[jagwap]

I thought DAB as other broadcasting in Europe were covered by the same R128 EU recommendation?
We're adopting DAB here in Norway as well. Yesterday the first of 18 blocks shut down their FM transmitters and within the end of the year we will be entirely without FM (except for a few special exceptions)

I hope (and expect) it is DAB+, not original DAB. From memory DAB was an old inefficient codec like AC2. DAB+ is AAC.

 

[limpidglitch]

I hope (and expect) it is DAB+, not original DAB. From memory DAB was an old inefficient codec like AC2. DAB+ is AAC.

 
Yes, it's DAB+. I don't think there are any stations broadcasting old DAB, hence DAB+ is usually referred to as simply DAB now.
Old DAB was mp2 (a longstanding broadcasting standard), DAB+ is HE-AAC.

 

[haiku]

Interesting read
 
http://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread.php?tid=35624

 

[sonitus mirus]

  Interesting read
 
http://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread.php?tid=35624

 
Fantastic!  Someone with the ability and time to put into words most of my immediate concerns.  Thanks for the link.

 

[TheTrace]

Sigh.. I finally got around to listening to some MQA albums on tidal with some familiar music. I've been researching about MQA on the internet for the last two years basically along with everything else I'm watching.

I don't believe this format is improving anything, let me just state that first. Like I was suspecting and actually pretty pissed about, why the **** don't they use these noticeably improved masters during initial release? Then I get reminded of capitalism and greed and it all comes back to me. I wonder what's going to come of this.

I already had a tidal subscription before MQA integration, honestly because of the discount I get while attending school. Otherwise I have a lossless home library and AAC to go so if they inflate the price at any point I'm gone.

 

[jagwap]

You don't need to test MQA directly.
Either you can test if moderate degradation of regular audio is audible. If it isn't, then that's a strong indication a moderate improvement won't matter either.
Or you can test the claims of MQA. Decoded MQA is claimed to be some lesser version of 24/96, so why not just compare that with regular audio?

I'm not sure I follow you.

The claims of MQA are (were?) that it competes with and betters in some areas 192kHz and I thought 24 bit.

The fact that it takes up the bandwidth of 48kHz 24 bit lossless is the selling point.

Opviously these claims are being disputed here. Moreover the motivation of doing this is also in strong dispute.

From my poit of view, knowing the people behind it, the first point is plausible even if most here dispute it.

The second point is dependant on your point of view also. I don't trust the music labels in entirety, but I don't accuse MQA of anything other than advancing the art and making a living

 

[limpidglitch]

I'm not sure I follow you.

The claims of MQA are (were?) that it competes with and betters in some areas 192kHz and I thought 24 bit.

The fact that it takes up the bandwidth of 48kHz 24 bit lossless is the selling point.

Opviously these claims are being disputed here. Moreover the motivation of doing this is also in strong dispute.

From my poit of view, knowing the people behind it, the first point is plausible even if most here dispute it.

The second point is dependant on your point of view also. I don't trust the music labels in entirety, but I don't accuse MQA of anything other than advancing the art and making a living

 
16, 24 or 32bit; 96, 192 or 352.8kHz, it doesn't matter. Their selling points, they don't matter.
What matters is, if you can't even hear a difference between the sensible and the patently ridiculous, MQA won't make a lick of a difference either.

 

[ThomasHK]

   
Agreed.  
 
I stopped caring about high resolution once I failed enough ABX tests.

Thank you. More people should come to that conclusion and this industry would be a lot more interesting. 

 

[watchnerd]

  Thank you. More people should come to that conclusion and this industry would be a lot more interesting. 

 
The first step to recovery from audio abuse is admitting you have a problem. 

 

[ThomasHK]

I've just come up with a pretty neat trick to debunk the whole MQA story on Tidal.
 
In the sound card settings you can enable "MQA passthrough". What's great is that with a non-MQA compatible external device (or your Macbook/Laptop soundcard), the MQA additional magic data will basically just remain folded in the noise of the 48 or 44.1 kHz file.
 
I want to pay however can hear the difference blindfolded between the software unfolded and folded version a lot of money.

 

[watchnerd]

   
In the sound card settings you can enable "MQA passthrough". 

 
I have no idea what you're referring to.
 
Can you show a screenshot?

 

[headfry]

The diiference is obvious to me with my gear, DBT test wouldn't prove
anything relevant to me ... really enjoying Tida- unfolded MQA to Mojo!

 

[watchnerd]

DBT test wouldn't prove anything relevant to me ... 

 
Why wouldn't it prove anything relevant to you?

 

[ThomasHK]

   
I have no idea what you're referring to.
 
Can you show a screenshot?

 
Under the settings -> streaming tab, next to your sound card name is cog wheel that takes you to these settings
 

 

[watchnerd]

 
 
Under the settings -> streaming tab, next to your sound card name is cog wheel that takes you to these settings
 

 
Oh, in the Tidal desktop app....
 
Wasn't clear to me you were referring to the Tidal app.