there is a big difference master vs hifi sound on tidal. im listen mqa quality and very like it.
Last edited:
MQA 3rd unfolding
gregorio
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Posts
- 6,757
- Likes
- 4,038
Then that would be because you’re actually comparing different masters and prefer the master available in MQA format. So, it’s a question of which master you prefer and has nothing to do with the format because they are all audibly the same.
G
im prefer mqa 24/96 vs mqa16/44.1 as first has more details
gregorio
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Posts
- 6,757
- Likes
- 4,038
How do you know? If the 24/96 version does have more details then they would ALL be inaudible, so you cannot tell just by listening.
G
71 dB
Headphoneus Supremus
What detail? What detail can 24/96 store 16/44.1 can't?
Sampling frequency dictates the available frequency range.
Bit depth dictates the noise floor level (dynamic range).
So, 24/96 has theoretically about 144 dB of dynamic range (much less in practice) and frequency range 0-48 kHz (less in practice). 16/44.1 has about 96 dB of dynamic range and 0-20 kHz bandwidth. Consumer audio doesn't need more than about 80 dB of dynamic range and 0-20 kHz bandwidth. That's 13/44.1. So, 16/44.1 has 3 bits more than needed for dynamic range and just enough frequency range. Increasing bit depth from 16 to 24 bit can only lower the noise floor from inaudible to even more inaudible (meaning further from audible). Increasing sample rate can only allow extending frequency range beyond the frequencies humans can hear. So, how can any of this increase the amount of detail humans can hear? It can't. That's why 16/44.1 is enough for consumer audio. Higher bitrates have use in studio, music production. Consumers don't need them.
bigshot
Headphoneus Supremus
It doesn't have more detail though. It just has frequencies that are too high for human ears to be able to hear, and noise floors so low that you would go deaf turning the volume level up high enough to hear a difference.
Within the range of human hearing 24/96 is *identical* to 16/44.1.
For the last time, I refer you to the link below, CD SOUND IS ALL YOU NEED. Get smart. If you make no effort to understand what I'm saying, I'll assume you are incapable of understanding.
Last edited:
so,why drastically changes sound quality after switch from tidal hifi to tidal masters? from 44.1 jump to 88.2khz
Last edited:
bigshot
Headphoneus Supremus
They are probably two complete different masterings. The same song, but modified to sound different.
so,what in difference? low sound details? why rip from vinyl all shows 24/192khz? if you telling that human ear dont hear more than 16/44.1khz sounds?
Last edited:
bigshot
Headphoneus Supremus
No, it's not added detail or resolution. They apply compression and equalization to tailor the sound of a song to a particular purpose. For instance, they might master a song to sound good played through portable headphones on a phone, and they might master the same song differently for playback on a full size stereo system with speakers. The recording is the same, but it's filtered to make it sound better with different kinds of playback equipment.
When it comes to resolution and detail, everything from 16/44.1 on up is exactly the same in the range our ears can hear. There's no added detail in 24/96, the song itself is exactly the same. The "tone controls" might just set differently for different purposes. MQA might even be deliberately reducing the sound quality of the lower data rates to encourage you to buy into their "super deluxe" services and equipment.
Personally, I just use Apple and Amazon streaming. It sounds as good as possible and pretty much follows the sound of the original CD without alteration. Tidal's regular service might be similar. I don't know though, because I don't use Tidal.
When it comes to resolution and detail, everything from 16/44.1 on up is exactly the same in the range our ears can hear. There's no added detail in 24/96, the song itself is exactly the same. The "tone controls" might just set differently for different purposes. MQA might even be deliberately reducing the sound quality of the lower data rates to encourage you to buy into their "super deluxe" services and equipment.
Personally, I just use Apple and Amazon streaming. It sounds as good as possible and pretty much follows the sound of the original CD without alteration. Tidal's regular service might be similar. I don't know though, because I don't use Tidal.
Last edited:
bigshot
Headphoneus Supremus
24/96 is useful to sound engineers when they record because it allows them more room to adjust sound in a mix. But after a song is mixed and you are playing it back, there is no advantage to 24/96. It's just a reason to charge you more money at that point.
understand. thanks. so flac quality is 16/44.1 to 192? how then about all want bluetooth LDAC codec for wireless sent listen 24/192khz sound vs LHDC only to 24/48khz if human can hear only as you say 16/44.1khz?
bigshot
Headphoneus Supremus
There are two different kinds of file... lossless and lossy.
16/44.1 PCM, 24/96, ALAC and FLAC are all lossless. The file you play is exactly the same as the original file- bit perfect.
LHDC, MQA, MP3, AAC, etc. are lossy. They use various schemes to reduce the file size so it is small enough to stream through bluetooth. They aren't bit perfect. There is data that is missing or has been altered to make it a smaller file.
Bit perfect means that the file itself is identical. Only lossless files are bit perfect.
Audibly transparent means that the file sounds exactly the same to human ears. Most modern compression codecs are able to achieve audible transparency. This means that a 24/96 file that has been reduced to a 320 VBR LAME MP3 is identical in sound. One format doesn't sound any different than the other, even though 24/96 is lossless, and 320 MP3 is lossy.
Bigger file sizes don't automatically mean better sound. Your ears can only hear sound up to a certain point. Beyond that, you can add more data, but it still sounds the same. Companies know that, but they want you to think it's worth spending more for bigger files so they can make more money from you. They encourage their customers to tell other people that they can hear a difference, and some people believe it and convince themselves that they hear a difference, even if there is no audible difference. This is called "expectation bias" and "placebo effect".
16/44.1 PCM, 24/96, ALAC and FLAC are all lossless. The file you play is exactly the same as the original file- bit perfect.
LHDC, MQA, MP3, AAC, etc. are lossy. They use various schemes to reduce the file size so it is small enough to stream through bluetooth. They aren't bit perfect. There is data that is missing or has been altered to make it a smaller file.
Bit perfect means that the file itself is identical. Only lossless files are bit perfect.
Audibly transparent means that the file sounds exactly the same to human ears. Most modern compression codecs are able to achieve audible transparency. This means that a 24/96 file that has been reduced to a 320 VBR LAME MP3 is identical in sound. One format doesn't sound any different than the other, even though 24/96 is lossless, and 320 MP3 is lossy.
Bigger file sizes don't automatically mean better sound. Your ears can only hear sound up to a certain point. Beyond that, you can add more data, but it still sounds the same. Companies know that, but they want you to think it's worth spending more for bigger files so they can make more money from you. They encourage their customers to tell other people that they can hear a difference, and some people believe it and convince themselves that they hear a difference, even if there is no audible difference. This is called "expectation bias" and "placebo effect".
Last edited:
71 dB
Headphoneus Supremus
I just saw a nice MQA joke: "Definitely not lossless...from an investor standpoint!" 
Users who are viewing this thread
