[Born2Cuddle]

Aren't those the best problems?

In my defense I always listen to music with the full playlist showing.

 

[Born2Cuddle]

LG native music app on V35 w/Android 10

Is anyone else having an issue when adding new albums by a band that you already have albums of the new album doesn't show up with the older albums (it shows up seperately)? I have checked and the spelling/capitalization is the same.

I seem to recall a setting in the app on when to update music library but can no longer find it.

I have rebooted and ejected the SD card and the new albums are still showing up separately.

 

[Taz777]

Does anyone know if it’s possible to connect the LG V30 directly to an external amplifier‘s line in using a 3.5mm stereo to twin RCA cable? I know physically that it will work, but will it cause any issues? Also, will it make use of the quad-DAC In the V30?

 

[pepodenata]

Does anyone know if it’s possible to connect the LG V30 directly to an external amplifier‘s line in using a 3.5mm stereo to twin RCA cable? I know physically that it will work, but will it cause any issues? Also, will it make use of the quad-DAC In the V30?

You can perfectly use LgV30 in external 3.5mm to 2RCA amplifier. Yes, the Quad DAC works. Don't expect impressive sound ... To muddle through is fine, but not up to the mark of a good desktop DAC, and not up to a good DAP either.

 

[Born2Cuddle]

Does anyone know if it’s possible to connect the LG V30 directly to an external amplifier‘s line in using a 3.5mm stereo to twin RCA cable? I know physically that it will work, but will it cause any issues? Also, will it make use of the quad-DAC In the V30?

Yep. I am listening to mine hooked up to a Darkvoice amp as we speak.

It does use the quad DAC and sounds good to me.

 

[Born2Cuddle]

LG native music app on V35 w/Android 10

Is anyone else having an issue when adding new albums by a band that you already have albums of the new album doesn't show up with the older albums (it shows up seperately)? I have checked and the spelling/capitalization is the same.

I seem to recall a setting in the app on when to update music library but can no longer find it.

I have rebooted and ejected the SD card and the new albums are still showing up separately.

To answer my own question...

I removed the SD card from my phone and added songs using my PC, and that forced the songs to update properly.

 

[Dannemand]

Does anyone know if it’s possible to connect the LG V30 directly to an external amplifier‘s line in using a 3.5mm stereo to twin RCA cable? I know physically that it will work, but will it cause any issues? Also, will it make use of the quad-DAC In the V30?

Exactly as @pepodenata wrote: I've done it, running my V30+ into a balanced Bryston power amp through 3.5mm-to-XLR cables. It works, is not terrible. But it isn't great either due to the relatively weak output stage of the 9218P. It was designed for headphones/IEMs. The DAC will switch to Aux mode (max 1Vrms). You can force it into HIM (max 2Vrms) and get more power, but I find the low end more muffled when I do that.

 

[Taz777]

Yep. I am listening to mine hooked up to a Darkvoice amp as we speak.

It does use the quad DAC and sounds good to me.

Thanks! This is going to save me a lot of hassle! I’ve been planning to use Bluetooth LDAC to a Zen Blue device and then use the analogue RCA jacks on the Zen Blue to connect to my amplifier.

A direct connection would make things so much simpler and I’d be getting fully decoded MQA too.

 

[Taz777]

Exactly as @pepodenata wrote: I've done it, running my V30+ into a balanced Bryston power amp through 3.5mm-to-XLR cables. It works, is not terrible. But it isn't great either due to the relatively weak output stage of the 9218P. It was designed for headphones/IEMs. The DAC will switch to Aux mode (max 1Vrms). You can force it into HIM (max 2Vrms) and get more power, but I find the low end more muffled when I do that.

Thanks also for confirming. With regards to your low output issue, this might be related to you using the balanced inputs on your amp. One of my head amps is an Arcam rHead that has balanced XLR inputs. The specs suggest double the voltage compared to the regular RCA inputs. You may want to try the RCA inputs as a test to see if they sound louder.

 

[Born2Cuddle]

Thanks also for confirming. With regards to your low output issue, this might be related to you using the balanced inputs on your amp. One of my head amps is an Arcam rHead that has balanced XLR inputs. The specs suggest double the voltage compared to the regular RCA inputs. You may want to try the RCA inputs as a test to see if they sound louder.

I will say that I only double amp on high impedance headphones. On my Grados, Koss KSC 75s etc it just blows them out (obviously a very audiophile term).

 

[Dannemand]

Thanks also for confirming. With regards to your low output issue, this might be related to you using the balanced inputs on your amp. One of my head amps is an Arcam rHead that has balanced XLR inputs. The specs suggest double the voltage compared to the regular RCA inputs. You may want to try the RCA inputs as a test to see if they sound louder.

This Bryston amp only has balanced XLR inputs, no RCA. The entire thing is really built as dual mono-blocks in a single case. But it does have pots to adjust the gain level; volume is not the problem. In fact, the amp has input sensitivity of just 0.775v. I could blow out my speakers even with the V30 in HiFi mode (its lowest power mode, <50 Ohms).

What I meant was the V30's output stage (OpAmp integrated in 9218P) simply doesn't have the oomph to drive floor speakers (powered or through a power amp) as well as a dedicated preamp or even a DAC with a stronger output stage.

I definitely understand about the convenience of using the V30's built-in MQA. I remember others here asking the exact same question (running V30 into a power amp or integrated amp to use as an MQA DAC). And they got the same answer -- from me as well as others here who have tried it. Output stages in DACs do matter, that much I've learned!

 

[HapaxLegomenon]

Hi Everyone,

It's my first time posting here, so my apologies if anything violates forum etiquette.

Does anyone know why enabling the MQA flag disables the Quad DAC digital filter for all non-MQA 16-bit 44.1kHz playback? You can still change the filter selection, but there's no corresponding change in the sound. This doesn't happen with 24-bit music, so I suspect this has to do with MQA being 16-bit.

I searched through this thread and other threads but couldn't find anything about this peculiarity. The only clue I found was on an xda thread where someone stated that enabling the MQA flag forces an MQA-specific digital filter.

I was also wondering if the MQA-specific digital filter would be preferable to Quad DAC Sharp filter, because I read AudioScienceReview's article on the G7 and he said that the G7's Quad DAC didn't measure well for non-MQA playback until the MQA flag was enabled, which is strange to me.

Thanks!

 

[Dannemand]

Hi Everyone,

It's my first time posting here, so my apologies if anything violates forum etiquette.

Does anyone know why enabling the MQA flag disables the Quad DAC digital filter for all non-MQA 16-bit 44.1kHz playback? You can still change the filter selection, but there's no corresponding change in the sound. This doesn't happen with 24-bit music, so I suspect this has to do with MQA being 16-bit.

I searched through this thread and other threads but couldn't find anything about this peculiarity. The only clue I found was on an xda thread where someone stated that enabling the MQA flag forces an MQA-specific digital filter.

I was also wondering if the MQA-specific digital filter would be preferable to Quad DAC Sharp filter, because I read AudioScienceReview's article on the G7 and he said that the G7's Quad DAC didn't measure well for non-MQA playback until the MQA flag was enabled, which is strange to me.

I assume you are referring to the MQA flag in UAPP under Settings -> Internal HiRes audio -> HiRes driver flags.

This flag is essentially what tells UAPP to use the hardware MQA feature on LG Quad DAC phones (from V30 to V50, removed in V60). Without that flag enabled you will not get hardware MQA processing. UAPP has its own software MQA, but that is not used when running on an LG Quad DAC phone with the MQA flag enabled.

You can Google MQA to learn more about it. It generally uses the lowest order bits of each sample (which usually just contain noise anyway) to pack additional samples, thus allowing a theoretical higher sample rate at a smaller file size. And it does this in multiple layers, referred to as origami. During playback each origami layer is "unfolded" to reveal the higher rate samples. Most MQA files are 24-bit, not 16-bit. Using the low-order bits on a 16-bit file would cut too much into its already limited resolution.

In addition to this, MQA uses a reconstruction filter which they claim is very magical because it has significantly less pre-ringing and faster transient response. Critics of MQA point out that such a filter by definition is bad because it spans too few samples to accurately reconstruct the sine wave, particularly at high frequencies where the samples are sparse.

On LG Quad DAC phones, the MQA flag in UAPP causes it to activate an LG specific audio effect in the phone called lgmqadummy, which in turn triggers unfolding of the MQA origami and enables the MQA filter. This will disable the Digital Filters you can normally select in the Quad DAC menu (Short, Sharp, Slow).

In Android Oreo you get an error if you try to change the filter when UAPP plays music with the MQA flag enabled. In Android Pie (and I presume Android 10) you can change the filter, but it won't have any effect since the MQA filter is in use. LG probably made this change to stop users from asking questions. Seriously.

When the MQA flag is enabled, UAPP activates the MQA effect regardless of whether it is playing MQA or just regular PCM. So you will always get the MQA filter when this flag is enabled in UAPP settings. I personally don't like this and have complained about it. The UAPP developer says this is a requirement from MQA (who are known to be very demanding). The LG Music app only activates MQA when actually playing an MQA file, not when playing regular PCM files, and I think UAPP should do the same.

I love Amir's reviews on ASR -- and I do pay attention to measurements. But when I read his LG G7 review, it seemed as if he didn't quite understand how different settings in Android and in UAPP affected audio processing in these phones. That is understandable: There is a reason we have this thread here on head-fi PLUS a large V30 thread (and threads for other LG models) PLUS a large UAPP thread.

Do note that it is important not to say or write anything positive about MQA in audiophile circles, including here on head-fi and on ASR . Just keep anything positive to yourself. Otherwise you are likely to be ridiculed and booed out by MQA haters.

I always state that I am neither an MQA lover nor an MQA hater. I know some MQA albums I like. I don't recall hearing any MQA album on Tidal that sounded worse than its non-MQA counterparts, but there may be some, particularly when different masters are involved. But I have also heard MQA albums on Tidal that are just re-releases of badly mastered non-MQA counterparts. And of course I always prefer a lossless HiRes FLAC over MQA.

MQA's business practices are known to be onerous, which hasn't done anything to endear them to the audiophile community.

 

[HapaxLegomenon]

I assume you are referring to the MQA flag in UAPP under Settings -> Internal HiRes audio -> HiRes driver flags.

This flag is essentially what tells UAPP to use the hardware MQA feature on LG Quad DAC phones (from V30 to V50, removed in V60). Without that flag enabled you will not get MQA hardware processing. UAPP has its own software MQA, but that is not used when running on an LG Quad DAC phone with the MQA flag enabled.

You can Google MQA to learn more about it. It generally uses the lowest order bits of each sample (which usually just contain noise anyway) to pack additional samples, thus allowing a theoretical higher sample rate at a smaller file size. And it does this in multiple layers, referred to as origami. During playback each origami layer is "unfolded" to reveal the higher rate samples. Most MQA files are 24-bit, not 16-bit. Using the low-order bits on a 16-bit file would cut too much into its already limited resolution.

In addition to this, MQA uses a reconstruction filter which they claim is very magical because it has significantly less pre-ringing and faster transient response. Critics of MQA point out that such a filter by definition is bad because it spans too few samples to accurately reconstruct the sine wave, particularly at high frequencies where the samples are sparse.

On LG Quad DAC phones, the MQA flag in UAPP causes it to activate an LG specific audio effect in the phone called lgmqadummy, which in turn triggers unfolding of the MQA origami and enables the MQA filter. This will disable the Digital Filters you can normally select in the Quad DAC menu (Short, Sharp, Slow).

In Android Oreo you get an error if you try to change the filter when UAPP plays music with the MQA flag enabled. In Android Pie (and I presume Android 10) you can change the filter, but it won't have any effect since the MQA filter is in use. LG probably made this change to stop users from asking questions. Seriously.

When the MQA flag is enabled, UAPP activates the MQA effect regardless of whether it is playing MQA or just regular PCM. So you will always get the MQA filter when this flag is enabled in UAPP settings. I personally don't like this and have complained about it. The UAPP developer says this is a requirement from MQA (who are known to be very demanding). The LG Music app only activates MQA when actually playing an MQA file, not when playing regular PCM files, and I think UAPP should do the same.

I love Amir's reviews on ASR -- and I do pay attention to measurements. But when I read his LG G7 review, it seemed as if he didn't quite understand how different settings in Android and in UAPP affected audio processing in these phones. That is understandable: There is a reason we have this thread here on head-fi PLUS a large V30 thread (and threads for other LG models) PLUS a large UAPP thread.

Do note that it is important not to say or write anything positive about MQA in audiophile circles, including here on head-fi and on ASR . Just keep anything positive to yourself. Otherwise you are likely to be ridiculed and booed out by MQA haters.

I always state that I am neither an MQA lover nor an MQA hater. I know some MQA albums I like. I don't recall hearing any MQA album on Tidal that sounded worse than its non-MQA counterparts, but there may be some, particularly when different masters are involved. But I have also heard MQA albums on Tidal that are just re-releases of badly mastered non-MQA counterparts. And of course I always prefer a lossless HiRes FLAC over MQA.

MQA's business practices are known to be onerous, which hasn't done anything to endear them to the audiophile community.

Wow, thanks! This comprised everything I could've possibly wanted in a response.

And sorry, yes - I forgot to clarify. I was referring to the MQA flag in UAPP under Settings -> Internal HiRes audio -> HiRes driver flags.

It's strange how MQA, assuming the same strictness and demanding nature, would impose the MQA-specific filter requirement for UAPP but not the stock LG music app. You would assume that, if their onerousness is meant to perpetuate an image of the "highest, most exacting music standards for the discerning audiophile" (and I say this rolling my eyes), then they would also impose this requirement systemwide so as to have MQA take precedence over everything. This double-standard doesn't really make sense to me, but I guess if you specifically check the MQA flag in UAPP, then you'd have more of an expectation bias (as opposed to no such checking of boxes for the stock LG music app), hence MQA's strictness toward UAPP.

In the case of Amir's G7 review, would that then be a case of something measuring better but sounding worse (as in, non-MQA music playback measuring better with the MQA flag enabled and the MQA effect applied, but ultimately sounding worse)? Also do you know why, with the MQA flag enabled, the MQA effect isn't applied to 24-bit PCM?

 

[Dannemand]

Wow, thanks! This comprised everything I could've possibly wanted in a response.

You're very welcome. Your post was a good opportunity to sum up these points in a single post for the benefit of... well, whoever finds them beneficial

It's strange how MQA, assuming the same strictness and demanding nature, would impose the MQA-specific filter requirement for UAPP but not the stock LG music app. You would assume that, if their onerousness is meant to perpetuate an image of the "highest, most exacting music standards for the discerning audiophile" (and I say this rolling my eyes), then they would also impose this requirement systemwide so as to have MQA take precedence over everything. This double-standard doesn't really make sense to me, but I guess if you specifically check the MQA flag in UAPP, then you'd have more of an expectation bias (as opposed to no such checking of boxes for the stock LG music app), hence MQA's strictness toward UAPP.

In the case of Amir's G7 review, would that then be a case of something measuring better but sounding worse (as in, non-MQA music playback measuring better with the MQA flag enabled and the MQA effect applied, but ultimately sounding worse)? Also do you know why, with the MQA flag enabled, the MQA effect isn't applied to 24-bit PCM

To be fair, the UAPP developer told me that the MQA flag was kept on all the time on MQA's recommendation. I don't think he used the work "demand". This was before UAPP gained its software MQA feature, it merely supported the hardware MQA feature of Quad DAC phones, same as LG Music. I assumed the reason for the decision was that UAPP couldn't tell (or tell with certainty) whether it was playing a regular PCM file or one that contained MQA origami. So best just to always assume it contained MQA and enable the flag.

I prefer the Sharp filter on V30 which I find most natural. I presume the MQA filter is more similar to the Slow filter with its limited pre- and post-ringing. Or even the Short filter which has no pre-ringing but lots of post-ringing. Or maybe the MQA filter is something else entirely. I believe MQA claims they use different filters depending on the master, however that works.

In any case, after some strict listening sessions I concluded that I prefer turning off the MQA flag when playing non-MQA tracks, which is most of my listening. That was a long time ago, and unfortunately I would be unable to repeat that comparison today as I have since suffered significant hearing loss -- although I am back to limited music listening, which I couldn't do a year ago

But based on those past conclusions and the sheer mechanics of how this is implemented, I am skeptical that the MQA filter would NOT be used on 24-bit PCM when the MQA flag is enabled. I think it IS used on all PCM. But the effect of a given reconstruction filter is generally more pronounced on lower sample rates (say 44/16) than on HiRes (say 192/24): 32 samples in a 44.1Khz stream span a much longer response time than 32 samples in a 192KHz stream. It is for this reason that the V30 Slow filter actually works better on HiRes music, but sounds artificial on RedBook (in my opinion).

Maybe that's the explanation for what you're hearing. Or maybe things are different in Pie and the MQA filter isn't loaded into the DAC unless actual origami is found. That would also explain why no error is displayed when changing the filter on the Quad DAC setting screen. If so that would be great!

On the matter of Amir's measurements, I can see that a filter with very fast transient response (such as the MQA filter) would measure better on the simple sinusoids from the AP Analyzer, and be more technically accurate. I don't think that necessarily guarantees that it sounds better on real music. Again I believe that the V30 Slow filter is also more accurate than the other two filters, particularly on high sample rates. But the Sharp filter just sounds more natural to me. Of course I would never dare say such a thing loud on ASR