MQA - USB only?

[dermott]

Recently acquired a Bluesound Node 2i and wanted to take full advantage of MQA files from Tidal. I have an older DAC (Yulong DA8, first generation) so looking at maybe something updated. It seems like the newer DACs that offer MQA decoding only do so if being feed via USB input. The Node 2i does not have USB output, so am I out of luck?

Also, am I really missing that much with the Yulong DA8? I see all the talk about R2R, Ladder, Mutlibit DACs that don’t deal with MQA anyways that might be a good option if I am looking for simply better sound on all music, not just MQA. My chain now is Tidal, ripped CDs and some Spotify streamed through the Bluesound Node 2i > Yulong DA8 > THX AAA 789 > Audeze LCD-2 (pre-Fazor)

 

[XeNoNF50]

Only way you are going to get full MQA with that equipment is going bluesound node 2i RCA straight to thx aaa 789.

I have bluesound node 2i and I've forgone full MQA to use coax out to smsl m200 > smsl sp200 > focal stellia which obviously won't do full MQA and it sounds better even on MQA files than going straight from node 2i to sp200.

 

[dermott]

Only way you are going to get full MQA with that equipment is going bluesound node 2i RCA straight to thx aaa 789.

I have bluesound node 2i and I've forgone full MQA to use coax out to smsl m200 > smsl sp200 > focal stellia which obviously won't do full MQA and it sounds better even on MQA files than going straight from node 2i to sp200.

Just like you, I found that the sound coming from my DAC was better than the internal DAC of the Node 2i and opted for the coax output. The DA8 is an older implementation of ESS Sabre 9018 that I think still sounds pretty good. Even though this was said to be a warmer/smoother implementation of a Sabre DAC for its time, I was just wondering how more modern DACs would compare. I'm looking for a relaxed sound, and just want to know what I can do to get there. Looking at where you put your money, I can tell where you think where you get your best mileage, but I like the sound of my old LCD-2s. At the end of the day, maybe fully decoded/unfolded MQA is not all that important when it comes to ultimate enjoyment(?)

 

[gimmeheadroom]

Recently acquired a Bluesound Node 2i and wanted to take full advantage of MQA files from Tidal. I have an older DAC (Yulong DA8, first generation) so looking at maybe something updated. It seems like the newer DACs that offer MQA decoding only do so if being feed via USB input. The Node 2i does not have USB output, so am I out of luck?

Also, am I really missing that much with the Yulong DA8? I see all the talk about R2R, Ladder, Mutlibit DACs that don’t deal with MQA anyways that might be a good option if I am looking for simply better sound on all music, not just MQA. My chain now is Tidal, ripped CDs and some Spotify streamed through the Bluesound Node 2i > Yulong DA8 > THX AAA 789 > Audeze LCD-2 (pre-Fazor)

What's the point of using the DA8 instead of the DAC in the node 2i? I see several guys talking about this but to me it makes no sense. I use the node 2i analog out to an integrated amp. You can do the same with your headamp.

In general, the less crap in the signal chain the better off you are.

 

[dermott]

What's the point of using the DA8 instead of the DAC in the node 2i?

Because, to me it sounds better. I have tried the analog out but it lacked the clarity and dynamics I get through my DAC. Is it a level matching thing? Maybe, but to me it just sounds better.

In general, the less crap in the signal chain the better off you are.

Intellectually, I get that the more you add to the chain, the better chance you have of adding something that may degrade the sound. However, I just want to trust my ears, and to me it sounds better with the external DAC in the chain. This is why I am wonding if a different DAC could make it even better. Ideally, it would also include MQA, but I am starting to see the limitations there.

 

[gimmeheadroom]

Because, to me it sounds better. I have tried the analog out but it lacked the clarity and dynamics I get through my DAC. Is it a level matching thing? Maybe, but to me it just sounds better.

Intellectually, I get that the more you add to the chain, the better chance you have of adding something that may degrade the sound. However, I just want to trust my ears, and to me it sounds better with the external DAC in the chain. This is why I am wonding if a different DAC could make it even better. Ideally, it would also include MQA, but I am starting to see the limitations there.

If you set the node 2i to line out (non adjustable volume) then that's the best quality you will get from analog out. There should not be an audible difference between DACs.

One of the reasons I bought the node 2i was because of MQA support. It turns out I really like the UI and I think the software is done very well. If I wasn't happy with the sound quality I'd get another streamer. I can't see giving up MQA and using a secondary DAC.

 

[XeNoNF50]

If you set the node 2i to line out (non adjustable volume) then that's the best quality you will get from analog out. There should not be an audible difference between DACs.

One of the reasons I bought the node 2i was because of MQA support. It turns out I really like the UI and I think the software is done very well. If I wasn't happy with the sound quality I'd get another streamer. I can't see giving up MQA and using a secondary DAC.

So tried Node 2i RCA out to SP200 and coax out to M200 DAC with XLR out to SP200. There's a switch on the amp going RCA input to XLR input so could instantly A/B test sound by flicking the switch. It 'felt' like the sound through the DAC was the ever so slight bit more dynamic but in all honesty there was no real tangible audible/sonic difference. You are right there is probably no point in adding a DAC while using the Node 2i.

 

[dermott]

If you set the node 2i to line out (non adjustable volume) then that's the best quality you will get from analog out. There should not be an audible difference between DACs.

I had some time this weekend to play around a bit and took my external DAC out of the equation. Made sure my settings were as you suggested here just running analog straight to my THX AAA 789. Then I went through and listened to regular and MQA versions of the same songs from Tidal. I have to say, the differences between some of the redbook vs MQA is not that earth shattering to my ears. The MQA versions usually have a more natural/relaxed sound to them, but I was expecting more. I still can remember hearing the SACD of Billy Joel The Stranger for the first time and my mind was blown. Nothing I have heard in 24/192, MQA, whatever has come close since. Just for fun, I swapped out the 789 for my Schiit Jotumheim, and found that right mow I am digging the way that amp sounds over the 789! I have been listening to the 789 for about 6 months but of late I have grown fatigued by it. At first I appreciated the clarity of it, but lately I am finding find the sound anxious. Switching back to the Jotunheim was much more relaxed and to my current liking. The sound was not as detailed and had a flatter soundstage, but deeper (or maybe less in my head/claustrophobic). I then put my DAC back into the mix and some (but not all) of the detail came back that I was hearing with the 789. If there is really no difference to be heard between 2 DACs, why are there so many to choose from? Is anyone who thinks they can hear a difference from one DAC to the next suffering from placebo effect?

 

[gimmeheadroom]

There are probably subtle differences between DACs but the analog section has more influence. It is not just the DAC but the power supply and everything all the way to the final analog output. At the higher price ranges you're paying for build quality, features, support, and other stuff including buying a name brand. There is also the synergy between the power amp and speakers or headphones. It's hard to isolate the DAC to compare directly between one and the other.

 

[Stourmead]

Just been having a really good play with my Chord Qutest DAC and streaming from my Macbook.
Streaming services are Tidal and Qobuz so I can compare albums like for like.

Its fascinating to see what happens...

Qobuz - you know what you're getting because it tells the sampling rate and bit depth in the track info...- and the light on the Qutest will go from deep red for 16/44.1 , to Orange 24/48 , to Yellow 24/88 , to Green 24/96 and finally Blue at 24/192. I can't find any 24/176 tracks but I'm sure they are out there....

Tidal - this tricky beast!
With the Qutest selected , and with MQA Passthrough enabled in the tidal software, the MAXIUMUM Sampling depth and rate achieved is 24/48khz (Orange light on the Qutest).
First thing to know about Tidal. Tidal folds up all of their masters catalogue to 24/44 or 24/48 for transmission, for reasons.
Second thing to know, the Qutest knows its getting a high res file but it cannot access or unfold any of the higher sampling rate beyond the original 48khz in the stream.

I'll come back to both of these points in a moment...

with MQA Passthrough disabled in the tidal software...
The Tidal app puts the Mac I'm using to work and unpacks or basically upsamples ANY of their 24bit catalogue (which they call Masters) , And upsamples it just the once..
So 24/44 tracks come through on the Qutest with a yellow light symbolising 24/88 received.
24/48 Tracks come through as Green , denoting 24/96 received at the DAC.

So - does Tidal turn your streamer into an upsampler. Yeah kind of. But that's not the whole story....

Remember above I said the Qutest cannot access or unfold any of the MQA encoded hi-res content by itself....
Thats because the MQA company only certify certain DACs. those DACS send a signal back to the streamer source (over USB).
This signal says "I'm MQA capable so I Can unpack EVEN MORE!" Tidal then reads the DAC information and applies a very particular set of parameters to the outgoing signal.
Basically it tunes the output to match that particular DAC to account for the filters within that particular DAC.
MQA "studio sound" is then achieved because the output from the DAC chip into it's analogue stage is EXACTLY what the original Digital encoder at the recording studio would have received from the studio analogue kit. Your DAC is effectively given a signal that helps it's digital stage to 'get out of the way' of the music
This then also triggers that MQA Authenticated light and everyone is happy.

So - to review...
I'm playing a 24/96 Tidal Masters file (studio recorded at 24/96) - My streamer (Mac) would receive that via the tidal server over the internet as a 24/48 file, which is then sent to the MQA DAC.
MQA Dac says "lets go MQA!" and the streamer in response applies the very specific filter data relevant to my DAC.
My DAC then unpacks the 24/48 to 24/96, also reads that its received the MQA signature, lights up the MQA light, and because the signal is specific for my DAC, the analogue stage gets the most accurate representation of what was recorded originally.

If its meant to be a 24/192 file, the DAC will unfold that 24/44 stream accordingly too 24/192

We can argue FOREVER about what sound signature or presentation a DAC filter will give to a digital stream .
And this is also difficult to analyse further when thinking about the analogue output stage of said Mac, because that will invariably affect the sound too.

But we can see MQA really is a clever way to reduce Tidal's bandwidth costs, storage space, and make people who are happy to pay for an MQA ecosystem, even happier that they are receiving 'certified accuracy' - whatever that means...

End of the day I subscribe to both tidal and Qobuz and don't have MQA DACs. Why? The catalogues of both don't perfectly overlap so some artists are unavailable on the other.

I hope this breakdown helps people understand how playing an MQA master file on a non MQA DAC really for the 95+% of music which is released in 24/96 or under, only means you're missing out on the special 'dac filter' and lets be honest, most Hi-Fi rigs and even listening rooms add colouration or affect the sound.

WAIT! we are on head-fi!! yeah ok so we already know ALL headphones sound different given the same track to play... Until I can afford a pair of Focal Utopias, I don't think I'll be bothered by the minute benefit MQA filter tuning promises to offer

 

[gimmeheadroom]

Just been having a really good play with my Chord Qutest DAC and streaming from my Macbook.
Streaming services are Tidal and Qobuz so I can compare albums like for like.

As far as I know, you cannot. Unless you can determine that the album is exactly the same master, which to my knowledge cannot be determined even with one streaming service (i.e. MQA version against non-MQA version on Tidal) then your comparison is apples and oranges.

 

[Stourmead]

As far as I know, you cannot. Unless you can determine that the album is exactly the same master, which to my knowledge cannot be determined even with one streaming service (i.e. MQA version against non-MQA version on Tidal) then your comparison is apples and oranges.

Well I’d be inclined to call it apples vs other apples ... but I’m not comparing sounds here thankfully , just illustrating what confuses people about MQA

we see this most when an artist releases in 24/44... the MQA technique upscales to 88khz even though that artist has NEVER released a 24/88 album. So I’d be inclined to think Tidal are taking a standard Hi Res album release and just applying the MQA dac filter data to the track , rather than it being some magical completely different recorded album specially for MQA release. 88khz also lets us use a softer filter in the DA conversion so a non MQA dac ‘may’ be able to output a better sounding sound

 

[gimmeheadroom]

Well I’d be inclined to call it apples vs other apples ... but I’m not comparing sounds here thankfully , just illustrating what confuses people about MQA

we see this most when an artist releases in 24/44... the MQA technique upscales to 88khz even though that artist has NEVER released a 24/88 album. So I’d be inclined to think Tidal are taking a standard Hi Res album release and just applying the MQA dac filter data to the track , rather than it being some magical completely different recorded album specially for MQA release. 88khz also lets us use a softer filter in the DA conversion so a non MQA dac ‘may’ be able to output a better sounding sound

No offense but I think there is no test here, no facts, and no conclusion. MQA is contentious already and this didn't help. Everybody on the forums who cares about it has already seen every possible claim and counterclaim. The decision is personal like everything in audio. There are great components and bad ones but everybody still has his own likes and dislikes. You can't say for sure what the original master was. Even if an SACD or high res file didn't get sold that doesn't mean the album is not available in highres. Only the guys in the sound booth and post production know.

I have MQA hardware and I enjoy the sound of many MQA albums. Some of them for example Captain Fantastic and the Brown Dirt Cowboy, and many of Van Morrison's albums take on an analog sound.

 

[Stourmead]

No offense but I think there is no test here, no facts, and no conclusion. MQA is contentious already and this didn't help. Everybody on the forums who cares about it has already seen every possible claim and counterclaim. The decision is personal like everything in audio. There are great components and bad ones but everybody still has his own likes and dislikes. You can't say for sure what the original master was. Even if an SACD or high res file didn't get sold that doesn't mean the album is not available in highres. Only the guys in the sound booth and post production know.

I have MQA hardware and I enjoy the sound of many MQA albums. Some of them for example Captain Fantastic and the Brown Dirt Cowboy, and many of Van Morrison's albums take on an analog sound.

No offence taken , just thought it would be of use for people to read my experience of the behaviour of DACs and MQA content . Im completely unbiased either way, and subscribe to both Tidal and Qobuz and like each equally.
I’m not trying to review either service or MQA itself, or prove any kind of audiophile points, but Instead illuminate a finding. With facts. We can see how an MQA track demonstrably changes the behaviour of a non MQA dac compared to what a a Non MQA track does . I think it’s fascinating.

 

[gimmeheadroom]

We still don't know whether the MQA masters are the same masters as non-MQA. Several guys here have said the MQA masters use hand-picked masters. It's difficult to do a direct comparison. Certainly the content is different and the filtering and compression change the signal. Somebody here also shared a playlist he found that has 352 KHz MQA masters on Tidal! So they're pushing the envelope of high res past the other services.