[John2e]

   

MQA is now streaming!
 
 
Tidal MQA works through my Explorer2, but only through ROON...?

I tried the new Masters using the Tidal Windows desktop, but could not get my Meridian Explorer2 to light up. So I tagged the new MQA albums in Tidal, switched to Roon, re synced to Tidal. Now I get the three LEDs to light up on the DAC, and play MQA.
 
This the Roon path...


The LEDs on my Meridian Explorer2 show Blue/White/White.  Is this correct?

My first impressions are that the MQA stream through Roon to the Explorer2 sounds better than the "MASTER" decoding through the Tidal PC app, e.g. on

Moondance (Van Morrison)
American Beauty (Greatful Dead)
Buena Vista Social Club

What about compared to a hi rez download 192/24 ??

 

[erich6]

 

What about compared to a hi rez download 192/24 ??

​You can compare high-res downloads including DSD to MQA files from here: http://www.2l.no/hires/.
 
I don't have an MQA decoder but the MQA files still played through Roon and I couldn't tell any difference with lossless.  These are samples of properly mastered music so I wouldn't expect to see much difference.
 
I think Roon does a better job than the native Tidal app with any stream.  I'm not sure why, but it could be the transport approach they use.  Will have to check the new masters out!

 

[peterinvan]

 
Quote:

The LEDs on my Meridian Explorer2 show Blue/White/White.  Is this correct?  

 
Looked it up...
 
 

 

[erich6]

It seems the Tidal desktop app does some sort of MQA decoding in software.  I don't have an MQA-enabled DAC so this is a good setting for me.  However, if you are trying to use the Explorer I'm guessing you'll have to enable the option "Passthrough MQA" in the audio streaming settings.
 
The new masters sound great!

 

[Currawong]

Since it was off-topic in the thread I originally posted it, I'm re-posting here where it isn't, without the "OT" spoiler tag:
 

 

 

  what i was reading about mqa (and someone clarify if i'm wrong) just because it's MQA doesn't necessarily mean it'll be a better sounding production than
is one done later one (remastered) down the line, esp if the original master was so-so anyway..can't put lipstick on a pig so to speak.....i'll try to find the article.
if i'm wrong don't blast me...be polite, thanks.

 
On the contrary. I've read Various articles saying that MQA is basically as good as DSD in a much much smaller file size due to compression so it can be streamed. 
 
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2016/06/an-inconvenient-truth-mqa-sounds-better/
 
http://www.crutchfield.com/S-YITtscFKiGC/learn/high-resolution-audio-guide.html

 
MQA is EQ'ed, more or less. That is why in demos it sounds different. But that is because....
 

  What's the benefit of MQA? Most of us(99%) cannot even hear the difference between 320 kbps vs CD in an abx type test.

 
...the idea is that the behaviour of the original ADC that was used during recording or encoding (if from tape) can be included in the MQA file and the DAC can compensate for it during playback, which is supposedly what was being heard in the demos.
 
Of course, this could be done without MQA entirely, and it is very arguably only worth considering for at least moderately high-end gear and listening to well-recorded music where all the details and acoustic considerations matter.

 
I'm thinking that "how MQA sounds" will vary considerably depending on the recording and how much it was altered by the above process. Personally I'd rather have a better DAC without MQA than a lesser DAC with it, but at some point no doubt now I'll be able to test this.

 

[OldRoadToad]

   

MQA is now streaming!
 
 
Tidal MQA works through my Explorer2, but only through ROON...?

I tried the new Masters using the Tidal Windows desktop, but could not get my Meridian Explorer2 to light up. So I tagged the new MQA albums in Tidal, switched to Roon, re synced to Tidal. Now I get the three LEDs to light up on the DAC, and play MQA.
 
This the Roon path...


The LEDs on my Meridian Explorer2 show Blue/White/White.  Is this correct?

My first impressions are that the MQA stream through Roon to the Explorer2 sounds better than the "MASTER" decoding through the Tidal PC app, e.g. on

Moondance (Van Morrison)
American Beauty (Greatful Dead)
Buena Vista Social Club

​This begs the question, did it sound better once the MQA lights lit  up and you "knew" that is was "working"?   It is a valid question.  And no, if you did not know what you were listening to you would not know a difference.  Cruel?
Nope.  Just the truth.

​Really now...MQA is snake oil.
 
ORT

 

[rlpaul]

A format is either lossless, or it isn't. So if MQA is asserting that it sounds better than a lossless format...
 
If I want an equalizer, I'll use an equalizer to fit my preferences. I don't need somebody else deciding what sound I should like.
 
MQA isn't a bad idea in concept, automatically adjusting for the deficiencies inherit in a lossy format, but I don't like the implementation, and the limitations imposed.

 

[peterinvan]

​This begs the question, did it sound better once the MQA lights lit  up and you "knew" that is was "working"?   It is a valid question.  And no, if you did not know what you were listening to you would not know a difference.  Cruel?
Nope.  Just the truth.


​Really now...MQA is snake oil.

ORT

Hi
Report back to us when you have done your A/B blind testing. Trust your ears.

 

[obobskivich]

A format is either lossless, or it isn't. So if MQA is asserting that it sounds better than a lossless format...

If I want an equalizer, I'll use an equalizer to fit my preferences. I don't need somebody else deciding what sound I should like.

MQA isn't a bad idea in concept, automatically adjusting for the deficiencies inherit in a lossy format, but I don't like the implementation, and the limitations imposed.

I think the "point" of MQA is that we need to get beyond just worrying about the container format itself, and consider things like provenance, mastering quality, etc. That premise is very needed in some contexts, and they aren't the only ones beating that drum. That said, I don't like their implementation either, and I don't care how many times he [the guy from Meridian] says it isn't - its still a DRM scheme, and a big cashgrab to hawk "newest and best" in the world of digital (now that they've gotten the mainstream marketing on board with "digital evolves so quickly by the time you've bought something new, its outdated!").

 

[John2e]

I think the "point" of MQA is that we need to get beyond just worrying about the container format itself, and consider things like provenance, mastering quality, etc. That premise is very needed in some contexts, and they aren't the only ones beating that drum. That said, I don't like their implementation either, and I don't care how many times he [the guy from Meridian] says it isn't - its still a DRM scheme, and a big cashgrab to hawk "newest and best" in the world of digital (now that they've gotten the mainstream marketing on board with "digital evolves so quickly by the time you've bought something new, its outdated!").

Mastering is no doubt essential to the quality of a recording. The Steve Wilson Remasters of Jethro Tull's albums are some of the best I have heard. These are 40 year old albums (some anyway) They are better than anything I've heard in DSD.

 

[Currawong]

 

A format is either lossless, or it isn't. So if MQA is asserting that it sounds better than a lossless format...

If I want an equalizer, I'll use an equalizer to fit my preferences. I don't need somebody else deciding what sound I should like.

MQA isn't a bad idea in concept, automatically adjusting for the deficiencies inherit in a lossy format, but I don't like the implementation, and the limitations imposed.

I think the "point" of MQA is that we need to get beyond just worrying about the container format itself, and consider things like provenance, mastering quality, etc. That premise is very needed in some contexts, and they aren't the only ones beating that drum. That said, I don't like their implementation either, and I don't care how many times he [the guy from Meridian] says it isn't - its still a DRM scheme, and a big cashgrab to hawk "newest and best" in the world of digital (now that they've gotten the mainstream marketing on board with "digital evolves so quickly by the time you've bought something new, its outdated!").

If it results in a big un-****ing of the compression they've added to albums over the years, then I'll be all for it. I'm sure it'd be dead in the water without TIDAL support. Nice of them to at least allow the TIDAL app to uncompress it as far as 24/96, though a lot of stuff out there was recorded with added distortion and/or has low-res components added so the value will be fairly limited on a lot of albums.  I'm more worries about laziness by the record companies. How often did we see them hand "masters" to HDTracks that were not masters at all, but up-sampled 44.1? I will take a bet on YMMV with the "Masters" on TIDAL. Joni Mitchell's Blue, The Doors and Talking Heads sound good so far. Other stuff I'm not so sure.

 

[obobskivich]

If it results in a big un-****ing of the compression they've added to albums over the years, then I'll be all for it. I'm sure it'd be dead in the water without TIDAL support. Nice of them to at least allow the TIDAL app to uncompress it as far as 24/96, though a lot of stuff out there was recorded with added distortion and/or has low-res components added so the value will be fairly limited on a lot of albums.  I'm more worries about laziness by the record companies. How often did we see them hand "masters" to HDTracks that were not masters at all, but up-sampled 44.1? I will take a bet on YMMV with the "Masters" on TIDAL. Joni Mitchell's Blue, The Doors and Talking Heads sound good so far. Other stuff I'm not so sure.

It's that "oh here's 44.1, and now its 24/96, ta-da! (but now it lights up some new feature lamp on your gear!)" or similar laziness that has me shaking my head. My guess is that we'll probably see the mixed-bag-erring-on-the-side-of-mediocrity that we've experienced with HD "re-releases" of back catalog movies over the last few years ("sure they're 1080p - with the original DVD audio track and more pixels to better see the film grain and assess the incorrect color keying, but its 1080p!"), but that's just a guess.

This isn't to say some good content won't come out, but I think unfortunately that really comes down on the content creator's head to care enough about the entire process end to end, and have the [whatever] to actually execute it. Still, the move to digital stuff has largely pushed noise floors down below audibility, and increased portability, so at least those are "wins" on some level.

 

[pdickerson]

Looking back earlier in this thread about Jason's comment not to support MQA..... Well it's here now and TIDAL is delivering on its promise. Audiogon members are posting very positive responses.

I hope Schiit will come through on promising to upgrade their dacs. You can't honestly beleive red book is the end of improvements in digital audio?

How many disparaging MQA still are watching the B&W consoles

 

[erich6]

The fact more people are now talking about the end-to-end signal chain in the context of MQA is a good thing...raising awareness and encouraging producers to do a better job in their mastering projects. I'm hopeful this will result in a higher proportion of good masters in the future than we have today.  In the meantime, I'm enjoying the new Tidal Masters!  They all seem to be an improvement.

 

[OldRoadToad]

Hi
Report back to us when you have done your A/B blind testing. Trust your ears.

​I thought I already did so earlier in this thread but if not...I already have listened to MQA. I did not hear a bit of difference.  
 
Digital or other wise.
 
MQA is the Emperor's New Clothes.
 
ORT