Hi-Rez Highway

New high resolution SACD releases, players and technology.

Return to Hi-Rez Highway

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

HighResAudio dumps MQA.

51.9.48.151
Posted on March 29, 2017 at 16:18:02
jusbe
Audiophile

Posts: 5950
Location: North Island
Joined: April 4, 2000
 As reported recently, by Hifi Plus. HRA says its really only 17bit tech with questionable analysis workflows, or something. Yawn.

Basically, it's lossy and never recovers the original signal. So what's the point?

Also, could someone please explain the point of MQA on a disc? Why on earth do we need MQA to compress something with lossy tech, then decompress it for us with questionable fidelity?



Big J

"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms."


 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
Depends..., posted on March 29, 2017 at 17:58:33
Ivan303
Audiophile

Posts: 48887
Location: Cadiere d'azur FRANCE - Santa Fe, NM
Joined: February 26, 2001

Perhaps 17bit tech is better that 16bit 16/44.1 Redbook?

Who knows?

Certainly the MQA Master stuff on TIDAL sounds a bit better with an MQA DAC (Meridian Explorer) than the HiFi version which claims to be 'CD quality', with the same DAC.

The real test would be to buy the same CD, rip it to the same computer used to stream TIDAL and compare using the same DAC?

Might try that as some point.




First they came for the dumb-asses
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a dumb-ass

 

RE: HighResAudio dumps MQA., posted on March 29, 2017 at 19:19:28
ahendler
Audiophile

Posts: 5151
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Joined: January 24, 2003
 And of course you have heard it!
Alan

 

RE: HighResAudio dumps MQA., posted on March 29, 2017 at 19:48:54
Isaak J. Garvey
Industry Professional

Posts: 1207
Location: Hollywod, CA
Joined: January 7, 2016
 I will give you this, you are indefatigable in your fanboydom.

 

RE: Depends..., posted on March 29, 2017 at 19:50:53
Isaak J. Garvey
Industry Professional

Posts: 1207
Location: Hollywod, CA
Joined: January 7, 2016
 No...the test would be the 24 bit masterfile vs the processed MQA file. NOT the CD. You can't really be this clueless.

 

If I have the 24 bit master file, MQA is of no value to me... , posted on March 29, 2017 at 20:49:01
Ivan303
Audiophile

Posts: 48887
Location: Cadiere d'azur FRANCE - Santa Fe, NM
Joined: February 26, 2001
 What folks have on their shelves are CDs.

What TIDAL and other lossless streaming services are streaming is 16/44.1 Lossless FLAC. What they are calling 'CD Quality'.

Like it or not, the bulk of all music currently sitting on consumer's shelves are on CD.

Yes, folk do download Hi-Rex, and they do, on occasion, purchase an odd SACD or two. I have a hundred or so. Some like myself have thousands of LPs but not many folks do.

OK, kids are streaming and downloading MP3 files, but that's a different topic for another day.

So all MQA has to do to justify its existence is better the Redbook CD.

Why?

Because Redbook CD is the existing standard. Redbook CD is the format that is currently in the the hands of the bulk of consumers, NOT the master file.

MQA does not have to meet master file sound quality (how could it if it's a 'lossy' codec?) because the 'average' consumer will NEVER hear a master file.

All it has to do is sound better than a Redbook CD.

Does it?

Who knows?

Some audio reviewers say it does(but who trusts them). ;-)

TIDAL's MQA MASTERS sound better to my ears than TIDAL 'HiFi' (16/44.1 Lossless FLAC) with the Meridian Explorer USB DAC.

Better than a ripped CD on the same computer with the same Meridian USB DAC?

Don't know, haven't tried it.

On the plus side, MQA seems to have given you something to live for, so there's that.






First they came for the dumb-asses
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a dumb-ass

 

RE: HighResAudio dumps MQA., posted on March 29, 2017 at 22:38:38
ahendler
Audiophile

Posts: 5151
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Joined: January 24, 2003
 So your answer is that you havn't heard it?
Alan

 

RE: Depends..., posted on March 29, 2017 at 22:41:11
ahendler
Audiophile

Posts: 5151
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Joined: January 24, 2003
 On the 2L site I have compared the same master in 24/192 and MQA. They sound identical
Alan

 

RE: If I have the 24 bit master file, MQA is of no value to me... , posted on March 29, 2017 at 22:45:40
ahendler
Audiophile

Posts: 5151
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Joined: January 24, 2003
 "All it has to do is sound better than a Redbook CD.
Does it?
Who knows?
Some audio reviewers say it does(but who trusts them)"

It does both streamed from Tidal to a non MQA dac and also to a Meridian Explorer2. The non MQA dac is the Audio-GD Master 7 But I doubt you trust me.
Alan

 

Well,, posted on March 30, 2017 at 00:22:55
jusbe
Audiophile

Posts: 5950
Location: North Island
Joined: April 4, 2000
 the whole premise for MQA is solving a problem I don't personally have, namely reducing bandwidth of high(-er) resolution tracks transmitting across networks for some eternally shifting and specious reason. I object to paying for random middlemen of questionable value and being worked over by the High-Resolution mob.

Even in the UK, where the roll-out of fibre networks is woefully slow for such an advanced economy, fibre networks are finally getting up to 1,000mbps in some towns/cities and not everyone uses a capped service. Do I want to contribute to knee-capping future music production with spurious technology when time will mitigate this apparent bottleneck? No.

No, I haven't used it. Can't see a compelling reason to do so, not even for simple idle curiosity. Unless the technology is categorically providing more fidelity, it seems unnecessary. I can roll valves or cables (et al) if I want tone control.

Wouldn't you agree?

Big J

"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms."


 

As you know, I have all of these..., posted on March 30, 2017 at 06:46:53
Ivan303
Audiophile

Posts: 48887
Location: Cadiere d'azur FRANCE - Santa Fe, NM
Joined: February 26, 2001
 Apples to apples would be to rip a 'good' CD and play it back using the Meridian Explorer 2 DAC then use the same computer that contains the ripped CD to stream the MQA Master version via TIDAL using the same Meridian DAC.

Then stream it using the software decoder that is part of the TIDAL Player to the MASTER-7 (or Master 11, I have both) and compare THAT to the above AND to the rip using either or both of the above Audio-GD DACs.

No, haven't taken the time to do all of that even though I have all the gear needed to do it.




First they came for the dumb-asses
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a dumb-ass

 

WAY behind you here in the US of A..., posted on March 30, 2017 at 07:05:02
Ivan303
Audiophile

Posts: 48887
Location: Cadiere d'azur FRANCE - Santa Fe, NM
Joined: February 26, 2001
 Up until just a few months ago, the BEST DSL from the phone company was 6 Mbps. Most times it was between 3-4 Mbps. And I live in 'Hi Tech' San Francisco.

Fortunately I live on the Western fringes of the City where utility lines are on polls blocking our view if the ocean, so we got Gigabit fiber first! Much cheaper to string the fiber on existing polls than to put it under ground, so they started in our end of town.


Use Case Number 1:
If you already stream TIDAL, you will pay not a cent more for better sound using the decoder inside the TIDAL desktop player. Sill not much of TIDAL's catalog is encoded with MQA but the ones I know and like sound better. And better than the 16/44.1 lossless FLAC on QOBUZ for the same recordings.

Inmate 'Bullethead' send me his Meridian Explorer 2 when he canceled TIDAL (I owe him a box of cigars). so my investment here is SMALL. I'll likely prefer the PCM1704U-K multibit ladder DACs in my collection better than the Explorer 2 so I'll likely use the software decoder in the TIDAL player fed to one of my Audio-GD DACs rather than the Explorer 2 most times.

Use Case Number 2:

OK, ya got me! :-)



First they came for the dumb-asses
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a dumb-ass

 

RE: Well,, posted on March 30, 2017 at 07:23:53
fmak
Audiophile

Posts: 13158
Location: Kent
Joined: June 1, 2002
 it is a classic case of wealth generation using closed licensing systems.

I do acknowledge that Meridian has considerable expertise on the manipulation of red book files using a range of dither and dynamic range extension techniques. These work well with their earlier mastering processors which did not require extra outlay on the music. I suspect that some of what is now MQA incorporates what they learnt from earlier on. However, with cheap HDDs and 384k/DSD high sample rate systems, there is no reason for a closed system except for making more money for vendors of streaming services and perhaps in very small cheap portable systems. However, the savings by providers will result in more outlay for the consumer, both for software and for decoding hardware.

 

RE: Well,, posted on March 30, 2017 at 07:34:56
ahendler
Audiophile

Posts: 5151
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Joined: January 24, 2003
 "Unless the technology is categorically providing more fidelity, it seems unnecessary."
That is my point. Unless you listen to it how do you know the answer to the question does it sound significantly better. Unless your willing to take the word of a lot of people who don't like it but have never heard it. It is like reviewing the taste of a wine without ever drinking it or a car without ever driving it. If you don't want to bother with MQA that's fine but don't comment on it's sound without listening
Alan

 

RE: Well,, posted on March 30, 2017 at 07:37:40
ahendler
Audiophile

Posts: 5151
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Joined: January 24, 2003
 I was already using Tidal and they are not charging extra for streaming MQA and you do not need a MQA dac to get most of the improved sound from MQA.
Alan

 

RE: Well,, posted on March 30, 2017 at 07:57:23
Isaak J. Garvey
Industry Professional

Posts: 1207
Location: Hollywod, CA
Joined: January 7, 2016
 True Tidal is not charging extra.

However, you cannot deny the fact that Meridian is saying that to get the so called full effect of MQA, an MQA DAC is required. This is on record.

I know for a fact that they could not get more than a few DAC manufacturers on board, and they had to let the software decoding out of the bag so to speak.

To this day, you cannot compare Tidal MQA vs Tidal streamed native hirez, ONLY to CD counterparts. Gladly correct me if I am wrong.

 

RE: Well,, posted on March 30, 2017 at 12:06:47
ahendler
Audiophile

Posts: 5151
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Joined: January 24, 2003
 I do not know what you mean by Tidal streamed native hirez. Non MQA files on Tidal are 16/44 flac files. They are the same as cds and sound the same as equivalent cds. So you can compare a Tidal MQA file against the same 16/44 tidal file which I have done. The best example I have heard is Fleetwood Macs Rumours album. The MQA file sounds better but I can't absolutely confirm that both files are derived from the same master.
This result is both into my non MQA Master 7 dac and the MQA Meridian Explorer2
Alan

 

RE: Well,, posted on March 30, 2017 at 12:45:08
Isaak J. Garvey
Industry Professional

Posts: 1207
Location: Hollywod, CA
Joined: January 7, 2016
 I think this why folks keep going round and round.

let me take this step by step.

-Tidal streams Redbook CD and so called Tidal MQA Masters, which are
supposed to be fold downs of Hi Rez masters, which then unfold to 24/96, which Tidal caps, even if the original master was 24/192.

-so you are comparing the "unfolded" 24/96 and comparing it to a Redbook CD of UNKNOWN origin and mastering? Do you know how many Rumours CDs there are? It has been remastered at least 3 times, NOT counting "Gold Discs" and boutique releases.

Check this out. Look at just the CD releases
https://www.discogs.com/Fleetwood-Mac-Rumours/master/38722

I know for a fact Rumours was remastered from the original two track mixes at 24/96 in 2013 and was also remixed for a DVD-A and 5.1 years ago. I was there when it was done.

So you see, when you talk about how great MQA you are comparing a hirez master, with MQA DSP, against a CD, which I know for a fact, even if it is the latest Anniv Edition, has more compression.

So it is all rather disingenuous (NOT you, but MQA/Tidal.

Am I unclear? Not being sarcastic I want to know if the above makes sense.

 

RE: Well,, posted on March 30, 2017 at 17:16:24
ahendler
Audiophile

Posts: 5151
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Joined: January 24, 2003
 You are perfectly clear. That's why I said I could not guarantee I am listening to the same masters. As long as MQA doesn't cost me anything I am having fun playing with it. Thanks for your input. I wish they would do a MQA mastering of something I recorded. Buddy Miles Them Changes would be good to start. I doubt it will ever happen unless when they do the UMG stuff
Alan

 

RE: Well, I listened to, posted on March 30, 2017 at 22:11:03
fmak
Audiophile

Posts: 13158
Location: Kent
Joined: June 1, 2002
 2L MQAs via a non MQA dac and was not at all impressed relative to the same hires files.

And I am not going to buy a lowish end MQA dac to assess any differences. The high end one by Meridian has a ridiculous price , just for a 'trial'.

 

MQA doesn't cost me anything , posted on March 31, 2017 at 22:10:19
fmak
Audiophile

Posts: 13158
Location: Kent
Joined: June 1, 2002
 But it can, if streaming companies reduce cost and if tou need at least an Explorer 2 to listen properly.

Remastering changes SQ. Upsample some CDs and make spectrum corrections etc and you will HEAR the effects. Changing the Impulse response and phase can also have major effects.

 

RE: Well,, posted on March 31, 2017 at 23:03:02
jazz1
Audiophile

Posts: 2891
Joined: October 30, 2000
 The MQA bersion of "Rumors" is an obvious example of what MQA can achieve
or is achieving. I am not into the technical stuff but my ears are my judge.

 

Who is HighResAudio ???, posted on April 1, 2017 at 00:44:28
jazz1
Audiophile

Posts: 2891
Joined: October 30, 2000
 I never heard of them or use them.

 

RE: MQA doesn't cost me anything , posted on April 1, 2017 at 05:51:16
zacster
Audiophile

Posts: 2179
Location: NYC
Joined: November 22, 2003
 Is this full hi-res as being advertised, or is it a lossy hi-res? I don't really care as it sounds better than CD and I'm listening to digital for the first time in a couple of years now, since I upgraded my vinyl.

Do you need a special MQA DAC or not? I would say not, since I don't have one and can still get 24/96 coming out of the Tidal app, whether full 24/96 or not.

Now if only I could bridge the final 15 feet between this computer (playing a Tidal master playlist through headphones as I type) and my main all tube system. It is the upper limit of USB, and an analog cable would pick up noise over that length, not that my wife would be happy with a cable running across the room like that.

And this hi-res costs less than the price of one LP per month, about a quarter of what I'd spend on LPs per month, plus I get the student discount for Tidal.

 

RE: Who is HighResAudio ???, posted on April 1, 2017 at 07:59:12
PAR
 They are one of the larger European (German) download websites specialising in high resolution repertoire. That is insofar as "larger" has much meaning in this paricular context.

I have bought from them. A good experience.

 

RE: Who is HighResAudio ???, posted on April 1, 2017 at 08:27:55
Isaak J. Garvey
Industry Professional

Posts: 1207
Location: Hollywod, CA
Joined: January 7, 2016
 They are one of the most successful download shops in europe period. I have seen their sales numbers internally and they do quite well. They were one of the first shops to out right REJECT phoney hirez albums and invest in analysis tools.


 

RE: HighResAudio dumps MQA., posted on April 1, 2017 at 08:28:41
Isaak J. Garvey
Industry Professional

Posts: 1207
Location: Hollywod, CA
Joined: January 7, 2016
 From HighResAudio

"Breaking News! Dear customers, for weeks now, we have published and asked Bob Stuart to reply to our MQA analysis paper. It seems, that MQA has no interested in correcting the facts, nor suppling us with an analysis/verification software tools and an MQA encoder. Why the silence?

We have expressed to MQA, that we are more than happy to continue to sell MQA - but the above issues need to be solved."

 

RE: MQA doesn't cost me anything , posted on April 1, 2017 at 08:52:01
ahendler
Audiophile

Posts: 5151
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Joined: January 24, 2003
 Use a Tripplite 16' amplified USB cable. My experience shows no downside to this
Alan

 

RE: MQA doesn't cost me anything , posted on April 1, 2017 at 20:01:50
zacster
Audiophile

Posts: 2179
Location: NYC
Joined: November 22, 2003
 After I wrote that I figured out a way to get around the security on my work laptop and get Tidal to run on it. That was a much better solution. The funny thing is that I installed Tidal on my daughter's old macbook and it wouldn't work because the clock was off. Instead I just pulled the solid state drive from it and stuck it in a USB case and plugged it in to my laptop and execute it from there. Worked like a charm. I also installed a remote control app on my iPad so I don't have to get up.

It doesn't change the fact that Tidal MQA releases are slow to come.

 

RE: MQA doesn't cost me anything , posted on April 1, 2017 at 20:11:06
ahendler
Audiophile

Posts: 5151
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Joined: January 24, 2003
 "Tidal MQA releases are slow to come."
That's because they only have Warner Bros to work with. Soon they will have UMG and Sony so roll out of MQA should be faster
Alan

 

RE: MQA doesn't cost me anything , posted on April 2, 2017 at 07:42:32
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46302
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
 I installed Tidal on my daughter's old macbook and it wouldn't work because the clock was off. Instead I just pulled the solid state drive from it and stuck it in a USB case and plugged it in to my laptop and execute it from there.

Why not just correct the time on your daughter's MacBook? If it no longer keeps time have you tried replacing the PRAM battery, which among other things also powers the RTC for timekeeping?

I didn't under your logic of pulling the disk from your daughter's Mac because it's clock was off.

I assume the other laptop is also a Mac?


 

RE: MQA doesn't cost me anything , posted on April 2, 2017 at 10:06:20
zacster
Audiophile

Posts: 2179
Location: NYC
Joined: November 22, 2003
 The old laptop is basically junk. It isn't worth putting money into it. Even with a SSD in it it was noticeably slow. The SSD is of more recent vintage, in fact it is still current. So rather than spend money on an old laptop, I took the drive and put it in a case I already have and can now use as an external drive. This cost $0, and I had everything I needed already, including an install of Tidal desktop.


 

RE: MQA doesn't cost me anything , posted on April 2, 2017 at 10:12:01
zacster
Audiophile

Posts: 2179
Location: NYC
Joined: November 22, 2003
 You keep saying that, but it has been 3 months now. And WB has a lot more titles than Tidal. If they want this to hit some critical mass they'd have to release a lot at once, otherwise it is just a niche group of CSN & ZEP lovers that will sign up.

It just isn't compelling enough the way it is now.

 

RE: MQA doesn't cost me anything , posted on April 2, 2017 at 11:04:18
Isaak J. Garvey
Industry Professional

Posts: 1207
Location: Hollywod, CA
Joined: January 7, 2016

Don't follow the true believers off the cliff.

Implosion imminent.



 

RE: MQA doesn't cost me anything , posted on April 2, 2017 at 13:05:16
ahendler
Audiophile

Posts: 5151
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Joined: January 24, 2003
 What's the rush?
Alan

 

RE: HighResAudio dumps MQA., posted on April 3, 2017 at 09:46:08
Isaak J. Garvey
Industry Professional

Posts: 1207
Location: Hollywod, CA
Joined: January 7, 2016
 http://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php/opinion/1057-mqa-one-year-later-suddenly-more-questions

 

Quite., posted on April 4, 2017 at 02:58:42
jusbe
Audiophile

Posts: 5950
Location: North Island
Joined: April 4, 2000
 Most of us struggle to keep up with disc recordings (CD and vinyl) that we like, let alone another new format.

I understand the business proposition and its attraction, but don't think this is the solution any of us are really looking for.


Big J

"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms."


 

RE: HighResAudio dumps MQA., posted on April 6, 2017 at 14:43:03
creativepart
Audiophile

Posts: 1898
Location: Spring Branch, Texas
Joined: March 1, 2004
 I'm not sure about you folks, but I'm enjoying the "Masters" MQA files on TIDAL. I have the Meridian Exp2 DAC so I've been running through all my favorite albums that are available on MQA.

I'm mostly a vinyl guy and will probably always remain so. But it's mind bending that I can pay $20 a month for thousands of Albums in MQA quality which to me sound better than redbook CD. So, I take advantage of this opportunity to listen to music that I don't have on my record shelves.

I'm in my late 60's and I was very slow to add streaming to my music listening. But when I heard that TIDAL had not only CD quality streaming but something that promises to be even better I didn't hesitate.

There are plenty of opportunities to listen to the same song at 16/44.1 and MQA 24/96 on TIDAL. It doesn't take long to determine that the MQA version is obviously better.

One last comment. As TIDAL puts more and more MQA files online the pressure on DAC manufacturers to add MQA to their products is going to build and build. It won't be long that every DAC will have to offer MQA decoding/rendering. Here's a case in point - AudioQuest have announced MQA ("render" only?) upgrades for their popular DragonFly USB DAC's already this year.

 

RE: HighResAudio dumps MQA., posted on April 6, 2017 at 18:06:03
Isaak J. Garvey
Industry Professional

Posts: 1207
Location: Hollywod, CA
Joined: January 7, 2016
 "There are plenty of opportunities to listen to the same song at 16/44.1 and MQA 24/96 on TIDAL. It doesn't take long to determine that the MQA version is obviously better. "

Yest gain the SAME false nonsense is getting posted.

What you are "comparing" is a CD master of undetermined origin against the MQA version which began with 24 bit files.

When Meridian actually allows DIRECT comparison to the original hirez file approved by the mastering engineer against their "MQA'd version" then people will give a damn.

"As TIDAL puts more and more MQA files online the pressure on DAC manufacturers to add MQA to their products is going to build and build. It won't be long that every DAC will have to offer MQA decoding/rendering."

I am afraid you are living in a fantasy world.

MQA is one of the most shameful attempts we have seen yet to move boxes out of the factory and to save a dying company like Meridian.

 

RE: HighResAudio dumps MQA., posted on April 6, 2017 at 19:08:34
creativepart
Audiophile

Posts: 1898
Location: Spring Branch, Texas
Joined: March 1, 2004
 IJG, I could agree with your whole "better than what" concept, except that. I don't have access to the original master file and never will. What I have access to is "a" CD quality file. Yes, of undetermined pedigree, but nonetheless it is what has been made available to me.

And if MQA sounds better than that - for free - then that's pretty good.

Sure in a perfect world I'd have access to the original master file and could compare the MQA to that - but I don't and I can't so the point is moot.

I'm not trying to prove anything other than I personally like what I'm hearing and that's good enough for me. I will grant you that it may not be good enough for you.

And, I'll try not to berate you about it in response to your posts. 'Cause as you say, I'm just here to "post that same old false nonsense."

 

RE: HighResAudio dumps MQA., posted on April 6, 2017 at 19:18:42
Isaak J. Garvey
Industry Professional

Posts: 1207
Location: Hollywod, CA
Joined: January 7, 2016
 Actually you do have the ability to source the original master file...they are being sold on HDTracks, Qobuz, ProStudiomasters, Hiresaudio.com, Superhirez, and soon again, Pono

Why have not seen or heard ANY comparisons of those files to the ones run through the MQA sausage machine? What are they afraid of.

If you believe that MORE processing an reduction in resolution are better than the original source, then so be it.

To clarify, I did not want to imply you are knowingly posting false information. What I MEANT to say is you are restating the same false premise, one that many others have excitedly posted before being confronted with the fact that comparing MQA Tidal to non MQA Tidal is a false comparison.

 

RE: HighResAudio dumps MQA., posted on April 6, 2017 at 20:19:58
creativepart
Audiophile

Posts: 1898
Location: Spring Branch, Texas
Joined: March 1, 2004
 I didn't realize that those Hi Rez file outlets you mentioned were now offering those files for free, or even as subscription of $20 a month. I was already a TIDAL HiFi subscriber and I already had a Meridian Exp2 DAC. So, to me the addition of their MQA Master files streaming is, well, FREE. Sure I could pay $19.95 or more for one album file from a HiRez Download company and listen to it. OR I can stream 30,000 MQA tracks for no additional cost over what I was already paying for.

Thing is I'm not trying to prove the concept of MQA. I'm not defending it or making any claims about it. I'm simply enjoying it.

I have to assume that your MQA DAC is very very good and you're making your claims of how false MQA is based upon your review of the service and it's resultant sound. You must feel it just doesn't sound good. Correct?

 

RE: HighResAudio dumps MQA., posted on April 6, 2017 at 20:23:42
Isaak J. Garvey
Industry Professional

Posts: 1207
Location: Hollywod, CA
Joined: January 7, 2016
 No, those files for download are not free. You have to buy them just like you would an CD, LP, SACD, or Blu Ray. I will take that over a streaming service that lost a combined 35 million between 2015 and late 2016.

And yes, I have heard MQA, extensively, not on a dinky $200 DAC, but on their flagship $24,000 DAC.

 

RE: HighResAudio dumps MQA., posted on April 6, 2017 at 20:40:01
creativepart
Audiophile

Posts: 1898
Location: Spring Branch, Texas
Joined: March 1, 2004
 Good. That's what I was hoping to hear. My Benchmark USB DAC was just not doing it for me any more, so I decided to take a flyer and get the little $299 Exp2. I thought at a chump change price how could I go wrong.

I'm guessing you didn't get a chance to compare the MQA to a known HiRez file?

I listen 99% of the time to vinyl. And, don't personally care for CDs. At first I subscribed to Spotify. It's was convenient but not great sounding. So, I switched to TIDAL HiFi. I heard about MQA coming to TIDAL and thought, I've been meaning to try the Meridian or the Audioquest USB DACs just for fun and chose the Meridian just in case MQA really did start to take off.

First I downloaded a HiRez Sampler from HDTracks and then I got some of the same files from 2L in MQA. I did like the HiRez files, but I felt they compared well to the MQA files of the same music.

In fact I found one classical piece in 44.1, 96, 192, and 384 with the 96 and 192 versions being MQA encoded files. They all sounded pretty good for digital files and the 192 MQA and the 384 HD File sounding very close but obviously putting more air in the music.

OK, I'll stop going on now. It will be fun to see how this unfolds. I guess the "market" will decide. Maybe.

 

Page processed in 0.033 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]