MQA Discussion

6. What has the N-05 to do with MQA?
Nothing because it cannot play MQA. And everything for the same reason.
I have wondered whether Meridian with its clever dsp processing, has managed to make redbook sound "like" non-MQA hires and MQA sound better than non-MQA by its proprietary algorithm within the MQA file. When I say this, I mean that the incremental step-up in SQ can only be appreciated through a Meridian MQA dac. With other dac's, all bets are off which then makes MQA a non-issue. So, it is with the N-05 which sounds better than the 808v6 for redbook/non-MQA hires pcm/dsd.

7. Conclusion
In deciding whether to buy a new dac which can or cannot do MQA, I would say MQA is not that important a factor if you have a ton of cd's in your collection. What is more signifiacnt is whether you like what it does for redbook via its usb or ethernet input. If that sounds better to you in your system than a Meridian or any other make of dac that does MQA, then that is the deal clincher. That is why I am in heaven now with the N-05 and the convenience of controlling my entire music collection from my tablet/phone.

Now, let's hear it from the others. We have CDLehner with the new Brooklyn, Jim(OP) when he returns from his vacation, and we will always have Mike. For myself, I am done talking and going back to more listening......
 
j2020 said:
Equipment is needed to play MQA files and these can be played only via usb or ethernet inputs. So, a lot about how MQA sounds depends on these 2 inputs and how well they are implemented.
Click to expand...

Typical MQA files are folded into 24/44.1 and 24/48 - these are rates that can go through SPDIF (usually up to 24/192). There's no reason for a MQA DAC to exclude support for MQA music incoming via coaxial or optical.

N-05 Digital Volume: To the best of my knowledge it can only be accessed via the iPad app(s), but you can try it only after taking the trouble of network-enabling it.

I find the "sounding the same" comment very interesting. Although I've not thought of this happening to a player/DAC before, perhaps it's not so surprising in the audio world - as sometimes certain amps are reviewed to make bad recordings sound good - not sure if this is a good or correct analogy though.
 
wklie said:
Typical MQA files are folded into 24/44.1 and 24/48 - these are rates that can go through SPDIF (usually up to 24/192). There's no reason for a MQA DAC to exclude support for MQA music incoming via coaxial or optical.
Click to expand...

That's good to know. It is still early days and those who have MQA dac's now can tell us more about this.
 
j2020 said:
Now, let's hear it from the others. We have CDLehner with the new Brooklyn, Jim(OP) when he returns from his vacation, and we will always have Mike. For myself, I am done talking and going back to more listening......
Click to expand...

Sorry guys; let me start by saying...I don't have all 30 pages under my belt :)

But let me take a wild-ass guess; we're debating, whether MQA files...sound "better", than their non-MQA counterparts?

IDK; I suppose I'll get around to that session...soon enough. But I will say this: I find the MQA files, to sound fabulous. However...it doesn't mean crap to me yet.

The files I've sampled (the 2Ls)...and please, if there are others; I'm all ears...are all sourced from DXD. OK...I guess I could specifically listen to the Redbook and 24/96-souced samples; and get a true idea, if MQA adds anything. But it still doesn't mean that much to me.

I mean...I don't know Christian Eggen, nor Ola Gjeilo; nor most of the other musical selections, on that list (that Mozart guy, sounds kinda familiar ;))

I don't want to sound like Joe 6-pack...because when it comes to music, I am far from mainstream; but still...I need to hear what some Neil Young, Pink Floyd, Van Morrison, et al. Sound like, in MQA.
 
CDLehner said:
Sorry guys; let me start by saying...I don't have all 30 pages under my belt :)

But let me take a wild-ass guess; we're debating, whether MQA files...sound "better", than their non-MQA counterparts?

IDK; I suppose I'll get around to that session...soon enough. But I will say this: I find the MQA files, to sound fabulous. However...it doesn't mean crap to me yet.

The files I've sampled (the 2Ls)...and please, if there are others; I'm all ears...are all sourced from DXD. OK...I guess I could specifically listen to the Redbook and 24/96-souced samples; and get a true idea, if MQA adds anything. But it still doesn't mean that much to me.

I mean...I don't know Christian Eggen, nor Ola Gjeilo; nor most of the other musical selections, on that list (that Mozart guy, sounds kinda familiar ;))

I don't want to sound like Joe 6-pack...because when it comes to music, I am far from mainstream; but still...I need to hear what some Neil Young, Pink Floyd, Van Morrison, et al. Sound like, in MQA.
Click to expand...

Thats the way I felt. Bring on the MQA rock
 
wklie said:
I find the "sounding the same" comment very interesting. Although I've not thought of this happening to a player/DAC before, perhaps it's not so surprising in the audio world - as sometimes certain amps are reviewed to make bad recordings sound good - not sure if this is a good or correct analogy though.
Click to expand...

Actually, it is a good analogy.
For the different labels/recording techniques/venues. I have this feeling that I am listening from row 3-5 instead of row 7-9 or 12-15 as it should be in some recordings.
Also, the tone of instruments, especially the piano with its wide frequency range, sounds the same for different recordings.
And bad recordings uncannily sound as good as the good ones but the very, very good recordings sound "only" as good as the merely good ones.
 
j2020 said:
I have this feeling that I am listening from row 3-5 instead of row 7-9 or 12-15 as it should be in some recordings.
Click to expand...

This sounds very similar to Jim Austin's review:

The distance between her instrument and the closest mike looks to be about 6', maybe a bit more. I asked Lindberg to confirm the distance: about 2m from instrument to mike?
"That sounds about right."
I told him that, with MQA, it sounded much closer.
"Yes, that's what the deblur process of MQA does."

Read more at http://www.stereophile.com/content/...eadphone-amplifier-page-2#jOIeBwyK9yOwqzjR.99
Click to expand...

And this:
http://www.meridianunplugged.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=247070#Post247070
 
Yes, it does sound like the review for the Explorer2.

The 808v6 foreshortens soundstage depth for all recordings(while still throwing a very wide one), not just for MQA but also for redbook and non-MQA hires. So. it can't just be the MQA deblur process.

Even so, if the MQA deblur process actually foreshortens soundstage depth, then that isn't something to look forward to.

Thanks for the link to the Meridian Unplugged forum. Interesting discussion going on there too. :)
 
While it would be nice if MQA would be good as hyped by some, all Meridian demos have two common denominators: a) the equipment used in the demos is top notch, so probably even mp3s would sound great through that gear, b) there is constant o-la-la about how good MQA sounds, yet no 1:1 comparisons against other formats have been offered - why, what are Meridian afraid of, if it is so superior?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
They are afraid of losing out on licensing fees if people see what's behind the curtain like in the Wizard of Oz. Kind of like DVD-A all over again to me a decade later.
 
Except that DVD-A actually did sound better than the main competition (CD), and offered multi-channel as well as multiple stereo hi-res PCM options. AFAIK, MLP only applied to the multi-channel part of DVD-A.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top