[gimmeheadroom]

The app does the 1st unfold for people who don't use an MQA DAC. It would help if you could distinguish between 44.1 and 48 KHz because they are very different. 44.1 indicates a normal commercial recording. When Tidal is serving 24 bit 48 KHz that is certainly an MQA album.

 

[gimmeheadroom]

On a non-MQA device, the file is at 24/44.1/48, so it's already better than the standard 16/44.1/48 CD quality.

Otherwise, even Tidal does a first unfold, to 24/88.2/96, which may not be the same as an original 24/88.2/96, but it's still better than CD quality or better than just playing the file on a non-MQA device.

Also, nobody forces you to use the format or to buy MQA compatible devices, so I really don't understand the hate.

Surprisingly, many 24/48 files eventually unfold to 16.1/44. We noticed this in the past week or so when somebody asked about a metal band. Anyway, that's really weird.

 

[iliketohideincloset]

The app does the 1st unfold for people who don't use an MQA DAC. It would help if you could distinguish between 44.1 and 48 KHz because they are very different. 44.1 indicates a normal commercial recording. When Tidal is serving 24 bit 48 KHz that is certainly an MQA album.

I can see the unfold in Audirvana I guess. On the left is the source and on the right whats played. Thats why my headphone amp/cad shows it is playing hi-res...

 

[MrWalkman]

Surprisingly, many 24/48 files eventually unfold to 16.1/44. We noticed this in the past week or so when somebody asked about a metal band. Anyway, that's really weird.

That's not really possible. For example, for a 24/96, everything above 48 kHz gets compressed with the MQA algorythm, so you what remains for non-MQA devices is the 24/48.

The 24/48 can't be "unfolded" to 16/48, as an unfold means expanding something, not packing it.

There has to be something else. Can you link or quote the post with the issue?

 

[Dannemand]

On a non-MQA device, the file is at 24/44.1/48, so it's already better than the standard 16/44.1/48 CD quality.

Otherwise, even Tidal does a first unfold, to 24/88.2/96, which may not be the same as an original 24/88.2/96, but it's still better than CD quality or better than just playing the file on a non-MQA device.

Also, nobody forces you to use the format or to buy MQA compatible devices, so I really don't understand the hate.

First of all I am a moderate MQA proponent, not a hater, although with enough insight to also understand some of the counterarguments. So please be careful how you peg me.

What you say is indeed how it USED to be. But the latest slate of Warner MQAs are all 16/44, NOT 24/44. You're not going to get 24 bits from them, regardless of your DAC.

And the reason for my post is that I would prefer a plain RedBook 16/44 over a MQA 16/44 -- where the MQA sacrifices some resolution to store additional samples. That's acceptable in a 24-bit file, but less so in a 16-bit file.

According to my USB DAC (Gustard A18 MkII) those Warner MQAs contain no additional samples either, i.e. they "unfold" to 44.1Khz. So I have to wonder what was done to them to earn the MQA badge?

Other MQA tracks on Tidal (such as the Everest Records I mentioned) are 24/48 and unfold to 24/192. They sound great, and I absolutely don't hate them

 

[MrWalkman]

First of all I am a moderate MQA proponent, not a hater, although with enough insight to also understand some of the counterarguments. So please be careful how you peg me.

What you say is indeed how it USED to be. But the latest slate of Warner MQAs are all 16/44, NOT 24/44. You're not going to get 24 bits from them, regardless of your DAC.

And the reason for my post is that I would prefer a plain RedBook 16/44 over a MQA 16/44 -- where the MQA sacrifices some resolution to store additional samples. That's acceptable in a 24-bit file, but less so in a 16-bit file.

According to my USB DAC (Gustard A18 MkII) those Warner MQAs contain no additional samples either, i.e. they "unfold" to 44.1Khz. So I have to wonder what was done to them to earn the MQA badge?

Other MQA tracks on Tidal (such as the Everest Records I mentioned) are 24/48 and unfold to 24/192. They sound great, and I absolutely don't hate them

I answered to the topic in general, not to you in particular. Take it easy.

Can you link the post describing the issue? I would like to test some things.

 

[Dannemand]

I answered to the topic in general, not to you in particular. Take it easy.

Understood. Since your post quoted me (and only me) I reasonably assumed you were addressing me. So yes, take it easy and be careful what you post.

 

[Dannemand]

Can you link the post describing the issue? I would like to test some things.

It's the post from me which you quoted:

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/tidal-masters-mqa-thread.838888/post-16075107

That Dvorak / du Pre album I mentioned is a good example of the issue I have with the Warner MQAs:

https://tidal.com/browse/album/79657145

If any of you see a non-MQA version of that album, I'd love a link. My main concern is that we don't get non-MQA versions of those, at least in USA.

 

[Left Channel]

So is there apart from the advantage of saving space - which is imo not an advantage anymore - anything else which is good about MQA? Am i missing something? Because if that's the only advantage i can't understand why it's still discussed controvers and not clearly stated that its bulls..t.

A day and three pages later, lol, but here's an answer: there's also the "time domain" thing. I've never heard it and I can't explain it, but here you go: https://audiophilereview.com/cd-dac-digital/mqa-its-about-time-not-frequency/

 

[iliketohideincloset]

A day and three pages later, lol, but here's an answer: there's also the "time domain" thing. I've never heard it and I can't explain it, but here you go: https://audiophilereview.com/cd-dac-digital/mqa-its-about-time-not-frequency/

Thank's for the read.

 

[Deolum]

A day and three pages later, lol, but here's an answer: there's also the "time domain" thing. I've never heard it and I can't explain it, but here you go: https://audiophilereview.com/cd-dac-digital/mqa-its-about-time-not-frequency/

Indeed interesting.

 

[MrWalkman]

Understood. Since your post quoted me (and only me) I reasonably assumed you were addressing me. So yes, take it easy and be careful what you post.

Sorry, I initially wrote part of the answer, and I finished the post a lot later, forgetting that I quoted you, and addressing the topic in general.

 

[MrWalkman]

That Dvorak / du Pre album I mentioned is a good example of the issue I have with the Warner MQAs:

https://tidal.com/browse/album/79657145

If any of you see a non-MQA version of that album, I'd love a link. My main concern is that we don't get non-MQA versions of those, at least in USA.

The non-MQA version will be played when you select the maximum quality as "HiFi" instead of "Master" by the way.

I looked into it, and I have no idea what's happening either. I checked the "HiFi" quality 16/44 and it has a different MD5 than the MQA counterpart of the same song, but the size of the files is almost the same - it may look like the MQA is just the 16/44 FLAC but with MQA tags in it.

I will try contacting Tidal about this, as MQA was made to compress high frequency energy from Hi-Res files, and 16/44 is not Hi-Res. Maybe it's some kind of mistake.

 

[rkw]

The non-MQA version will be played when you select the maximum quality as "HiFi" instead of "Master" by the way.

I looked into it, and I have no idea what's happening either. I checked the "HiFi" quality 16/44 and it has a different MD5 than the MQA counterpart of the same song, but the size of the files is almost the same - it may look like the MQA is just the 16/44 FLAC but with MQA tags in it.



I will try contacting Tidal about this, as MQA was made to compress high frequency energy from Hi-Res files, and 16/44 is not Hi-Res. Maybe it's some kind of mistake.

I don't see any problem here. 16/44 is a valid MQA format and is a 16/44 FLAC file with MQA encoding. The Tidal desktop app recognizes the file as MQA and does the first unfold to 88.2 kHz. If I turn on the Passthrough MQA option, it plays at 44.1. This is consistent with how it's supposed to work. There are MQA Redbook CDs sold in Japan that play like a standard audio CD but decodes if the stream is sent to an MQA DAC.

This is also part of the controversy. Some people want the original 16/44 and don't trust the quality of encoding hi-res to 16/44.

 

[trueno84]

I don't understand. Does that mean you don't have MQA albums for Pink Floyd?

That's correct. I do not have that. and I'm on tidal HiFi