The funny thing is Tidal is actually cheaper for me with a Military discount and works better for me in my vehicle than Qobuz. People in these forums get in such an uproar about Tidal it's really silly. Why does anyone care what people listen to? As far as their claims, if you think it's a scam then we need to evaluate claims by all companies who market their products because many of them are false. BTW I see where the Neil Young titles are back on Tidal so he must have come to an arrangement with them again after his boycott! Overall, I'm happy with the quality of MQA however when I purchase a more resolving system that may change. BTW not all titles on Tidal are MQA as far as I know.
I actually just finished watching that video lol - that's what spurred the post on.
Where do you go for HiFi music then? I'm currently using Apple Music ALAC, though I just signed up for Amazon Music HD. I have a lot of tracks I got from AudFree from Tidal (100% legal btw, if you strictly use it for personal use and do not distribute), but now I'm thinking I might as well dump those since they aren't legitimately lossless.
Seeing as I’ve yet to witness anyone capable of discerning the “difference” between a proper MP3 320/AAC256 file and a FLAC (after the two have been volumematched no less)..anything further up the file size ladder is pure nonsense.
I do listen to cd’s some 90% of the time but the last 10% over MP3 320 sounds just as good ie identical.
There’s a really easy way to figure this out for oneself: download Foobar2000 or something similar. Take whatever FLAC or MQA file and make an MP3 320 copy. Then volumematch the two and load them into the free ABX program and see if you can hear a difference
Coming from a time when a music album on CD still cost 40DM (Deutschmark ), I afford both Tidal and Qobuz.
Most of my albums I have on Qobuz, but when browsing I always find MQA albums that sound really very good, mostly those that are in 48kHz.
Why that is, I don't care, I don't worry about that, I'm just happy that it sounds good.
I also honestly can't understand why people always have to discuss MQA.
Whoever likes it, uses it, whoever doesn't, doesn't.
Here in Germany we have an association called "GEZ", that is a scam, but what a scam....
I didn't have the chance to compare the SQ of MQA vs FLAC vs HiRes, but there are several issues I have with MQA and TIDAL:
I cannot choose between MQA and FLAC in TIDAL, I am forced to listen to MQA if I want to have full quality
As such it prevents me from analyzing and making my own choice
The "unfolding" method requires the use of specific software players (Level 1 unfold) and DACs with dedicated MQA Hardware (Level 2 & 3 unfold)
This limits the choice, and if you are using incompatible SW & HW you get digital data with additional information baked in - how do I know that this data does not mess with the sensitive D/A conversion?
The marketing talk paired with secrecy - basically you have to believe what you are being told
I am also hearing issues with music files played through Tidal - iPhone - CHORD Hugo 2 - Focal Clear or Sony IER-M9
There are sometimes sounds in trackes which make me wonder if there are issues with the digital files.
I cannot be sure where they come from, but the whole MQA story makes me wonder if there's a connection between the additional data baked into the FLAC file and those noises.
All said, I am seriously considering cancelling my Tidal subscription and changing to Quobuz
I cannot choose between MQA and FLAC in TIDAL, I am forced to listen to MQA if I want to have full quality
As such it prevents me from analyzing and making my own choice
Here is an album that sounds better to me - this is of course a subjective statement! - sounds better in MQA than in FLAC.
Why that is, I don't know, but as already written above, I don't care.
In the video posted, the guy claims he uploaded content to Tidal, and they presented it in MQA format. He then analyzed this MQA track and apparently it was NOT the same as the track he uploaded.
According to Tidal:
"With Master Quality audio, the label has mined their archives and confirmed that these are the definitive song releases. MQA’s technology ensures this original version is supplied via TIDAL directly to the subscriber: an authenticated and unbroken music file with the highest possible resolution—as flawless as it sounded in the mastering suite."
The video uploader's experience doesn't seem to tally with Tidal's definition of MQA, and he appears to back his claims up with his objective analysis of the content.
If this guy's evidence is good, then it seems Tidal/MQA is not being honest with their claims.
I actually just finished watching that video lol - that's what spurred the post on.
Where do you go for HiFi music then? I'm currently using Apple Music ALAC, though I just signed up for Amazon Music HD. I have a lot of tracks I got from AudFree from Tidal (100% legal btw, if you strictly use it for personal use and do not distribute), but now I'm thinking I might as well dump those since they aren't legitimately lossless.
Are you listening through a Mac? I use my Mac as a streamer and the best way I’ve found so far is using Tidal,because of the military discount, and Audirvāna which keeps the computer’s sound card out of the equation. As time goes on, and I get a dedicated streamer, things will likely change but for now I’m enjoying it.
Probably your amps or drivers are poorly performing in the presence of ultrasonic information (real info or noise) and/or you happen to like the sound of aliasing reflections and/or you and your gear can't differentiate. The measurements are irrefutable.
It's a scam. The Tidal implementation is particularly screwy, as you're stuck with the MQA garbage even without the Plus version. Hifi non-Plus if it says "master" has been heavily altered and processed.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
