MQA: That Sounds Good. To Me.

Alkyogre said:
How do you know all different sources came from the same remaster? Maybe an equation with 2 unknowns.
Click to expand...

There is the original and the 25th anniversary edition. The same album (not talking about the 25th anniversary edition) is available in high res on Qobuz and MQA on Tidal. Worth comparing if you have an MQA DAC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Like anything else in audio… Highly subjective topic and totally depends on many variables. From personal preference of what any recording should sound like based on the listeners ears and physiology, to the response and interaction of the gear in the room or headphone response to the genres and energy levels of music.

IÂ’m not one bit surprised MQA of Billie Jean somehow sounded better to a listener as Tidal and MQA often did sound a bit more dynamic with genres that favor the dynamics, tempo and drive.

In the end I personally favor Qobuz and do not need artificial and lossy manipulation of MQA but that’s like saying I prefer Peter Luger steakhouse in Brooklyn to The Steakhouse in Vegas… all depends on your preference and neither asked the cow how the steak is supposed to be.
 
TheOctopus said:
Like anything else in audio… Highly subjective topic and totally depends on many variables. From personal preference of what any recording should sound like based on the listeners ears and physiology, to the response and interaction of the gear in the room or headphone response to the genres and energy levels of music.

IÂ’m not one bit surprised MQA of Billie Jean somehow sounded better to a listener as Tidal and MQA often did sound a bit more dynamic with genres that favor the dynamics, tempo and drive.

In the end I personally favor Qobuz and do not need artificial and lossy manipulation of MQA but that’s like saying I prefer Peter Luger steakhouse in Brooklyn to The Steakhouse in Vegas… all depends on your preference and neither asked the cow how the steak is supposed to be.
Click to expand...

So you compared it with an MQA DAC?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Mike said:
So you compared it with an MQA DAC?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...
Correct. A few DACs and half a dozen serious headphones which gave me a deeper listen without room interaction of the main system.

It’s a personal preference type of thing. I would not stop listening to MQA just because one “knows” it’s lossy but I did prefer Qobuz for the genres I listen to. Good to have choices
 
While I subscribed to Tidal, I actually enjoyed listening to several MQA tracks.
But it is really impossible (at least for me) to tell what the folks at MQA did to the original music.

Here is somebody's actual experience with his own music and MQA:
I published music on Tidal to test MQA - MQA Review - YouTube

I prefer to listen to the “original” tracks. But then I use filters to tweak the sound to my personal preference. So in a way, I’m doing the tweaking to my liking as opposed to MQA doing it for me. Go figure!

To me it is about the music. If MQA or MP3 or whatever floats one's boat it is all good.
 
my roon, 218, dsp 8000se does full unfold and supertramp crisis what crisis 24/192 clearly sounds more transparent. I can't compare mqa to dsd or any other hi rez source, but compared to 16/44, whew.
 
Mike said:
There is the original and the 25th anniversary edition. The same album (not talking about the 25th anniversary edition) is available in high res on Qobuz and MQA on Tidal. Worth comparing if you have an MQA DAC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

Never mind the “Hi Rez” Quobuz version of any recording, always try the 16/44.1 Quobuz version first. You might be in for a giant surprise.
 
Mike said:
So you listened on an MQA DAC and compared?
Click to expand...
Yeah the lossy MQA track sounded like a Korg, the non-MQA sounded like a Yamaha CS-80.
I've contacted John Edward to channel MJ to see what the artists intent was. Somehow Bob Stuart knows.
 
mep said:
Never mind the “Hi Rez” Quobuz version of any recording, always try the 16/44.1 Quobuz version first. You might be in for a giant surprise.
Click to expand...

Here are the versions available. I don’t see any non-25th anniversary 16/44.

8a9a581d069c5a4943abf0b1d11ab8af.jpg
 
Mike said:
So you listened on an MQA DAC and compared?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

No I did not listen via a MQA DAC. I only listened through Roon which did the first unfold only.

And while I liked what I heard for the most part, it was impossible for me to confirm what I was listening to (i.e., was the track ‘sweetened’ for MQA?).

I don’t have any gripes against MQA. But today, with the ability to stream lossless HD resolution (with Qobuz for example), I have no need for MQA.
 
nicoff said:
No I did not listen via a MQA DAC. I only listened through Roon which did the first unfold only.

And while I liked what I heard for the most part, it was impossible for me to confirm what I was listening to (i.e., was the track ‘sweetened’ for MQA?).

I don’t have any gripes against MQA. But today, with the ability to stream lossless HD resolution (with Qobuz for example), I have no need for MQA.
Click to expand...

Oh trust me, I prefer high res on Qobuz too - generally speaking - but Sony and others were making a big flap about the thousands of titles they released in MQA so I decided to give arguably one of their biggest a listen and found it quite compelling compared to the same resolution (high res) version on Qobuz.
 
steve59 said:
I can't compare mqa to dsd
Click to expand...

Obviously it will depend on every album and how it was produced and mastered, etc., including how the format version was. This is a given in my mind.

I have had an opportunity to compare directly MQA and DSD from the source. A friend of mine was one of the first artist to endorse and record in DSD. He now is a huge supporter of MQA. He tells me that he still believes DSD, especially DSD512 is the best sounding format. However he really likes and endorses MQA for portables and streaming because of its sound and digital footprint (size).

He has sent me MQA versions of a couple of his albums that I own in DSD. I have directly compared them on my Astell&Kern with my Abyss headphones. The A&K does full MQA unfolding and does DSD up to DSD256. It has both AKM and ESS chips (I prefer the AKM). While the MQA is solid and I would say probably better than 16/44.1, however DSD was far superior in my view. YMMV
 
Randy Myers said:
Obviously it will depend on every album and how it was produced and mastered, etc., including how the format version was. This is a given in my mind.

I have had an opportunity to compare directly MQA and DSD from the source. A friend of mine was one of the first artist to endorse and record in DSD. He now is a huge supporter of MQA. He tells me that he still believes DSD, especially DSD512 is the best sounding format. However he really likes and endorses MQA for portables and streaming because of its sound and digital footprint (size).

He has sent me MQA versions of a couple of his albums that I own in DSD. I have directly compared them on my Astell&Kern with my Abyss headphones. The A&K does full MQA unfolding and does DSD up to DSD256. It has both AKM and ESS chips (I prefer the AKM). While the MQA is solid and I would say probably better than 16/44.1, however DSD was far superior in my view. YMMV
Click to expand...

Yes, the DSD is the best digital and so is the right vinyl pressing. I give the edge to the vinyl pressing (Japan or early US). I was just interested in comparing the MQA (same resolution) on Tidal to the high res version on Qobuz.
 
Got ya, I was just commenting on the post about MQA and DSD :).... I agree on DSD and vinyl by the way... love both... anyway, since I do not stream I am out :P.
 
MQA is a big trigger word. Probably just as big as words like Vaccines or faceMask
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top