My take on MQA

**Mike** · February 28, 2017, 08:30 AM

I've been living with full blown MQA in my system for a little while now. At first, I sat down eagerly wanting to compare redbook and high res PCM and DSD versions to the MQA versions in my system. Finally, I had MQA in a system I knew inside and out. As I began comparing, in all cases, the redbook or high res pcm version was approximately 6db louder. This made direct A:B comparisons tricky to say the least, but I eventually was able to figure out the numbers on my preamp to volume match.

Comparing DSD versions was easier since the volume matching was much closer.

As I compared various MQA vs non-MQA versions, I kept scratching my head. Why were the sky's not opening up so as to reveal the heavens? Why were angels not flying around granting musical wishes? Why have I not seen God? What gives? In many cases, at first pass, I preferred the redbook or high res pcm/DSD versions.

In some cases, I preferred the MQA version, but in other cases, the redbook/high res PCM or DSD version was preferred.

As time went on, it then hit me what was happening. I finally found the magic of MQA. No, it's not that you will suddenly start hearing instruments in songs you never heard before or that Jimi Hendrix will jump out of your speakers and grab you by the....

Nope, it's much more subtle, I would argue, subliminal in fact rather than overt.

I noticed repeatedly that when the MQA version was playing, I listened all the way through. All the way through the songs, all the way through playlist, all the way through the albums. Just like I do with vinyl or tape. When the redbook, high res pcm, DSD versions came on via my playlist, I was not aware of what format was playing, but I do know the "digital fidgetiness" returned and I found myself reaching for the iPad. Each time, it was the PCM or DSD song playing, not the MQA one. This experience repeated itself over and over again until I finally became aware of what was happening.

The magic of true, completely unfolded MQA, to me, resides in the what it does to relax the brain while listening - much like analog. Do not underestimate this benefit. It's worth it's weight in gold for the digital audiophile. To me, MQA has made long term digital listening without any hint of fatigue, a reality. I would argue that MQA gets the spatial cues right and those spatial cues allow for greater long term listening. Your brain will thank you.

Mike

**CPP** · February 28, 2017, 09:16 AM

Mike what is your MQA DAC ?

**Mike** · February 28, 2017, 09:19 AM

Originally Posted by CPP

Mike what is your MQA DAC ?

A10.

**Mike** · February 28, 2017, 09:21 AM

Chris - have you had a chance to demo MQA?

**CPP** · February 28, 2017, 09:26 AM

Originally Posted by Mike

Chris - have you had a chance to demo MQA?

Oh yes using my friends Brooklyn. Many many times. I preferred DSD and LP and just plain well recorded 24/192. Heck I prefer the sound coming out of my Lumin over MQA.

**Mike** · February 28, 2017, 09:30 AM

Originally Posted by CPP

Oh yes using my friends Brooklyn. Many many times. I preferred DSD and LP and just plain well recorded 24/192. Heck I prefer the sound coming out of my Lumin over MQA.

It is all very curious. I will be interested to observe the long term listening opinions to see if they jive with mine: the magic of full blown MQA is much more subliminal with respect to the spatial cues than something overt like better vocals, tighter bass, wider soundstage.

**CPP** · February 28, 2017, 09:51 AM

Originally Posted by Mike

It is all very curious. I will be interested to observe the long term listening opinions to see if they jive with mine: the magic of full blown MQA is much more subliminal with respect to the spatial cues than something overt like better vocals, tighter bass, wider soundstage.

Maybe a person has to have a $5k and up device to be able to hear the real benefits of MQA. Just saying.

**Mike** · February 28, 2017, 09:57 AM

Originally Posted by CPP

Maybe a person has to have a $5k and up device to be able to hear the real benefits of MQA. Just saying.

I have no idea, but I think Andy has the Brooklyn DAC and was quite impressed with what he heard. I think MQA's benefits require long-term listening to appreciate. At first brush, I tend to agree with you. It was only after long listening that a light went off. YMMV.

**still-one** · February 28, 2017, 10:00 AM

Mike with full MQA I have found that there is less "fuzz" around vocals that I never knew was there until it was gone. The bass seems more accurate too.
In all comparisons the MQA version has never sounded worse than either my CD, streamed or server version. With 24/88, 24/96 or 24/192 it is harder to come up with a definite conclusion since I only own a handful of both the h-Rez and MQA titles. So far I can't say I'd rather listen to one or the other.

**CPP** · February 28, 2017, 10:15 AM

Originally Posted by Mike

I have no idea, but I think Andy has the Brooklyn DAC and was quite impressed with what he heard. I think MQA's benefits require long-term listening to appreciate. At first brush, I tend to agree with you. It was only after long listening that a light went off. YMMV.

oh don't get me wrong, MQA wasn't bad, but I clearly liked my LP's a lot better and what my Lumin was playing better than what I heard from the Brooklyn, and the little Lumin was only pushing out a 24/48 not full MQA mind you but better than what I heard out of the Brooklyn and I used his broken-in Brooklyn for 2 full days so I had considerable listening time. I did however get a chance to hear MQA via a Meridian 808v6 and yes it was heads above what the Brooklyn had in music quality and dynamics but its heads above in cost as well, like Jim noted, less fuzz, and to me better over all but you pay to play as they say.

**Audio 1** · February 28, 2017, 10:24 AM

Mike do you know if Lumin has plans for full MQA implementation in the near future?

**Mike** · February 28, 2017, 10:34 AM

Originally Posted by Audio 1

Mike do you know if Lumin has plans for full MQA implementation in the near future?

I sure hope so.

**audio.bill** · February 28, 2017, 10:35 AM

Originally Posted by Audio 1

Mike do you know if Lumin has plans for full MQA implementation in the near future?

Buddy - Based on this Teaser thread it would appear so, but an exact timeline has not been given. It seems as if they have a prototype working but are likely waiting on approval and certification from MQA before they can release it. This is pretty much speculation at this point.

**still-one** · February 28, 2017, 10:40 AM

Mike that circle in the Teaser leads me to think that would be the "authentication" light in a full MQA implementation.

**Randy Myers** · February 28, 2017, 11:29 AM

It almost seems like you need a specialized unit for MQA and one for PCM/DSD. The lower level MQA machines, such as the Brooklyn are very lacking in non-MQA capabilities.

Using the Brooklyn as an example; it is not only using last gen chip, the 9018, but it is also using the lower level mobile version. Doing identical machine to machine comparisons from the full blown 9018 chip to the 9028 Pro chip there is a night and day difference. This comparison was done using the Benchmark DAC2 HGC head to head against the Benchmark DAC3 HGC. Exact same machine with the new chip.

Therefore it seems difficult, at best, to compare MQA versus PCM/DSD. When using a machine compromising one format or another, such as the Brooklyn. However, in many reviews and comparisons that I have read as many times as not the PCM/DSD version is preferred even on these machines.

Using top notch machines, such as the Meridian, appears to give great results. I would venture a guess that using similarly priced PCM/DSD DACs in comparison would be a better test. Basically any machine in that price level had better give amazing results.

What is needed, in my view, is an inexpensive add on unit that can be used in conjunction with your current DAC. This unit would recognize and unfold MQA files on the fly, working in conjunction with your current DAC. This would be a great machine that gives the best of both worlds.

As of yet I have not seen a DAC that does top notch in all formats, including MQA, that is at an affordable price level for the average audio enthusiast. So far it appears that most direct comparisons being done with this level equipment is not boding well for MQA.

Depending on extreme level equipment, such as the Meridian, or compromise equipment, such as the Brooklyn, is not going to gain a needed market penetration. A very large portion of the assumed market can not afford the extreme level, and people also want the best with what the currently own so compromise gear will not win the market either because most people will not re-buy their current library (except maybe a few of their favorites).

I am not dismissing MQA's apparent capabilities and possible improvements. I feel that to gain the true needed market penetration is going to take some serious strategy considerations. It is not going to take over to an extent that people will replace their entire library; therefore a strategy to integrate with current equipment and music libraries is needed. And honestly, a half baked system with doing MQA decoding but not unfolding in software is not the answer. This allows playing MQA files, but not at their best. Full capability integrated with current equipment to allow people to really hear MQA is the only way of winning the masses. This is my belief.

**Kuoppis** · February 28, 2017, 11:33 AM

I recognize the effect Mike describes very clearly between analog and digital playback, have however not had a chance to corroborate it in terms of MQA. The limited catalogue on Tidal is a bit of a hindrance.

It will be interesting to compare whether there is an impact when I get the Meitner back from the V2 upgrade and it up-samples everything to 5x DSD.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

**Randy Myers** · February 28, 2017, 11:40 AM

The best example I can give of analog versus digital is to quote a conversation I had with one of the first artist to fully embrace MQA. He recorded extensively in DSD and now offers his entire catalog in MQA. He is one of the first artist to do this.

He told me that in his view, as an artist who has specialize in highest quality recordings as he possibly can for many many years, that DSD is by far the most "analog" sounding digital format. He highly supports MQA because of its' lower band width requirements for streaming and smaller foot print for portable use. However he still feels that DSD is the most analog sounding format.

**Joe P** · February 28, 2017, 04:20 PM

The flip side:

https://www.linn.co.uk/blog/mqa-is-bad-for-music

https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/app...855-is-mqa-doa

http://schiit.com/news/news/why-we-w...supporting-mqa

**Randy Myers** · February 28, 2017, 04:49 PM

You may or may not have noticed, but I use the latest Benchmark DAC. However I also believe in trying to be fair and give credit where credit is due. It sounds like MQA may have some good points, but I also feel that some changes are very much warranted if it is ever going to make any real in roads in the high end audio world market.

**wisnon** · February 28, 2017, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by Mike

I have no idea, but I think Andy has the Brooklyn DAC and was quite impressed with what he heard. I think MQA's benefits require long-term listening to appreciate. At first brush, I tend to agree with you. It was only after long listening that a light went off. YMMV.

Are you sure its not the better AUDIOPHILE remastering on the MQA VERSIONS?

**wisnon** · February 28, 2017, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by mike

a10.

what dac is that?

**AJ Soundfield** · February 28, 2017, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by wisnon

Are you sure its not the better AUDIOPHILE remastering on the MQA VERSIONS?

Ding, ding, we have a winner.

Exactly how do you separate what "MQA" is doing, vs the remastering...which ought to sound different!!

And every piece of music in history needs remastering?? I wonder what the artists were thinking when originally released?

Ah well, as long as Bob Stuart profits from all music on earth, future equipment, etc, etc, it's all good I suppose

**Randy Myers** · February 28, 2017, 07:40 PM

I hear talking about digital listening fatigue. Maybe with CDs, but I don't recall getting this with high res files, and DSD I can listen to all day and never get listening fatigue... maybe sitting on my butt fatigue

....

**rbbert** · February 28, 2017, 07:55 PM

Originally Posted by jap

The flip side:

https://www.linn.co.uk/blog/mqa-is-bad-for-music

https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/app...855-is-mqa-doa

http://schiit.com/news/news/why-we-w...supporting-mqa

All very old news by now, significantly pre-dating more widespread MQA availability via Tidal. That is not to say there aren't some very useful opinions and facts presented there, but the most valid and pertinent ones have little or nothing to do with the actual sound of MQA.

**Joe P** · February 28, 2017, 08:38 PM

Originally Posted by rbbert

All very old news by now, significantly pre-dating more widespread MQA availability via Tidal. That is not to say there aren't some very useful opinions and facts presented there, but the most valid and pertinent ones have little or nothing to do with the actual sound of MQA.

The Linn opinion was posted on 2/10/2017.

Tidal has very little MQA music available, nothing I would pay to listen to.

**rbbert** · February 28, 2017, 09:22 PM

The Linn post pretty much avoids the sound of MQA. Tidal has over 1000 MQA titles, with at least a few classic albums in almost any genre.

I would LOVE it if MQA faded away and disappeared, but that's not what this topic thread is about. This thread is about the sound of MQA.

**wklie** · February 28, 2017, 09:31 PM

According to this user-maintained Tidal MQA Album spreadsheet Tidal has over 1600 MQA albums right now.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...#gid=945476039

For those who are already Tidal HiFi subscribers, streaming MQA music does not cost extra.

**rbbert** · February 28, 2017, 09:42 PM

Originally Posted by wklie

According to this user-maintained Tidal MQA Album spreadsheet Tidal has over 1600 MQA albums right now.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...#gid=945476039

For those who are already Tidal HiFi subscribers, streaming MQA music does not cost extra.

I was just about to correct my post, thanks

**Randy Myers** · February 28, 2017, 09:44 PM

Again, that is all streaming. I have never questioned the viability of MQA as a transport for PCM files. There are many audio enthusiasts, such as myself, who have no interest in streaming. Again, this thread is about sound quality. DSD is the benchmark in my view and MQA has that standard to meet.

**Joe P** · February 28, 2017, 09:52 PM

Originally Posted by wklie

According to this user-maintained Tidal MQA Album spreadsheet Tidal has over 1600 MQA albums right now.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...#gid=945476039

For those who are already Tidal HiFi subscribers, streaming MQA music does not cost extra.

Thanks for the list.

Still nothing I would pay to listen to, and I have no interest in Tidal.

It's great for the record labels....they can sell their old recordings again.

**still-one** · February 28, 2017, 11:26 PM

Originally Posted by jap

Thanks for the list.

Still nothing I would pay to listen to, and I have no interest in Tidal.

It's great for the record labels....they can sell their old recordings again.

You mean they aren't reselling their catalog with DSD and hi-Rez? The more options we have the better off we are. In any event I'll take PCM over DSD most every time.

**mep** · February 28, 2017, 11:31 PM

Originally Posted by still-one

You mean they aren't reselling their catalog with DSD and hi-Rez? The more options we have the better off we are. In any event I'll take PCM over DSD most every time.

Why would you take PCM over DSD?

**still-one** · February 28, 2017, 11:43 PM

Originally Posted by mep

Why would you take PCM over DSD?

First significantly more content, second more content I care about and third the best digital I have heard has been PCM.

**Randy Myers** · March 1, 2017, 02:25 AM

If I am recalling correctly, Meridian is very anti-DSD. To each their own. In my view, to my ears, on my much lower end equipment DSD is hands down the winner. I also buy quite a bit of PCM downloads. There is a lot of what I care about available in DSD (both downloads and SACDs) but some not. PCMs can be very good and if I want something not available in a DSD format then PCM is a good alternative.

**wisnon** · March 1, 2017, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by still-one

First significantly more content, second more content I care about and third the best digital I have heard has been PCM.

LoL

With HQP and a powerful server, its ALL DSD now...or DXD (pcm) if you prefer. Format means very little anymore.

**Zero** · March 1, 2017, 08:48 AM

PCM. DSD. Lossless. Mp3. MQA. Vinyl. Tape.

Honestly, I've yet to encounter one format that conquers all. Or more specifically, I've yet to encounter results from one specific format that is consistently superior to another. Even the compression artifacts of an .mp3 can benefit certain recordings. My take on the situation may change over time, but thus far, this has been my overall experience.

**wisnon** · March 1, 2017, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by Zero

PCM. DSD. Lossless. Mp3. MQA. Vinyl. Tape.

Honestly, I've yet to encounter one format that conquers all. Or more specifically, I've yet to encounter results from one specific format that is consistently superior to another. Even the compression artifacts of an .mp3 can benefit certain recordings. My take on the situation may change over time, but thus far, this has been my overall experience.

I am forced to agree and I LOVE DSD. Mastering is most important.

**mep** · March 1, 2017, 01:11 PM

Originally Posted by Zero

PCM. DSD. Lossless. Mp3. MQA. Vinyl. Tape.

Honestly, I've yet to encounter one format that conquers all. Or more specifically, I've yet to encounter results from one specific format that is consistently superior to another. Even the compression artifacts of an .mp3 can benefit certain recordings. My take on the situation may change over time, but thus far, this has been my overall experience.

I guess we have to define what "conquers" means in this context. With regards to ultimate sound quality, analog conquers all digital that I have heard in my home and tape conquers all analog. Unless you have single-handily left the digital Kool-Aid pitcher empty, I wouldn't be lumping digital formats in with analog and saying they are all fuzzy with regards to pecking order. If you would have left off vinyl and tape from your opening sentence, I probably would have agreed with you.

**wisnon** · March 1, 2017, 01:23 PM

MEP...I didnt catch that. I would not include analog formats in such a post. Not taking sides, but the discussion here is all digital and should have remained that way.

**AJ Soundfield** · March 1, 2017, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by Zero

Honestly, I've yet to encounter one format that conquers all.

Agreed, though heresy to some.

**Randy Myers** · March 1, 2017, 01:51 PM

Agreed, although in general for me anything DSD sounds better (downloads and SACD) and then high resolution downloads. CDs take up the rear but are tremendously improved running through the Wyred 4 Sound Remedy! Of course there are variances depending on recording and mastering, etc., but I am talking in over all tendencies!

**a.wayne** · March 1, 2017, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by Zero

PCM. DSD. Lossless. Mp3. MQA. Vinyl. Tape.

Honestly, I've yet to encounter one format that conquers all. Or more specifically, I've yet to encounter results from one specific format that is consistently superior to another. Even the compression artifacts of an .mp3 can benefit certain recordings. My take on the situation may change over time, but thus far, this has been my overall experience.

Have you tried master tape vs glass masters .... ?

For those not familiar .... : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDlbN8p8Jww

Going by whats available, IMO, tape masters do offer the most realistic reproduction , followed by D2D Vinyl . In regards to CD, PCM. DSD. Lossless. Mp3. MQA, i can agree with your assessment, which is , no one specific digital format is consistently superior to another...

Regards

**anji12305** · March 1, 2017, 02:43 PM

Originally Posted by jap

Thanks for the list

It's great for the record labels....they can sell their old recordings again.]

I'm in agreement, and have said much the same, elsewhere. It walks like, talks like and squawks like DRM.

Unless the encoding is done at the time of recording, it's not offering much new.

We're not the first to see this, either.
http://www.psaudio.com/forum/directs...a-controversy/

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

**AJ Soundfield** · March 1, 2017, 02:48 PM

The bottom line is still how MQA sounds. Will the purported remastering + HF aliasing distortion spicing sound better or....

**anji12305** · March 1, 2017, 02:51 PM

It has real potential to improve many aspects of new recordings.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

**AJ Soundfield** · March 1, 2017, 02:54 PM

Originally Posted by anji12305

It has real potential to improve many aspects of new recordings.

Such as?

**Mike** · March 1, 2017, 02:59 PM

Originally Posted by AJ Soundfield

Such as?

Spatial cues.

Good read here:

https://mqa-production.s3.amazonaws....7ffcd09cd3.pdf

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**AJ Soundfield** · March 1, 2017, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by Mike

Spatial cues.

Good read here:

https://mqa-production.s3.amazonaws....7ffcd09cd3.pdf

Couldn't find anything there other than Harleys personal experience/opinion. I can show quotes where he said essentially the same about all the other Hi-Res formats throughout the years.

There is nothing inherent about the MQA process that would change spatial information, other than remastering. The aliasing distortion from the "lazy" encode filtering could change it slightly, though not always for the better.
But anji said "new" recordings. What spatial effects created by original recording with MQA, vs say, 24/96, which has been used in studios for an awful long time now?

**AJ Soundfield** · March 1, 2017, 03:14 PM

Btw, have there been any "original" MQA recordings yet?

**anji12305** · March 1, 2017, 03:20 PM

I haven't the background to validate the higher math: I understand that the MQA handshake acts as an apodizing filter that reduces timing artifacts on playback.

The claim is a timing error in playback of less than 3 microseconds. I've heard worse errors than this in live music settings, where the monitors are poorly positioned.

This should be evident on recordings where all concerned are playing at the moment of recording, less so if the recordings are dubbed, stitched or multitracked together.

I gather it has the same potential as pitch correction, but haven't heard an A-B comparison to verify the claim.

I'm leery of any proprietary 'chain' that requires a license the codec, for media I've purchased.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

Thread: My take on MQA

My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Re: My take on MQA

Posting Permissions