

...
(Audio)


Like Rebecca Pidgeon’s “The Raven”, “Brothers in Arms” was originally recorded in 44.1k/16bits, which was upsampled for all high-res releases, so, it shouldn’t surprise anyone when the formats are not that different.

That said, the (2013) MOFI SACD is the best and has the widest dynamic-range among all the high-res digital versions, while the Japan SHM-SACD is audibly the worse by a big margin.


Seems to me, it doesn't matter MQA sounds good or bad.....

The trick is they tried to make you part with your money.....and they succeeded!!    :)

(Audio)

Seriously Audio?? That’s the point you’re happy about; Me buying a few sample MQA discs to play with?? Hahaha ;D

(http://thesmartlocal.com/images/easyblog_articles/632/xb2ap3_thumbnail_sgslangs.png.pagespeed.ic.5tTtTV-E1x.jpg)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on July 04, 2018, 07:33
Seriously Audio?? That’s the point you’re happy about; Me buying a few sample MQA discs to play with?? Hahaha ;D

(http://thesmartlocal.com/images/easyblog_articles/632/xb2ap3_thumbnail_sgslangs.png.pagespeed.ic.5tTtTV-E1x.jpg)

Yes, I am a man of simple pleasures.  Yes, having you actually bought MQA CDs and starting a collection really make my day.   :)    Thank you.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 04, 2018, 07:38
Yes, I am a man of simple pleasures.  Yes, having you actually bought MQA CDs and starting a collection really make my day.   :)    Thank you.

(Audio)

Starting a collection?  ;D ;D ;D... You (and Bob Stuart) can only wish!
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on July 04, 2018, 09:14
Starting a collection?  ;D ;D ;D... You (and Bob Stuart) can only wish!

"Raven" is the first MQA disc you acquired.....followed by a couple of Japanese Universal ones you will receive this week as you had confessed...seems like a legitimate collection to me.  :)

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on July 04, 2018, 22:38
OK, I have not tried playing the MQA CD on the Oppo players yet.  I only ripped the MQA CD and playback via the Oppo USB input.

it would be good to hear your follow-up thoughts once you've had a chance to spin the MQA CDs the old-fashioned way :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on July 04, 2018, 23:58
Please note MQA CDs are 16 bit 44.1k MQA (this ensures Redbook backward compatibility) not 24 bit/44.1/48k as in Tidal Master. It means 16 bit 44.1k MQA only unfold the first 16 bit from 0-22.05k bandwidth. 22.05-44.1k bandwidth is NOT encoded at all coz the lower 8 bit is not used when compared to 24 bit MQA in Tidal Master.

The rest is just up-sampling with appropriate filters. I would prefer the 24 bit MQA coz it is closer to the original hi-res masters.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on July 05, 2018, 07:43
I’ve got a couple of these Universal disc arriving this week, including ones I’ve already got on SACD, should be an interesting comparison. I’ve already got Chesky’s Rebecca Pidgone’s “Raven” on MQA … But I'm still waiting for the firmware update to unfold and render these disc natively on my dCS deck though, no point having to rip them as they're already available as MQA streams on Tidal.

No doubt in my mind these discs will be “collectables” like my HDCD, DAD, and DVD-Audio discs ;D

It is creeping back again.  ;D

http://www.highfidelity.pl



Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on July 05, 2018, 10:10
Another reviewer post a youtube on MQA CD:

https://youtu.be/m31r1GHPPdA

Apparently, the reviewer actually makes a AB comparison when compared to drop-out version(44.1k, which he assumed it switched back to CD version) then to MQA version. However, the drop-out version is NOT actually the CD version but undecoded MQA version!

if there’s a manufacturing defect on the disc itself. The error correction in Redbook CD can compensate errors to a certain limit(bit perfect correction), If the errors are too great to be bit prefect corrected, the next step it uses ‘masking’ effect to reduce audible drop-out(not bit perfect correction). When this happens, MQA decoding is interrupted.


As I said in my previous post, there's a great different between 16 bit and 24 bit MQA versions, the later one, which is found in Tidal masters are better off than the 16 bit MQA CD.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 05, 2018, 10:43
"Raven" is the first MQA disc you acquired.....followed by a couple of Japanese Universal ones you will receive this week as you had confessed...seems like a legitimate collection to me.  :)

(Audio)

Rebecca's album was released by Chesky, and the new discs I just bought are by Universal; the point being, I'm keen to explore samples of the different MQA renderings adopted by the different main Music Studios. Likewise, I will acquire MQA samplers discs released by Sony and Warner as well when available.

Coincidentally, I just received the first couple of discs this morning in the office ;D

(http://i67.tinypic.com/2aj8e8g.jpg)

Sure, you can call it a "collection"; same as my samples of  DVD-Audio discs, DualDiscs, HDCD, HDAD discs, and Sony Mini-Discs... i.e. all the dead formats ;D

Speaking of DualDiscs, one of the MQA discs I ordered thats yet to be delivered is a Limited Edition SACD-MQA Hybrid disc - SACD layer on one side, and MQA encoded Redbook on the other - it's the first of it's kind that I've seen. Should make SACD-vs-MQA sonic comparisons significantly easier on MQA-capable transport/players :)

If anyone's interested, its this disc (https://www.amazon.co.jp/%E9%9D%99%E3%81%8B%E3%81%AA%E5%86%AC%E3%81%AE%E5%A4%9C-Winter-Ensemble-Limited-%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E%E8%A7%A3%E8%AA%AC%E3%83%BB%E3%82%B9%E3%83%AA%E3%83%BC%E3%83%96%E4%BB%98/dp/B07D9WBWKL/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1530674067&sr=8-1), which seems to only be available on Amazon Japan. Grab it while stocks last ;)

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61lYK5ZBe%2BL.jpg)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on July 05, 2018, 10:46
As as Bob received his MQA commisions through your purchases.....he's happy.   :)

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 05, 2018, 10:47
Please note MQA CDs are 16 bit 44.1k MQA (this ensures Redbook backward compatibility) not 24 bit/44.1/48k as in Tidal Master. It means 16 bit 44.1k MQA only unfold the first 16 bit from 0-22.05k bandwidth. 22.05-44.1k bandwidth is NOT encoded at all coz the lower 8 bit is not used when compared to 24 bit MQA in Tidal Master.

The rest is just up-sampling with appropriate filters. I would prefer the 24 bit MQA coz it is closer to the original hi-res masters.

Sorry, you're mistaken.

Pretty much all of the MQA streams on Tidal Master are 24/88.2 or 24/96 high-res encoded into 16/44.1 -  Thats the whole point about MQA Streaming... keeping the bandwidth consumption down to standard redbook streams, i.e. around 1.411Mbps for "high-res equivalent" playback.

You don't have to take my word for it;

Set your Tidal to Passthrough so that Tidal does NOT decode the MQA stream... Then take a Coax or TOSlink output from your PC/Mac into a DAC that clearly shows you the input bit-rate. Playback a Tidal "Masters" track and you'll see it's a 16/44.1 stream. I just verified it on my system this morning - TOSLink off my Macbook Pro into my DAC;

(http://i68.tinypic.com/sy603s.jpg)

(http://i67.tinypic.com/mu94lj.jpg)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 05, 2018, 10:48
As as Bob received his MQA commisions through your purchases.....he's happy.   :)

(Audio)

As are you no doubt, for little victories  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on July 05, 2018, 10:50
Sorry, you're mistaken.

Pretty much all of the MQA streams on Tidal Master are 24/88.2 or 24/96 high-res encoded into 16/44.1 -  Thats the whole point about MQA Streaming... keeping the bandwidth consumption down to standard redbook streams, i.e. around 1.411Mbps for "high-res equivalent" playback.

You don't have to take my word for it;

Set your Tidal to Passthrough so that Tidal does NOT decode the MQA stream... Then take a Coax or TOSlink output from your PC/Mac into a DAC that clearly shows you the input bit-rate. Playback a Tidal "Masters" track and you'll see it's a 16/44.1 stream. I just verified it on my system this morning - TOSLink off my Macbook Pro into my DAC;

(http://i68.tinypic.com/sy603s.jpg)

(http://i67.tinypic.com/mu94lj.jpg)



Wow!!   So expert and involved in a format you hated so much!!

(Audio) 
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 05, 2018, 10:59

Wow!!   So expert and involved in a format you hated so much!!

(Audio)

Of course! I can only hate something once I've understood it intimately. Obviously you don't really care one bit about the technology (pun unintended)  ;D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: audionoob on July 05, 2018, 11:09
Maybe this article can help clarify:

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/05/mqa-explained-everything-you-need-to-know-about-high-res-audio/4/
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on July 05, 2018, 12:33
Sorry, you're mistaken.

Pretty much all of the MQA streams on Tidal Master are 24/88.2 or 24/96 high-res encoded into 16/44.1 -  Thats the whole point about MQA Streaming... keeping the bandwidth consumption down to standard redbook streams, i.e. around 1.411Mbps for "high-res equivalent" playback.

You don't have to take my word for it;

Set your Tidal to Passthrough so that Tidal does NOT decode the MQA stream... Then take a Coax or TOSlink output from your PC/Mac into a DAC that clearly shows you the input bit-rate. Playback a Tidal "Masters" track and you'll see it's a 16/44.1 stream. I just verified it on my system this morning - TOSLink off my Macbook Pro into my DAC;

(http://i68.tinypic.com/sy603s.jpg)

(http://i67.tinypic.com/mu94lj.jpg)

I'm Roon user and Roon reports two versions of 16 bit and 24 bit MQA via Tidal master.

(http://i65.tinypic.com/312tzqw.jpg)

This 16 bit 44.1k MQA version which is authenticated at 44.1kHz. The MQA decoder 'up-sampled' to 24bit 88.2k (first decoding)

(http://i66.tinypic.com/8xqybq.jpg)

This is 24 bit 44.1k MQA version and is authenticated to 352.8k. The MQA decoder 'unfold' to 88.2k (first decoding), if one have a renderer, it will unfold to 352.8k.

There's not many 16 bit MQA version in Tidal masters, majority are 24 bit MQA version. Obviously the 24 bit MQA version has a higher bit rate. This higher bit-rate is fine for streaming but it will not fit into MQA CD. The only benefit of MQA CD is one will get the 'de-blurring' effects.

 
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on July 05, 2018, 15:09
Pretty much all of the MQA streams on Tidal Master are 24/88.2 or 24/96 high-res encoded into 16/44.1

Tidal Masters are indeed 24-bit.  If you get 16/44.1, something is wrong in the setup.  (If you use a computer, it may require exclusive setting and USB output for 24-bit Tidal output instead of SPDIF, regardless of the hardware capability of the latter.)  If you use Roon, check the signal path when playing a Tidal Master album.

In case you can test a Lumin, you'd also see Lumin plays Tidal Master in 24-bit natively.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on July 06, 2018, 00:54
Wah, today playback on the Lumin S1 and yes, the MQA indeed is sounding great!!   Now I know why someone is building his collection.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 06, 2018, 07:53
I'm Roon user and Roon reports two versions of 16 bit and 24 bit MQA via Tidal master.
...
There's not many 16 bit MQA version in Tidal masters, majority are 24 bit MQA version. Obviously the 24 bit MQA version has a higher bit rate. This higher bit-rate is fine for streaming but it will not fit into MQA CD. The only benefit of MQA CD is one will get the 'de-blurring' effects.

Tidal Masters are indeed 24-bit.  If you get 16/44.1, something is wrong in the setup.
...

Alright guys, I stand corrected :)

Took a look this morning, through Roon, I tested a couple of random new albums from Tidal’s current Masters list, they do show-up as 44.1/24.

(http://i65.tinypic.com/73mkv8.jpg) (http://i66.tinypic.com/se2fjp.jpg)


Just to be sure it’s not just a Roon Tidal MQA stream thing, I verified directly via my dCS client into the dCS Network Bridge with hardware MQA decoding… Shows the same. Interestingly enough though, the actual bit-rate of the stream was not 2.12Mbps as might be expected of a 44.1/24 stream, it was just 1.445Mbps, almost that of redbook - definitely requires more exploration.

(http://i68.tinypic.com/oqytsn.jpg) (http://i64.tinypic.com/md1du9.jpg)


All that said, Tidal set to “Passthrough” and out via TOSLInk on old my Macbook still shows up as 44.1/16 for any MQA 96k source tracks. I tested my DAC’s TOSLink separately, nothing wrong.  Assuming the Tidal App itself is not doing something funky, it could be the Macbook TOSLink outputs is wonky - will have to track this down separately (not that I use it much though).
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 06, 2018, 07:55
Wah, today playback on the Lumin S1 and yes, the MQA indeed is sounding great!!   Now I know why someone is building his collection.
...

Listen to original high-res versions, the MQA tracks sound flat and more like Redbook in comparison... I think you need to listen properly :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on July 06, 2018, 10:22
Listen to original high-res versions, the MQA tracks sound flat and more like Redbook in comparison... I think you need to listen properly :)

Just to be clear, I am not replying for the sake of arguing.  I intend to have a fruitful discussion with you, my friend.

What I find between the Hi-Res tracks and normal Redbook tracks are generally the hi-res versions are tamer sounding and sometimes has a hint of better detailing.  Overall, yes, the hi-res is preferred.  The Redbook does, however, sound more dynamics and has better "bite".

The MQA tracks seems has better dynamics and do sound better than the Redbook.

So, to me, there is no real guarantee which versions you would like, Redbook, hi-res (even different hi res, FLAC, AIFF, DSD are different) and now MQA.  You need to try them and then pick out the one you prefer.  Unfortunately, it's a mixed bag.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on July 06, 2018, 10:32
Tidal set to “Passthrough” and out via TOSLInk on old my Macbook still shows up as 44.1/16 for any MQA 96k source tracks. I tested my DAC’s TOSLink separately, nothing wrong.  Assuming the Tidal App itself is not doing something funky, it could be the Macbook TOSLink outputs is wonky - will have to track this down separately (not that I use it much though).

You need to use Exclusive Mode, and probably Force Volume as well.

If you choose Sound Output as "System Default", it will not work.  All successful setups I read about use USB output.  I'm not sure Built-in Output will work or not.

There's a MAC setting that overrides whatever sample rate you play, see:
https://www.avhub.com.au/news/sound-image/how-to-play-tidals-high-res-masters-on-your-mac-446915
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on July 06, 2018, 17:08
Wah, today playback on the Lumin S1 and yes, the MQA indeed is sounding great!!
(Audio)

Thanks for the report.   :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on July 07, 2018, 01:54
Thanks for the report.   :)

The last time the S1 will work.  Waiting for the X1.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on July 07, 2018, 06:34
http://www.youtube.com/v/-EWUiqW5hcM&fs=1
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 07, 2018, 08:58
Just to be clear, I am not replying for the sake of arguing.  I intend to have a fruitful discussion with you, my friend.

...

(Audio)

Much better approach :) Here’s my honest view….

Thus far I have yet to encountered a single instance where an MQA release sounds better in any way than it’s original high-res source (contrary to Bob Stuart’s goal/view and much of the high-end HiFi Media).

When compared to Redbook, like you, I find MQA to be a hit or miss; often times its barely different (especially for Pop), other times its worse; especially when compared to Redbook upsampled on proper high-end gear. Occasionally, it’s actually better than the Redbook release from the same master, and for such releases which don’t otherwise have high-res versions available, MQA does actually benefit the Audiophile community. That’s the one and only reason I continue to be interested in what happens with MQA, but only as long as it comes with my Tidal subscription at no additional costs; I only listen to streamed music casually, for music I really like, I acquire Redbook CDs, SACDs or high-res downloads, period ;)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 07, 2018, 08:59
You need to use Exclusive Mode, and probably Force Volume as well.

If you choose Sound Output as "System Default", it will not work.  All successful setups I read about use USB output.  I'm not sure Built-in Output will work or not.

There's a MAC setting that overrides whatever sample rate you play, see:
https://www.avhub.com.au/news/sound-image/how-to-play-tidals-high-res-masters-on-your-mac-446915

You’ll see in my post #415 screenshot (http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=190717.msg1266312#msg1266312) that my Tidal app was set to Exclusive Mode, Forced volume, and Passthrough.

In any case, it’s not a big deal, I don’t use TOSLink at all normally. The only reason I was testing with TOSLInk that morning was to prevent the USB port rate-negotiation between my MacBook Pro and the DAC just to verify exactly what rate was coming out of the Mac. Just curiosity :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 07, 2018, 11:37
More samplers just received, including the SACD-MQA hybrid disc! ;D

(http://i68.tinypic.com/2qjbqz6.jpg)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on July 09, 2018, 09:37
More samplers just received, including the SACD-MQA hybrid disc! ;D

(http://i68.tinypic.com/2qjbqz6.jpg)

You can rip the MQA CD and play it back via NAS. I bet Roon will report 16 bit instead of 24 bit. As for 24 bit variable bit rate it can reach to 1.7Mbps depending on the contents of music.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 09, 2018, 10:30
You can rip the MQA CD and play it back via NAS. I bet Roon will report 16 bit instead of 24 bit. As for 24 bit variable bit rate it can reach to 1.7Mbps depending on the contents of music.

Just tried it this morning as a matter of fact... it’s 16/44.1 as expected (since these are redbook disc). The MQA Master source in the case of Rebecca Pidgeon is 176k, and for Oscar Peterson is 352.8k

(http://i64.tinypic.com/262rryd.jpg)   (http://i64.tinypic.com/359gtg6.jpg)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on July 09, 2018, 10:31
Bob Stuart spinning the usual yarn ::)…

He keeps claiming that the only way to sonically deliver what the artist signed-off at the studio is to “control the DAC”… Complete Bollocks!! Different Amplifier, different speakers, different room acoustics, different cabling, different power etc etc… all conspire to guarantee no one will ever hear what the artist heard in the studio… “Highest level of purity… it’s the Musician and You”… a bloody stupid argument from Bob/MQA camp. And “It can’t be free, because nothing in life is free”… Really?? One word; FLAC.

http://www.youtube.com/v/F--_5h_7YV0&fs=1  http://www.youtube.com/v/x-I9-gzhDcY&fs=1
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on July 09, 2018, 11:31
As expected, there’s nothing I presumed no coding in the upper audio band when it comes to 16 bit MQA, so basically what we are seeing here is just up-sampling not unfolding. All these claims from MQA is simply B.S!
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on July 13, 2018, 12:09


http://audiofi.net/2018/06/exogal-ditches-mqa/

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on September 13, 2018, 11:39


www.hifiplus.com/articles/dcs-rossini-mqa-updates/?page=3

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Pinky on September 16, 2018, 15:01
     I confess to having liked what I've heard of MQA, I've detatched myself from the technical arguments and just listenend to it on Tidal. I now actively seek out MQA encoded tracks where possible. Visiting "ears" seem to share my opinion.
     As it costs me no more to stream than CD quality it's a win/win situation for me though I doubt I'd go to the trouble of buying MQA CDs (virtually unknown here) and the required equipment as prices are a bit silly at the moment. Time will tell what the future holds.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jaffrie on September 16, 2018, 20:56
I do wonder if it would suceed as we’ve witness the demise of Sony Super Mapping,
Sacd, HDCD , DSD etc. For me I do believe that there’s still life left in Red Book which might not have been fully capitalised. Just look at the ressurgance of vinyl, it too wasn’t the perfect playback source.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Pinky on September 17, 2018, 12:43
For me I do believe that there’s still life left in Red Book which might not have been fully capitalised. Just look at the ressurgance of vinyl, it too wasn’t the perfect playback source.
Red Book is good enough for me for sure as a listening medium, the main problem besetting it is the mastering. So long as the content is compressed and overly loud it's never going to sound anywhere near as good as it has the potential to. It's aimed at a world of ear buds "on the move" and car audio.
A lot of vinyl/SACD/MQA (not all) is mastered for a different demographic and retains a lot of it's original characteristics and consequently sounds a lot more engaging. Perhaps Red Book titles should be sold in two versions, one for serious listening and one for muzak. I'd certainly carry on buying them  :)   
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on September 17, 2018, 14:22
Coincidentally, this Disc comes in this morning.

This is a redbook, with MQA encoding....recommended to me by an anti-MQA lobbyist....

(http://audio.sg/pic/ravenmqa.jpg)

(Audio)

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on September 18, 2018, 11:28
I do wonder if it would suceed as we’ve witness the demise of Sony Super Mapping,
Sacd, HDCD , DSD etc. For me I do believe that there’s still life left in Red Book which might not have been fully capitalised. Just look at the ressurgance of vinyl, it too wasn’t the perfect playback source.

SACD isn't quite dead yet. companies such as Audio Fidelity may have closed down but there are still places like Mobile Fidelity who still continue to produce SACDs 😊
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on September 18, 2018, 16:29


https://www.cnet.com/news/more-proof-the-cd-format-isnt-dead-the-nad-c538-player/#ftag=rss.audiophiliac.ftag

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on September 18, 2018, 16:54
I do wonder if it would suceed as we’ve witness the demise of Sony Super Mapping,
Sacd, HDCD , DSD etc. For me I do believe that there’s still life left in Red Book which might not have been fully capitalised. Just look at the ressurgance of vinyl, it too wasn’t the perfect playback source.

I haven't seen Sony Super Bit Mapping mentioned in a looong time... it's noise-shaping with a fancy name ;D.

Like IB says, SACD/DSD is hardly dead, plenty of releases every single day :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on September 18, 2018, 16:56
Coincidentally, this Disc comes in this morning.

This is a redbook, with MQA encoding....recommended to me by an anti-MQA lobbyist....

(http://audio.sg/pic/ravenmqa.jpg)

(Audio)

And have you compared it to the original highres PCM or SACD releases, and your verdict is...?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: InnocentBlood on September 19, 2018, 11:53
could you share if the MQA disc booklet includes details regarding the provenance of this release? did the makers of this disc really go back to the master tapes to produce an MQA version of this recording?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on September 19, 2018, 12:33
could you share if the MQA disc booklet includes details regarding the provenance of this release? did the makers of this disc really go back to the master tapes to produce an MQA version of this recording?


Chesky has zero details shipped with the MQA disc… nothing, nada, just the album insert. The only place where you can read about it, is not Chesky.com, but Stereophile when they first talked about the release; https://www.stereophile.com/content/chesky-release-mqa-cds-may (https://www.stereophile.com/content/chesky-release-mqa-cds-may)

ps: IMHO, don’t waste your money on this disc, both the 24/176.4 PCM and the SACD releases are better than this MQA release  :P
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jaffrie on September 19, 2018, 17:38
ps: IMHO, don’t waste your money on this disc, both the 24/176.4 PCM and the SACD releases are better than this MQA release  :P

So we’re back to square one. Think better to just stick to good Red Book recordings ya. Lol. Re Sony super mapping, I’ve 1 CD & frankly nothing to shout about.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on September 19, 2018, 19:45

Chesky has zero details shipped with the MQA disc… nothing, nada, just the album insert. The only place where you can read about it, is not Chesky.com, but Stereophile when they first talked about the release; https://www.stereophile.com/content/chesky-release-mqa-cds-may (https://www.stereophile.com/content/chesky-release-mqa-cds-may)

ps: IMHO, don’t waste your money on this disc, both the 24/176.4 PCM and the SACD releases are better than this MQA release  :P


We should see...I just bought the SACD version....

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jaffrie on September 19, 2018, 22:41
Hows Cheaky’s recording these days Audio ?
I’ve a collection of earlier Chesky’s recordings, wonder if they’ve improved.

Thks
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on September 20, 2018, 01:11
Too busy this week, I will listen and let you all know in this thread.....
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on September 20, 2018, 01:13
In the meantime,
These came in today.....

Wah Lau!!  Teresa in MQA...fcuk the world!!
(http://audio.sg/pic/theresamqa.jpg)

(http://audio.sg/pic/supertrampmqa.jpg)

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on September 20, 2018, 06:32

We should see...I just bought the SACD version....

(Audio)

You should get the Bob Kat’s 15th Anniversary Edition on 24/176 PCM… it’s the best, re-mastered from the original analog master with proper dynamic headroom. This one; http://www.hdtracks.com/the-raven-the-bob-katz-15th-anniversary-remaster (http://www.hdtracks.com/the-raven-the-bob-katz-15th-anniversary-remaster) (the rest of the rates are derivatives ;))
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: avo on September 20, 2018, 11:00
For these MQA-CDs, did they mentioned the MQA encoded resolution?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: BadEnglish on September 20, 2018, 12:05
In the meantime,
These came in today.....

Wah Lau!!  Teresa in MQA...fcuk the world!!
(http://audio.sg/pic/theresamqa.jpg)

(http://audio.sg/pic/supertrampmqa.jpg)

(Audio)


Can't help but wonder,  it's MQA from 2 inch recording reel or 1 inch mastering reel or a quarter inch home use reel ?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on September 20, 2018, 13:19
For these MQA-CDs, did they mentioned the MQA encoded resolution?

Can't recall seeing it on the disc itself or the inserts... but the MQA encode itself includes a preamble tag that has the original rate embedded. So, a full decode will reveal the original PCM rate that the MQA disc was derived from. In the case of the Rebecca MQA CD, the encoding reveals it comes from a 24/176 PCM master, though the actual provenance of the master is usually unclear.  :-\
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on September 22, 2018, 07:12
For those that intend to buy/download MQA tracks...

http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/tag435sdf43te (http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/tag435sdf43te)

Quote
MQA TAG RENAMING APPLICATION

This application (initially for Windows but soon for MAC OS) can examine files ripped from CD, determine whether they are MQA and build a sub-folder containing correctly formed MQA files. Files that are not MQA remain unchanged.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on September 23, 2018, 17:47
For those that intend to buy/download MQA tracks...

http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/tag435sdf43te (http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/tag435sdf43te)

Actually all you need to tag MQA file is simply two parameters, one to identify MQA encoded and the other one is to show the original sample frequency (OSF). You can use any editing software to include the followings:-

Encoder MQAEncode
ORIGINALSAMPLERATE XXXXX

Where XXXXX is sampling frequency in Hz, for example 96000 is 96kHz

One can still playback without having MQA tagged and still get decoded but in most case playback software will not indicate first hand MQA information until the file is playback.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jaffrie on September 23, 2018, 18:06
Would’nt it be great if record labels just focus on getting the most out of Red Book recordings instead. If one were to look into audiophile recordings, they’re still varied
in quality. To me jumping into the next bandwagon is a mooted point. Guess these companies are looking for commercial returns rather then anything else.
Like the saying goes, the pen is mightier then the sword so lots of marketing & hype to get the ball rolling.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on September 23, 2018, 19:15
Would’nt it be great if record labels just focus on getting the most out of Red Book recordings instead. If one were to look into audiophile recordings, they’re still varied
in quality. To me jumping into the next bandwagon is a mooted point. Guess these companies are looking for commercial returns rather then anything else.
Like the saying goes, the pen is mightier then the sword so lots of marketing & hype to get the ball rolling.

Actually Redbook recording has been around since CD was introduced in the early 80’s and today’s professional recording has move to high resolution. That’s why there’s many marketing & hype to attract consumers onboard. They can sell you re-issue or re-mastered old recordings in high resolution and thus able to make profit out of it.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jaffrie on September 23, 2018, 21:23
Well if the recordings are so so to begin with Hi Res will just be as bad MusicEar.
What's happening now aside from marketing hype is that new generation of audiophiles
aren't really exposed to what a properly set up Red Book playback can do. If you look at the
other thread, it's all about discussion on latest dac for computer audio playback. Regardless
of however good the usb interface with super low noise clocks etc is, it is still poison when compared
to the good old I2S connection. For me I've always been suspicious of download files that's being sold online
now. Imagine the distance that it's being transmitted to our lap top, will it not degrade at all. For audiophile
CDs there's already no assurance that all pressed disc are 100% the same let alone files which are transferred
from hundreds or thousand of kilometres away.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: BadEnglish on September 23, 2018, 21:29
...For audiophile
CDs there's already no assurance that all pressed disc are 100% the same let alone files which are transferred
from hundreds or thousand of kilometres away.

In digital transmission,  especially TCP in your case,  the distance is not matter at all.  You received exact bit to bit copy.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jaffrie on September 23, 2018, 23:03
Yes BadEnglish this is what we’ve been told. Rather unfortunate that Im in Batam for not it would be great to share my findings with like minded audiophiles & learn from each other. For me unless it’s proven, I’ll stick to Red Book playback. My last audition was a Dcs set up couple of years back in Taiwan, can’t say that I walk away impressed.
To each his own I guess.

Cheers
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on September 24, 2018, 08:03
Yes BadEnglish this is what we’ve been told. Rather unfortunate that Im in Batam for not it would be great to share my findings with like minded audiophiles & learn from each other. For me unless it’s proven, I’ll stick to Red Book playback. My last audition was a Dcs set up couple of years back in Taiwan, can’t say that I walk away impressed.
To each his own I guess.

Cheers

That data can be transmitted over thousands/millions of miles error free if required is science FACT. It’s not an opinion, it’s not subject[ive], and its been proven. If that wasn’t the case, the world as we know it today would not be able to function; banking would fail, broadcast would fail, even YouTube wouldn’t be possible... and you wouldn’t even be able to login to X’place to post. ;D

If you don’t know that, I highly recommend you go educate yourself, YouTube is a good start, search for data transmission technology :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jaffrie on September 24, 2018, 08:51
Proven in my context was in referral to SQ of the formats AndrewC
and thank you kindly for the tutorial.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: BadEnglish on September 24, 2018, 09:03
Yes BadEnglish this is what we’ve been told. Rather unfortunate that Im in Batam for not it would be great to share my findings with like minded audiophiles & learn from each other. For me unless it’s proven, I’ll stick to Red Book playback. My last audition was a Dcs set up couple of years back in Taiwan, can’t say that I walk away impressed.
To each his own I guess.

Cheers

I would love to learn your finding.  So when you are in Singapore,  I'll buy you cuppa how about that.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jaffrie on September 24, 2018, 11:47
Me in Batam BadEnglish, lol. drop me a mail if your ever planning to visit Batam.

Cheers
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wusplay on September 24, 2018, 20:19
The Received data and source file from far away is 100% identical.  Bit perfect,  no problem at all.

The problem  is during real-time playback,  jitter creep in and affected SQ.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jaffrie on September 24, 2018, 22:58
Im old school wusplay. Everything that I build adopts the KISS approach.
Having said that when time permits, will build a dac just for computer audio mainly because an audio buddy downloaded almost 2tb of music into an HD for me.
Will judge then if its as gd or better then what I have now.

Cheers
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 05, 2018, 17:07
Proprietary App supporting MQA streams of Live gigs from nugs.net (http://nugs.net) - been testing out the 2-month free subscription. Not bad, but I don’t intent to continue once the trial period is over (poorly recorded gigs, even if at "highrez" is not really my thing ;D).

(https://i.postimg.cc/Gprp87gq/PJ_Gig_MQA.jpg)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jaffrie on October 05, 2018, 17:12
So aren’t we back to square one AndrewC. If recordings are bad it’s bad regardless of whatever kind of recording software including Red Book.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 05, 2018, 17:18
So aren’t we back to square one AndrewC. If recordings are bad it’s bad regardless of whatever kind of recording software including Red Book.

It's not recording software or playback software issue, the issue is that Nugs.net seems to carry poorly recorded gigs. Thats got nothing to do with MQA vs. Redbook vs. Highres of another sort.

ps: there are very poorly recorded gigs in redbook rate as well on Nugs.net.... Nothing to do with resolution. 
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 05, 2018, 18:06
I giggle every time I see AndrewC talks negatively about MQA.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: reno77 on October 05, 2018, 19:28
Well if the recordings are so so to begin with Hi Res will just be as bad MusicEar.
What's happening now aside from marketing hype is that new generation of audiophiles
aren't really exposed to what a properly set up Red Book playback can do. If you look at the
other thread, it's all about discussion on latest dac for computer audio playback. Regardless
of however good the usb interface with super low noise clocks etc is, it is still poison when compared
to the good old I2S connection. For me I've always been suspicious of download files that's being sold online
now. Imagine the distance that it's being transmitted to our lap top, will it not degrade at all. For audiophile
CDs there's already no assurance that all pressed disc are 100% the same let alone files which are transferred
from hundreds or thousand of kilometres away.

I think XT should buy a local server. Looks like the long distance between your phone/pc and the server made it scramble a word or two in the msg you sent. Because in the version I read, it sounds like you are saying digital transmission is distance dependent..
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: jaffrie on October 05, 2018, 21:00
Well Reno77 I really don’t know but I do have some suspicion.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on October 08, 2018, 17:59
http://www.youtube.com/v/NSv0lcHlawk&fs=1
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: 1AngMoh on October 08, 2018, 22:07
http://www.youtube.com/v/NSv0lcHlawk&fs=1

Wow, that was tough to watch.

Such a toxic conversation and falling well short of a proper debate.

Chris looked like a fish out of water and the MQA guys came across as gangsters.

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 09, 2018, 01:35
With a title like that for an agenda for your presentation, you are expecting trouble......

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 09, 2018, 18:18
I giggle every time I see AndrewC talks negatively about MQA.

(Audio)

 :P... It's a love-hate relationship; Love that more music being put out, but hate that some are being distributed via a very proprietary encapsulation which has zero benefit over basic high-res.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 09, 2018, 18:20
http://www.youtube.com/v/NSv0lcHlawk&fs=1

Watched the vid earlier, degenerated pretty quickly into mudslinging  ;D... The thing I was most surprised by though was how few (and so very OLD) the people in attendance were... OMG :o
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on October 10, 2018, 14:19

https://audiobacon.net/2018/10/08/rmaf-2018-mqa-live-streaming-your-favorite-concerts-in-high-res/

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 10, 2018, 14:34
:P... It's a love-hate relationship; Love that more music being put out, but hate that some are being distributed via a very proprietary encapsulation which has zero benefit over basic high-res.


Wah!!  Better go buy lottery....AndrewC used the word "Love" in connection with "MQA".....

LOL!   :)

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 11, 2018, 16:21
https://audiobacon.net/2018/10/08/rmaf-2018-mqa-live-streaming-your-favorite-concerts-in-high-res/

So far the events haven’t truly been opened to the public at large, so, still a little unclear which streaming distribution network they’ve been using to deliver these MQA Live streams events (though I believe/suspect its nugs.net).

mqa.co.uk/mqalive (http://mqa.co.uk/mqalive)

Quote
How it works
MQA has applied its ground-breaking technology to make a real time encoder, which connects easily to the audio system of the location and then can be sent into the chosen delivery platform of promoters and venue owners. The only additional equipment required is MQA's live encoder box at the venue to encode the performance. This keeps production costs low, while the MQA encoding process preserves audio quality and addresses bandwidth issues. MQA music will stream and play back on any device, although for optimum results and the full MQA ‘unfold’, use devices or software from the growing number of MQA partners.


(https://www.stereonet.co.uk/images/articles/Images/MQA-Live.jpg)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 11, 2018, 16:22

Wah!!  Better go buy lottery....AndrewC used the word "Love" in connection with "MQA".....

LOL!   :)

(Audio)

When you strike don’t forget to give me commission :)

(So, have you been streaming your favourite Sgt. Peppers… in MQA yet? Any better than the PCM 96/24 release?)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 11, 2018, 16:31
When you strike don’t forget to give me commission :)

(So, have you been streaming your favourite Sgt. Peppers… in MQA yet? Any better than the PCM 96/24 release?)

Huh??   St Peppers in MQA??   How come I don't know??

For someone who hates MQA, you seems to put in more efforts than one who appreciate MQA...LOL.

Let me go check, all i know is the Beatles' White Album remaster box set is coming out now.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 11, 2018, 16:34
Huh??   St Peppers in MQA??   How come I don't know??

For someone who hates MQA, you seems to put in more efforts than one who appreciate MQA...LOL.

Let me go check, all i know is the Beatles' White Album remaster box set is coming out now.

(Audio)

https://tidal.com/album/82697541 (https://tidal.com/album/82697541) :)

Haven't you realised? I put in a lot of effort in all things Audio.... it's a disease called Audiophilia  ;)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: wklie on October 12, 2018, 11:20
Tidal’s Hi-Res Masters (MQA) tracks surpass one million

https://www.whathifi.com/news/tidals-hi-res-masters-tracks-surpass-one-million
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Pinky on October 12, 2018, 18:39
Good to hear, hopefully it'll continue to be on the rise.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: kaydee6 on October 14, 2018, 22:00
Interesting MQA talk by Chris of Computer Audiophile at RMAF.
Title of the talk: "The Truth Lies Somewhere in the Middle"
https://youtu.be/NSv0lcHlawk
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on October 17, 2018, 09:57
So far the events haven’t truly been opened to the public at large, so, still a little unclear which streaming distribution network they’ve been using to deliver these MQA Live streams events (though I believe/suspect its nugs.net).

mqa.co.uk/mqalive (http://mqa.co.uk/mqalive)

(https://www.stereonet.co.uk/images/articles/Images/MQA-Live.jpg)

Hopefully they can sell software encoding which convert any lossless PCM to lossy MQA for ‘improved’ sound quality.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Boxerfan88 on October 24, 2018, 10:14
http://archimago.blogspot.com/2018/10/musings-on-rmaf-2018-mqa-talk.html (http://archimago.blogspot.com/2018/10/musings-on-rmaf-2018-mqa-talk.html)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 24, 2018, 12:41
http://archimago.blogspot.com/2018/10/musings-on-rmaf-2018-mqa-talk.html (http://archimago.blogspot.com/2018/10/musings-on-rmaf-2018-mqa-talk.html)

 ;D... the old geezer's gonna work himself into a coronary banging the table about MQA!

(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-BY0zBncjX2c/W7wIMgt2vmI/AAAAAAAARvM/VHFkfUzvbGgJj-GJVViFMrBaJkx0ptehgCLcBGAs/s400/Table_Slam.jpg)


Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 24, 2018, 12:45
Spent last night upgrading my dCS Vivaldi with the MQA firmware update that was finally released late last week.  I haven't done careful listening comparisons yet, but initial casual listening of MQA tracks off Tidal seems quite compelling, significantly better than core decode with the Network Bridge, and miles better than any other MQA implementation I've heard to date (give Ella Mai (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W16bk86xIY0)'s debut album on MQA a spin).

dCS' has an interesting "de-coupled" MQA implementation - Core Decoding is done on the Vivaldi Upsampler, while final Rendering is done separately on the Vivaldi DAC. This lends itself to a couple of interesting capabilities; for example, the full core decoding on the Upsampler means I can now rip decoded Tidal MQA tracks for off-line listening ;D... While the Rendering on the DAC is flexible in allowing a choice of filters; either MQA's own full rendering filter, or any one of dCS' own filters (which frankly seems to sound so much better than MQA’s own filters!... but I'm biased  :P)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on October 24, 2018, 17:12
How ironic  ;D

http://www.mqa.co.uk/smokeseason

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 25, 2018, 13:10
How ironic  ;D

http://www.mqa.co.uk/smokeseason

 ;D ;D ;D



Check out MQA’s National Album Day event London last week;

[Updated URL - MQA deleted the original vid and re-posted for some strange reason]
http://www.youtube.com/v/tLC_1qAshcU&fs=1 
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: reno77 on October 25, 2018, 15:11
Bob Stuart and MQA: AudioStream Podcast No.1

http://flip.it/ER8tEs
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on October 26, 2018, 11:19
Bob Stuart and MQA: AudioStream Podcast No.1

http://flip.it/ER8tEs

Gave this a listen.. what a snooze fest... no new information, just the same old B.S regurgitated.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on October 26, 2018, 11:30
Gave this a listen.. what a snooze fest... no new information, just the same old B.S regurgitated.

What's your latest MQA CD?

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 01, 2018, 10:53
What's your latest MQA CD?

(Audio)

I haven't bought any since that first batch to try it out (ironically despite the fact that my system now natively supports the playback of MQA CDs).

If you think about it, there's really no reason to buy MQA CDs ... You get most via Tidal Masters/MQA streams anyway, but if you're willing to spend actual $$ buying an individual album, then you might as well get the full native highres PCM or DSD downloads, not a crippled lossy MQA CD - the business case for MQA CDs only works if all other forms of Highres ceases to exist.  :P

ps: (Noticed your Melco in the USB cable thread); the Melco does a great job ripping MQA CDs... just connect a USB Optical Drive (I use my old Apple USB SuperDrive (https://www.apple.com/sg/shop/product/MD564ZM/A/apple-usb-superdrive) - which you can buy online for about $20), and off you go! With the Melco as a network-drive tracked by Roon, playback of MQA rips is plug & play simple ;)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on November 01, 2018, 13:40
I already sold my Melco.

I just finish setting up my Audio Ripper which is now running Window Server 2012...and communicate with the outside world via Intel X520 10Gb NIC fiber card.
Also will be replacing my HGST SSD card inside my music server with this beauty, just got it this morning.....beautiful, isn't it?   (http://audio.sg/pic/samsungpm1725-01.jpg)

It's the Samsung NVme SSD card.  Probably the best "hard disk" you can get for your music server.   Music server is now running with the AMD Threadripper 32-core CPU.

(Audio)

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on November 02, 2018, 16:43
I guessed the recording engineers are quite pissed off how MQA actually alter their recordings..

https://youtu.be/X776HHJayC8
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on November 02, 2018, 18:28
A Steath DRM Torjan?

https://youtu.be/tGJ5eW-gBxA

MQA and Utamaro cryptography security keys:

https://hsm.utimaco.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/MQA-Case-Study_vfinal_DIN-A4.pdf
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 14, 2018, 13:04
Huh??   St Peppers in MQA??   How come I don't know??
...

So, what's your verdict on the White album in MQA?  ;)

https://tidal.com/album/97872030 (https://tidal.com/album/97872030)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on November 14, 2018, 14:20
So, what's your verdict on the White album in MQA?  ;)

https://tidal.com/album/97872030 (https://tidal.com/album/97872030)

Just received the Beatles White Album box set yesterday.   Not unwrapped yet.

Inspired by your post just now....fire up my Tidal now and listening to it on my iPhone, bluetooth it to my Sony MDR-W1000 M3.......WAH!!!!    Dammn shiok!!

It sounded very different!!!    WAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cannot, must unwrap tonight.   Can't listen to MQA version, my Lumin is at home.

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on November 21, 2018, 15:14
So, it looks like Tidal is either holding back, or doesn’t have access to the full MQA catalogue… Kate Bush’s 2018 Remasters are available in MQA from Highresaudio but not Tidal. Can’t tell what’s original resolution (HDTracks only has 44.1/24).

(http://i65.tinypic.com/jl42vq.jpg)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: gs11tan on December 13, 2018, 06:35
Tidal has released all titles in the Master section in MQA format.  very good .
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on December 14, 2018, 15:12
Tidal has released all titles in the Master section in MQA format.  very good .

Do you mean Kate Bush's MQA album release? Not when I checked yesterday... there's only ONE Kate MQA title on Tidal as of yesterday (in Singapore).
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 08, 2019, 16:08
http://www.mqa.co.uk/press (http://www.mqa.co.uk/press)

Quote
TIDAL MASTERS NOW ON MOBILE

TIDAL’s Android App Adds MQA To Deliver Studio Quality Sound On The Move

Las Vegas/New York/London, 7 January 2019: TIDAL Masters is now available on all Android smartphones, so you can experience studio quality sound with TIDAL Masters wherever you choose to listen.
...

(https://mqa-production.s3.amazonaws.com/default/0001/02/413f770b4e385ec9bc7bbebf4a88748fb0a7bee1.png)

They also announced the Andriod App, USB Audio Player PRO (http://www.extreamsd.com/index.php/products/usb-audio-player-pro) as now supporting MQA Core decode as well. iOS versions MIA for now  :P

All things considered, pretty pathetic announcements for CES from MQA -  no new hardware vendor partner announced.  ;D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on January 08, 2019, 16:21
*Sorry, I cannot help giggling*

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on January 09, 2019, 13:49
Virtually all android OS will re-sample to 48kHz and only a few with special tweaking to the OS will bypass the SRC (Sample Rate Converter) to the internal DAC. By the way how many android phones have a 96kHz capable DAC built-in?

In most case, it will down-sample to 48kHz when using the internal DAC. In some case, when using an external portable DAC with USB-OTG may work.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 09, 2019, 15:45
*Sorry, I cannot help giggling*

(Audio)

Glad I'm keeping you entertained  :P



Virtually all android OS will re-sample to 48kHz and only a few with special tweaking to the OS will bypass the SRC (Sample Rate Converter) to the internal DAC. By the way how many android phones have a 96kHz capable DAC built-in?

In most case, it will down-sample to 48kHz when using the internal DAC. In some case, when using an external portable DAC with USB-OTG may work.

I'm pretty sure you're very mistaken!

If you Google search, the [AudioTrack] API on Android OS supports up to 24/192k, and most of the Android phones these days have audio codecs that can support 24/96 at least. For example, the Samsung S7 (2 years old) has the Qualcomm WCD9335 audio codec which supports PCM 24/192k. Phones like LG and Sony I believe are the same or even better!

As for Android Phones to external USB DACs, 3rd party App drivers easily bypass native Android ones and support full highres... that's how Apps like USB Audio Player Pro work for actual highres support on external DACs - for example, here's what USB Audio Player Pro says;
Quote
USB Audio Player Pro, which was built specifically for USB DAC output, utilizes a custom USB audio driver that can bypass any Android sampling limitations, which means your 32-bit/384kHz files will actually play at that bitrate/frequency.

Don't be confused by Bluetooth Limitations.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on January 10, 2019, 18:38
Yes, the newer phones with the latest codecs can support up to 24/192k but it is always based on the 48kHz clock multiples (there's only one frequency based clock). If the source is 48k, 96k and 192k, you don't have an issue. The problem occurred when the source is 44.1k, 88.2k and 176.4k. The android re-sampler will kick in and convert to 48k, 96k and 192k. Re-sampling always introduces truncation errors (no longer bit perfect) and in some case increased in jitter. Tidal Master not only stream in 48kHz but also 44.1kHz. The results get decoded to 88.2/96k.

To avoid this issue, manufacturers have to incorporate two based clocks; one to handle 44.1k and the other 48kHz multiples. In technical term, it requires two separate crystal oscillators. I've not seen this implementation in android and iOS phones yet. I do see it in some android based music players. I've a Fiio X5III android based music player loaded with latest Tidal app that support MQA. This player contains two separate base clocks and a tweaked android OS to bypass the re-sampler. More information on Fiio X5III:

http://www.fiio.net/en/products/65

Playing back Tidal Master on Fiio X5III music player:
(http://i66.tinypic.com/211jk21.jpg)

Output Fiio X5III via coaxial to Topping DX3 Pro DAC (96kHz after decoded):
(http://i65.tinypic.com/35a0w9s.jpg)

Output Fiio X5III via coaxial to Topping DX3 Pro DAC (88.2kHz after decoded):
(http://i63.tinypic.com/e3x4j.jpg)

The DACs built-in for phones applications does not yield good sound quality, besides, you need an external DAC via USB-OTG to get optimised SQ. The downside, it will add weight and not everyone would want to carry a DAC stripped to their phones with messy cables.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 10, 2019, 20:57
Yes, the newer phones with the latest codecs can support up to 24/192k but it is always based on the 48kHz clock multiples (there's only one frequency based clock). ...

Duh ::)  Even many mid and lower-end standalone DACs work that way too; dividing down and using fractional multipliers from a single master clock frequency. Mobile phones are no different. Expecting external DAC build quality and SQ is pretty silly.  As for portable players, FiiO is not the only one. You might want to read up on iRiver’s Astell & Kern players, MQA support since around mid last year, and IMHO, better than FiiO players by a mile.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on January 25, 2019, 14:05
Finally, an Audio Journalist with critical listening abilities to actually hear the deficiencies of MQA (like some of us can ;)).  The latest issue of HIFICRITIC (Vol 12/No.4) has a very critical piece on MQA (HFC by the way takes no Advertising $, and is just about the only unbiased HiFi publication there is);

Quote
[MQA's minimum-phase filter]... gives the impression of a more detailed sound by delaying the arrival of treble frequencies with respect to bass and midrange. However, the resulting phase distortion can manifest as loss of musical coherence, of subjective timing, and an unnatural acceleration of musical pace. Soundstage precision and proportions are also skewed...  In short, while claiming to deblur the sound, to these ears [MQA's] non-linear phase processing has the contrary effect, blurring musical timing, and spatial presentation.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on February 15, 2019, 17:06


https://6moons.com/industry_articles/mqa/

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on February 15, 2019, 17:46

https://6moons.com/industry_articles/mqa/

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190215/214acd1a46bc5a3854fe70bd012e2951.jpg)

Which has exactly been my point.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on February 16, 2019, 11:41

https://6moons.com/industry_articles/mqa/

Very ill-informed article indeed… right off the bat the guy gets it wrong…

Quote
… my basic non-technical understanding of MQA is of a process from recording to decoding which ‘folds’ or losslessly compresses higher-resolution data into smaller data stream;…”


Bzzzt.. Wrong. ::)

Actually, I don’t know why people still bother reading 6moons, it’s a pay-to-play site with pretty much useless reviews (IMHO)  :P;

https://6moons.com/audioreviews2/why/why.html (https://6moons.com/audioreviews2/why/why.html)

Quote

So here's the upshot. From mid July 2014 on, our review policy changed from what it was until then. From that point forward manufacturers who want a review from us commit upfront to at least a small one-month token ad.

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on February 16, 2019, 12:44
He has a love-hate relationship with MQA.

He wishes DCS never could decode MQA....    :)

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on February 16, 2019, 17:29
Duh ::)  Even many mid and lower-end standalone DACs work that way too; dividing down and using fractional multipliers from a single master clock frequency. Mobile phones are no different. Expecting external DAC build quality and SQ is pretty silly.  As for portable players, FiiO is not the only one. You might want to read up on iRiver’s Astell & Kern players, MQA support since around mid last year, and IMHO, better than FiiO players by a mile.

Fractional multiplier? where on earth you get this from? The old way of doing this is to use PLL and lock onto different sample rates but this creates significant amount of jitter and it was never use in modern DAC.

http://audio-probe.com/en/documentation/clock-jitter-and-audio-quality/?ckattempt=1

Mobile phones mainly use base clock (24.5760 MHz) that support 48k. The kernel of the OS is originally written to support this sample in mind. In order to support other than 48k, you need to use SRC. With that said, it is longer bit perfect during conversion (44.1k).

Your assertion on AK support for MQA is limited, not all its range. The support of AK for MQA is native which requires firmware updates. AK is also required to pay a licensing fee to MQA. Tidal MQA app is universally supported for any devices that run on android OS. There’s no licensing fee required in this part to decode MQA (The manufacturer) . This is main advantage here.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on February 16, 2019, 22:28
He has a love-hate relationship with MQA.

He wishes DCS never could decode MQA....    :)

(Audio)

Comes free with a firmware upgrade that includes other stuff. Hard to resist  ;D


Fractional multiplier? where on earth you get this from? The old way of doing this is to use PLL and lock onto different sample rates but this creates significant amount of jitter and it was never use in modern DAC.

http://audio-probe.com/en/documentation/clock-jitter-and-audio-quality/?ckattempt=1

Mobile phones mainly use base clock (24.5760 MHz) that support 48k. The kernel of the OS is originally written to support this sample in mind. In order to support other than 48k, you need to use SRC. With that said, it is longer bit perfect during conversion (44.1k).

...

Hello ::)… How do you think an SRCs actually works? Specifically between rates that are not full integer factors?… Go do some homework on fractional re-sampling using interpolation and decimation.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on March 01, 2019, 12:11


https://www.stereophile.com/content/meitner-emm-dv2-dsd-mqa-digital-audio

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on March 03, 2019, 09:25
Was checking out the Metallica Live Concert MQA streams on Nugs.net... And noticed that the price for MQA vs. actual high-res tracks are exactly the same  ;D

(http://i64.tinypic.com/167po1u.jpg)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on March 12, 2019, 14:55
Tidal Master now available on iOS

https://9to5mac.com/2019/03/11/mqa/
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on March 13, 2019, 13:27
Tidal Master now available on iOS

https://9to5mac.com/2019/03/11/mqa/

With a few caveats - Airplay limits it back down to 16/48

And the iOS app doesn't support Chromecast Audio which would have done 24/96

Is the iPhone DAC capable of 24/96 internally or do you need an external USB DAC?
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on March 15, 2019, 10:38
With a few caveats - Airplay limits it back down to 16/48

And the iOS app doesn't support Chromecast Audio which would have done 24/96

Is the iPhone DAC capable of 24/96 internally or do you need an external USB DAC?

When I use Roon to stream to iPhone and Ipad as endpoints with Roon remote installed, Roon performs a down-sampled to 48kHz, this may suggest that the internal DACs are still operating at 48kHz. I've not tried using an external DAC.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: valenroy on March 15, 2019, 14:48
It has been while since I last posted and the recent hype in MQA has piqued my interest after my previous obsession with DSD...

What if I hint to you guys that you can readily download and permanently store ALL the MOQ files that is available on TIDAL with nothing more than a free TIDAL trial account and some hard disk drive storage... would you still have reservations in trying them out just for kicks?

*wink*
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: ginamos on March 15, 2019, 15:57
It has been while since I last posted and the recent hype in MQA has piqued my interest after my previous obsession with DSD...

What if I hint to you guys that you can readily download and permanently store ALL the MOQ files that is available on TIDAL with nothing more than a free TIDAL trial account and some hard disk drive storage... would you still have reservations in trying them out just for kicks?

*wink*

waiting for more info :)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on March 15, 2019, 17:07
...
Is the iPhone DAC capable of 24/96 internally or do you need an external USB DAC?

With the current generation of iPhones, its internal DAC (“Apple 338S00248” CODEC) is only active when you use the phone’s built-in speaker/mic.  Otherwise it’s always digital out via the Lightening port (which can go up to PCM768/DSD256 no sweat). The internal DAC (likewise Apple’s $9 dongle) while capable of 24/96, depends entirely on the playback App and the driver used. With playback apps that use iOS’ native audio drivers, highres gets downsampled to 48k  ;D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on March 15, 2019, 17:08
... What if I hint to you guys...

waiting for more info :)

Guys, take it to PM or offline… you’re putting yourselves (and XP) at risk.

https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/CMA1993

Quote
COMPUTER MISUSE ACT
(CHAPTER 50A)

5.—(1)  Subject to subsection (2), any person who does any act which he knows will cause an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 years or to both and, in the case of a second or subsequent conviction, to a fine not exceeding $20,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to both.

Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on March 20, 2019, 15:50
(http://audio.sg/pic/mqacdmarch19.jpg)

More MQA CD shopping....

(Audio)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: valenroy on March 21, 2019, 08:16
Hi Audio, do enlighten me on something. The MQA tracks on CDs are of a lesser quality than those found on Tidal (16-bit vs 24-bit) - am I right to say that? I have read on Meridian's website that the MQA tracks on CDs are limited by the 16-bit depth and it is not able to unfold fully like how the 24-bit versions are able to. Just want to clarify as you seem to be the only one around with MQA CDs at the moment. Thanks.
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: malsound on March 21, 2019, 12:36

https://darko.audio/2019/03/the-inconvenient-truth-about-mqa-on-ios/


Title: Re: MQA
Post by: MusicEar on March 28, 2019, 20:50
May be you guys may be interested in this app, it does MQA decoding from library and integrated Tidal, Qobuz and more on an android phone.

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/high-res-audio-on-andriod-phone-usb-audio-player-pro/66280
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on March 29, 2019, 05:42
(http://audio.sg/pic/mqacdmarch19.jpg)

More MQA CD shopping....

(Audio)

Hi Audio, do enlighten me on something. The MQA tracks on CDs are of a lesser quality than those found on Tidal (16-bit vs 24-bit) - am I right to say that? I have read on Meridian's website that the MQA tracks on CDs are limited by the 16-bit depth and it is not able to unfold fully like how the 24-bit versions are able to. Just want to clarify as you seem to be the only one around with MQA CDs at the moment. Thanks.



Aiyo Audio... seriously? I'm also curious to see your response to Valenroy on why you would buy so many of these MQA CDs with less than 13bits of actual music content. (You don't think that money is better spent buying actual hires downloads?? :P)
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Audio on March 29, 2019, 14:07
(http://audio.sg/pic/mqacdmarch19.jpg)
More MQA CD shopping....
(Audio)
Hi Audio, do enlighten me on something. The MQA tracks on CDs are of a lesser quality than those found on Tidal (16-bit vs 24-bit) - am I right to say that? I have read on Meridian's website that the MQA tracks on CDs are limited by the 16-bit depth and it is not able to unfold fully like how the 24-bit versions are able to. Just want to clarify as you seem to be the only one around with MQA CDs at the moment. Thanks.

I have with me, the same CDs that I bought when these titles are first released.  I also have SACD version of some of them.  I also bought the hi-res versions too.  The MQA CD sound quality is a mixed bag.  Not consistently better, not consistently worse.   There were a few fine moments I got , listening to MQA.

So, here you are, shopping in downtown Tokyo......browsing at Tower Records in Shibuya, probably the last multi-storey CD outlet in the world......you got a whole row of these MQA CDs sitting on the shelf, staring at you, what would you do?

Frankly, the effort was entirely worth it because I got a irritated response from our prime MQA hater here, who must have got the second largest collection of MQA CDs, here in Xtremeplace.   What could he do?  His Hi-End Top Notch DAC supports MQA.  :)

In respect to the extraction, I did this with an Oppo 205 and got the following response.  I suppose it is working and the Oppo did managed to extract from the CD,

(http://audio.sg/pic/mqacd-02.jpg)
This is the CD being played on the Oppo 205 with the screen shopwing the data rate in the background.

(http://audio.sg/pic/mqacd-03.jpg)
This is a closeup shot of the data rate as claimed by the Oppo 205.

Aiyo Audio... seriously? I'm also curious to see your response to Valenroy on why you would buy so many of these MQA CDs with less than 13bits of actual music content. (You don't think that money is better spent buying actual hires downloads?? :P)

In life, you must taste the bitter, or else, how could you appreciate the sweet?   
These MQA CDs, whether good or bad, I need to buy them to compare, I suppose, that's holiday shopping.  I have not ripped any of these CDs yet as I need to catch up on other aspects of the hobby.....I am beta testing Audiophile Optimizer Beta36 of AO3.00....and I just installed JRiver MC25....I build a new AMD Threadripper PC to sandbox these with Window Server 2019 Core OS.  This is probably the best music server I ever constructed.  The other AMD Threadripper PC holds Window Server 2016 Core , AudioOptimizer 2.20 and JRiver MC24 64 bits.   The SQ between both music serevrs are very significant.  I will share when the time is right.

(Audio)

PS: I can't wait to go back in Jun this year to buy up the Carpenter MQA CD collection!!
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: AndrewC on April 01, 2019, 04:29
...
So, here you are, shopping in downtown Tokyo......browsing at Tower Records in Shibuya, probably the last multi-storey CD outlet in the world......you got a whole row of these MQA CDs sitting on the shelf, staring at you, what would you do?
...

You...
http://www.youtube.com/v/ijhL9Y7skQs&fs=1


... I have not ripped any of these CDs yet as I need to catch up on other aspects of the hobby.....

Best to rip to FLAC and use MQA’s “MQATagRestorer” application to fix file headers properly for consistent decoding behaviour, be it software or hardware decoding.


...
The MQA CD sound quality is a mixed bag.  Not consistently better, not consistently worse.   There were a few fine moments I got , listening to MQA.
...
...PS: I can't wait to go back in Jun this year to buy up the Carpenter MQA CD collection!!

The MQA CDs are consistently worse than the highres downloads obtainable for practically every MQA CD available (at the same or less than the price of those MQA CDs). Guess you need to spend some more $ before you realise that ;D
Title: Re: MQA
Post by: Doggie Howser on April 01, 2019, 08:22
WLE

ALAN TAM ALSO GOT MQA!!??

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190401/3787c7c260e61d82d2f6efca4ac9933b.jpg)