[Wasaabi]

I am using a portable decoding amp without MQA decoding function, and I recently discovered that this amp has an MQA decoding version. But I saw the news on YouTube which said that the MQA is a scam.

 

[ClieOS]

MQA might not be as good as it advertised to be, it doesn't mean a DAC/amp with MQA decoding is fundamentally bad. A few DAC chips maker, most noticeably ESS, is pushing to include MQA into more and more of their DAC chips line up. If a company designs a DAC/amp around a recent ESS DAC chip, the chance is MQA decoding will be included because it has already been built into the chip itself, whether user end up using it or not. It will be very silly for the DAC/amp manufacturing company not to advertise a feature that is included in their DAC/amp, but it is ultimately up to the user to decide whether MQA is worthy of their time and money or not. Even if you are not using the MQA function in the DAC/amp, it should still work just fine as a normal DAC/amp.

 

[Wasaabi]

MQA might not be as good as it advertised to be, it doesn't mean a DAC/amp with MQA decoding is fundamentally bad. A few DAC chips maker, most noticeably ESS, is pushing to include MQA into more and more of their DAC chips line up. If a company designs a DAC/amp around a recent ESS DAC chip, the chance is MQA decoding will be included because it has already been built into the chip itself, whether user end up using it or not. It will be very silly for the DAC/amp manufacturing company not to advertise a feature that is included in their DAC/amp, but it is ultimately up to the user to decide whether MQA is worthy of their time and money or not. Even if you are not using the MQA function in the DAC/amp, it should still work just fine as a normal DAC/amp.

Thanks for your explanation, your explanation really makes sense!

 

[Stevko]

i don`t support MQA
MQA is nonsens from GB

 

[Ieonasj]

tidal masters is MQA files? or just lossless 24/96? do i feel sound difference using MQA renderer vs MQA full decoding DAC from laptop no software added to decode MQA qore?

 

[TheUnknow]

If a company designs a DAC/amp around a recent ESS DAC chip, the chance is MQA decoding will be included because it has already been built into the chip itself, whether user end up using it or not. It will be very silly for the DAC/amp manufacturing company not to advertise a feature that is included in their DAC/amp, but it is ultimately up to the user to decide whether MQA is worthy of their time and money or not. Even if you are not using the MQA function in the DAC/amp, it should still work just fine as a normal DAC/amp.

The big problem is that even if you don't use the MQA decoding , manufacturer have to make you pay for it because MQA is not free.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-topping-dx5-lite-dac-amp-now-available-on-apos-audio.967262/

The new Topping DX5 Lite use 2x ES9068AS (which has MQA hardware decoding) but Topping choose not to enable MQA function = 100 $ saved.

 

[Ieonasj]

The big problem is that even if you don't use the MQA decoding , manufacturer have to make you pay for it because MQA is not free.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-topping-dx5-lite-dac-amp-now-available-on-apos-audio.967262/

The new Topping DX5 Lite use 2x ES9068AS (which has MQA hardware decoding) but Topping choose not to enable MQA function = 100 $ saved.

who need (im need and like tidal mqa sound) buying what need.

 

[Andrew_WOT]

I don't use and not planning to use services with MQA scam encoding, if stripping it off makes equipment cheaper, I am all for it.

 

[ClieOS]

The big problem is that even if you don't use the MQA decoding , manufacturer have to make you pay for it because MQA is not free.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-topping-dx5-lite-dac-amp-now-available-on-apos-audio.967262/

The new Topping DX5 Lite use 2x ES9068AS (which has MQA hardware decoding) but Topping choose not to enable MQA function = 100 $ saved.

I think you completely missed the point regarding DX5 Lite on the "$100" MQA fee.

The cheapest MQA decoding USB dongle (*a random Chinese brand) that I can find via a quick Google search is about $75. If the actual licensing fee of MQA per device is actually $100, that means the USB dongle I just found would be sold, even at full price, at a loss. That is simply impossible. With most MQA capable all-in-one DAC chip, you actually already paid the license to use its MQA decoding capability when you paid for the chip itself. Even if DAC/amp manufacturer decided to acquire a separate license, those are usually in some kind of bulk licensing agreement that deal with a large, but non-specified number of units that will more than cover many future products instead of individual product rolling out of production line everyday.

So why Topping chooses to 'save' people the $100 MQA fee? Well, they didn't. MQA per individual unit is probably a few cents to a few dollars depends on what kind of license Topping has. However, giving so small a discount will make no sense to the customer. Topping needs to make enough discount to make sure people who don't use or even dislike MQA think the DX5 Lite models make for a better value by giving it a big price cut, otherwise people will just going to opt for the regular DX5 (and more like not buying one altogether). In short, Topping really just want to sell more DX5 quick (*maybe the regular DX5 is selling slower than they were hoping for?), so they create an illusion to incentivize those who have no interest in MQA to take a look at a product they would otherwise skip. That $100 is cutting into Topping's own profit, not MQA's.

 

[BS5711]

I think you completely missed the point regarding DX5 Lite on the "$100" MQA fee.

The cheapest MQA decoding USB dongle (*a random Chinese brand) that I can find via a quick Google search is about $75. If the actual licensing fee of MQA per device is actually $100, that means the USB dongle I just found would be sold, even at full price, at a loss. That is simply impossible. With most MQA capable all-in-one DAC chip, you actually already paid the license to use its MQA decoding capability when you paid for the chip itself. Even if DAC/amp manufacturer decided to acquire a separate license, those are usually in some kind of bulk licensing agreement that deal with a large, but non-specified number of units that will more than cover many future products instead of individual product rolling out of production line everyday.

So why Topping chooses to 'save' people the $100 MQA fee? Well, they didn't. MQA per individual unit is probably a few cents to a few dollars depends on what kind of license Topping has. However, giving so small a discount will make no sense to the customer. Topping needs to make enough discount to make sure people who don't use or even dislike MQA think the DX5 Lite models make for a better value by giving it a big price cut, otherwise people will just going to opt for the regular DX5 (and more like not buying one altogether). In short, Topping really just want to sell more DX5 quick (*maybe the regular DX5 is selling slower than they were hoping for?), so they create an illusion to incentivize those who have no interest in MQA to take a look at a product they would otherwise skip. That $100 is cutting into Topping's own profit, not MQA's.

More likely Topping are taking $25 off the non MQA version and bumping the price of the MQA version by $75 so they make additional profit on the MQA version and a little less on the non MQA version. As you stated Topping couldn't care which version somebody buys they just want to make money and they probably watch the market and understand the anti MQA sentiment so are cashing in on it proving a version to satisfy the antis.

I certainly agree, regardless of the exact numbers, the seemingly generously discounted gear that doesn't support MQA wildly distorts the perceived cost for MQA implementation which froths up the anti MQA brigade even more !

 

[Ieonasj]

I think you completely missed the point regarding DX5 Lite on the "$100" MQA fee.

The cheapest MQA decoding USB dongle (*a random Chinese brand) that I can find via a quick Google search is about $75. If the actual licensing fee of MQA per device is actually $100, that means the USB dongle I just found would be sold, even at full price, at a loss. That is simply impossible. With most MQA capable all-in-one DAC chip, you actually already paid the license to use its MQA decoding capability when you paid for the chip itself. Even if DAC/amp manufacturer decided to acquire a separate license, those are usually in some kind of bulk licensing agreement that deal with a large, but non-specified number of units that will more than cover many future products instead of individual product rolling out of production line everyday.

So why Topping chooses to 'save' people the $100 MQA fee? Well, they didn't. MQA per individual unit is probably a few cents to a few dollars depends on what kind of license Topping has. However, giving so small a discount will make no sense to the customer. Topping needs to make enough discount to make sure people who don't use or even dislike MQA think the DX5 Lite models make for a better value by giving it a big price cut, otherwise people will just going to opt for the regular DX5 (and more like not buying one altogether). In short, Topping really just want to sell more DX5 quick (*maybe the regular DX5 is selling slower than they were hoping for?), so they create an illusion to incentivize those who have no interest in MQA to take a look at a product they would otherwise skip. That $100 is cutting into Topping's own profit, not MQA's.

for cheap dongle MQA for nfolding only 8x , not full decoding

 

[ClieOS]

for cheap dongle MQA for nfolding only 8x , not full decoding

Another round of quick Googling:

Hidizs XO (MQA 16X) USD$99
iBasso DC06 (MQA 16X) USD$

Noted that the above USB dongle all do 8X decoding on board after 2X from the source (*UAPP, Tidal, Hiby Music, etc), so you are getting the full 16X = "MQA Render"

Also note that 'Full Decoder' can decode to higher bitrate because all decoding is mandated by MQA to be done on hardware only, so technically any time when an app is doing the first 2X decoding, then it is not going to be a 'full decoder' but just a 'render' Hence why 'full decoder' is almost always desktop device so it is kinda a moot point to compare it to USB dongle. It is not because you can't make an USB dongle that does the whole full decoder thing but it is intentionally limited by MQA so that full decoder can be their 'premier' product.

 

[Ieonasj]

Another round of quick Googling:

Hidizs XO (MQA 16X) USD$99
iBasso DC06 (MQA 16X) USD$

Noted that the above USB dongle all do 8X decoding on board after 2X from the source (*UAPP, Tidal, Hiby Music, etc), so you are getting the full 16X = "MQA Render"

Also note that 'Full Decoder' can decode to higher bitrate because all decoding is mandated by MQA to be done on hardware only, so technically any time when an app is doing the first 2X decoding, then it is not going to be a 'full decoder' but just a 'render' Hence why 'full decoder' is almost always desktop device so it is kinda a moot point to compare it to USB dongle. It is not because you can't make an USB dongle that does the whole full decoder thing but it is intentionally limited by MQA so that full decoder can be their 'premier' product.

Those two XO and DC06 has 16x mqa full decoding. other portable dongles only 8x ?
how about ifi?:
All iFi MQA compatible DACs can do the last MQA unfold, thus fully unfold MQA master tracks. MQA renderer DACs do the last unfold and require Tidal etc. to do the first unfolds. MQA decoder DACs can do all unfolds without external unfolding support.

iFi MQA decoder DACs include:

• Pro iDSD Signature
• NEO iDSD
• iDSD Diablo
• ZEN DAC Signature V2
• ZEN DAC V2
• hip dac2

Other iFi MQA compatible DACs support MQA renderer only.

 

[ClieOS]

Those two XO and DC06 has 16x mqa full decoding. other portable dongles only 8x ?
how about ifi?:
All iFi MQA compatible DACs can do the last MQA unfold, thus fully unfold MQA master tracks. MQA renderer DACs do the last unfold and require Tidal etc. to do the first unfolds. MQA decoder DACs can do all unfolds without external unfolding support.

iFi MQA decoder DACs include:

• Pro iDSD Signature
• NEO iDSD
• iDSD Diablo
• ZEN DAC Signature V2
• ZEN DAC V2
• hip dac2

Other iFi MQA compatible DACs support MQA renderer only.

One of the reason why some older USB dongle only do 8X is because older ESS chip implementation has MQA kinda like an afterthought. But newer ESS chip such as ES9219C that is very common on new MQA capable USB dongle and DAP are fully 16X capable on its hardware because ESS these days seems to want to integrate full MQA capability to most of its DAC chips, especially its low to mid-end chips.

iFi is different as they don't use ESS chip for MQA decoding. Most of iFi product is based on their own unique DSD1792 DAC implementation. DSD1973 is a super old chip (*going back a few decades) so naturally it doesn't support MQA by its own. The solution iFi used is to add the MQA decoding capability onto the XMOS controller chip which they also used heavily to add extra functionality to the aging DSD1793 chip. That means iFi is using its own MQA decoding method and can't be compared to most other MQA DAC directly.

 

[Ieonasj]

One of the reason why some older USB dongle only do 8X is because older ESS chip implementation has MQA kinda like an afterthought. But newer ESS chip such as ES9219C that is very common on new MQA capable USB dongle and DAP are fully 16X capable on its hardware because ESS these days seems to want to integrate full MQA capability to most of its DAC chips, especially its low to mid-end chips.

iFi is different as they don't use ESS chip for MQA decoding. Most of iFi product is based on their own unique DSD1792 DAC implementation. DSD1973 is a super old chip (*going back a few decades) so naturally it doesn't support MQA by its own. The solution iFi used is to add the MQA decoding capability onto the XMOS controller chip which they also used heavily to add extra functionality to the aging DSD1793 chip. That means iFi is using its own MQA decoding method and can't be compared to most other MQA DAC directly.

so,for full mqa decoding 16x i must buy IFI from list or one from two
Hidizs XO (MQA 16X)
iBasso DC06 (MQA 16X) ?
why master quality mqa rihanna song lights green and play 24/96 ,but louis armstrong song play 24/192 and light purple color on my astell kern AK SR25ii dap ?