A summary of bad press so far:
http://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php/opinion/1057-mqa-one-year-later-suddenly-more-questions
http://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php/opinion/1057-mqa-one-year-later-suddenly-more-questions
MQA Discussion
- Thread starter still-one
- Start date
Thanks for the link, Peter.
I hope we can share our personal experience with respect to MQA vs non-MQA files, specifying our dac's as MQA or non-MQA.
With my non-MQA dac, SQ in order of merit is as follows :-
1. Non-MQA hires pcm/dsd with non-MQA dac(Esoteric N-05)
2. Redbook files in Flac with Esoteric N-05
3. MQA hires pcm/dsd with MQA dac(Meridian 808v6)
4. Redbook CD/files with Meridian 808v6
5. Tidal MQA files with Esoteric N-05
5. Tidal non-MQA files with Esoteric N-05
Only well-recorded materials are compared.
Happy listening.
J.
jdandy
New member
wklie.......I don't call it bad press, more like inquiring minds of intelligent individuals in the industry voicing legitimate concerns with few proof sources being provided by MQA's creator.
Doug Schneider's article is well written.
It is only bad press if it is bad for the business concerned.
Many audiophiles are still waiting for Bob Stuart to run a public demo of MQA vs non-MQA.
That this hasn't happened so far does put his credibility into question.
Among the audio press, only JA has reported on his personal experience. All others raving about MQA(notably RH) have not.
Would be good to hear from those who own audio stores here, with their vast resources to make just such a comparison.
Kuoppis
New member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2015
- Messages
- 5,203
I think that Doug Schneider and the Highresaudio people do ask the right questions. With MQA continued resistance against transparency it is obvious something is rotten in the state of Denmark.
Another significant difference between MQA and other codecs is, that e.g. case of DSD files, I have so far never had to ask myself whether DSD files do sound better. The difference is obvious.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Another significant difference between MQA and other codecs is, that e.g. case of DSD files, I have so far never had to ask myself whether DSD files do sound better. The difference is obvious.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I think it is the hesitancy on the part of Bob Stuart and others besides JA, to conduct public demos that is the big credibility issue here.
YuriKorzunov
New member
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2015
- Messages
- 66
From the article:
From http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/how-it-works
In coding/decoding used lossless band splitter: http://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=...&SectionNum=&idkey=NONE&Input=View+first+page
As lossless and 100% of quality I understand full binary identity of compressed and decompressed audio stream.
I still can't understand how possibly split band without loses. Because, I don't know how it do without filters. Before I hear nothing about ideal filters.
I am pretty sure the guy(DS) who wrote this piece believes that cables and interconnects do improve sound quality.
I know I do as I am in audio heaven now with my new KS 1126's.
I guess I am not the same type as "....... the same type who don't belive cables or interconnects improve sound don't believe MQA sounds as good we say.'
AJ Soundfield
Well-known member
Guess Doug's not drinking the koolaid either.
Agree with jdandy, not really bad press imo, just someone with critical thinking skills thinking out aloud.
I have. Read my post entitled "my take on MQA".
http://www.audioshark.org/showthread.php?t=11498&p=195863#post195863
Have read your post, Mike. I was hoping more of others will come forward.
In your post, you were asked which dac and you named the Aurender A10.
Have you compared the A10 to the non-MQA dCS Rossini, Vivaldi or Esoteric K-series/Grandioso and what are your impressions?
Many thanks in advance.
Can "someone" please respond to my post above?
1. Has Bob Stuart done such a comparison?
2. Has the audio press other than JA done such a comparison in a proper review?
3. How many (apart from MSB) have done such a comparison? It would be interesting to compare the MSB vs the Vivaldi or Grandioso.
Many thanks in advance.
Not specifically with those, but with the Chord DAVE, Berkeley REF2, etc. It's obviously not in the same league. It's basically a $3000 DAC. It competes in the sub-$5000 DAC category.
If your point is "will a $5000 MQA DAC slay a mega priced DAC just because it does MQA?", the answer is no. Its like asking "will a VW GOLF with turbo slay a naturally aspirated Ferrari 430". Same answer. Hell no.
The game will be interesting when Berkeley's MQA feature for the REF2 goes into affect in another month or two.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks. Precisely what I have been saying all along. But "some" just can't get it.
The next question would be, would the Meridian 808v6 slay the dCS Rossini/Vivaldi or Esoteric K-series/Grandioso?
I haven't heard a Meridian piece I liked, so I guess the answer is no.
I still really really like the Chord DAVE in the $10k range and the Berk REF2 in the $20k range. Above that, DCS and MSB are the ones to beat.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I agree.
When I first heard the 808v6, I initially fell for it but over time, something was missing and What Hi-Fi mag nailed it by describing it as "polite".
The first 2 questions are rhetorical. We all know the answers to those. Only 3 needs answering.
The audacity, the temerity, the pomposity of it all to brook no dissent - quite a pain to watch.
The first 2 questions are rhetorical. We all know the answers to those. Only 3 needs answering.
The audacity, the temerity, the pomposity of it all to brook no dissent - quite a pain to watch.
You want dissent among the MSB, DCS and Grandioso fans?
Can't go wrong with any of those.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk