Tidal and MQA Files

mep said:
Thanks for the list Mike. How many people are using upsamplers and converting all of their files to DSD? I think there a lots of them. When I first reviewed the DSJ, it made all of my PCM files sound better than when played natively than through the Mytek Stereo 192. That was in a different time in a different room in different state with a different server. Reviewing the latest Mojo server showed me how much the laptop server was holding the Mytek Stereo 192 back. I don't care what anyone says, the Mytek Stereo 192 still sounds great and I would still be using it if it had a Roon end point built in.
Click to expand...

Very few are upsample everything to DSD, including MQA. I think on some resolutions, it can sound like a blanket thrown over the music. On BAD 16/44 recordings, it can help. YMMV.

Consider a Lumin D2/T2 for your needs. Roon endpoint. MQA. Etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mike said:
Very few are upsample everything to DSD, including MQA. I think on some resolutions, it can sound like a blanket thrown over the music. On BAD 16/44 recordings, it can help. YMMV.

Consider a Lumin D2/T2 for your needs. Roon endpoint. MQA. Etc.




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

Well, I don’t know how converting a 16/44.1 file to DSD is going to make it shine in comparison to hi-Rez files converted to DSD.
 
mep said:
Well, I don’t know how converting a 16/44.1 file to DSD is going to make it shine in comparison to hi-Rez files converted to DSD.
Click to expand...

A bad 16/44 file can get some lipstick with an upsample to DSD. But a native good sounding 24/96 pcm when converted to DSD will sound like someone put a veil over it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Let me know how the comparisons go, but I’m still convinced the upsampling of everything to DSD is effecting the results.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Some sound better. Same situation with Redbook, Hi-Res, DSD, MQA....It all goes back upstream to the quality of the recording, mastering, etc. Just because it’s a, pick your flavor format, doesn’t mean it’s better.
 
mep said:
My setup is pretty straight forward. CAT 8 cable run from my Infinity router downstairs to my stereo room upstairs and terminated behind my digital rack of gear. From the wall I have a CAT 8 cable run to my Netgear router. My Roon Nucleus+ and my PS Audio DSJ are both plugged into my Netgear router with CAT 8 cables. I don't have any digital dingleberries hanging off my network. To date, I have not had any dropouts.
Click to expand...

You might want to keep in mind, that also Ethernet cables affect SQ.

A top Cat7 cable is likely to sound better than a standard Cat8. The Cat standard is a bandwidth definition, which from Cat 6 onwards well exceeds audio requirements.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
For that distance I would go wireless.

Alternatively, a long distance it is of course difficult cost-wise to bridge with a very high-end cable. So I would take the best I can stomach for the long run, and use a short top cable from switch to DAC.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Ritmo said:
Some sound better. Same situation with Redbook, Hi-Res, DSD, MQA....It all goes back upstream to the quality of the recording, mastering, etc. Just because it’s a, pick your flavor format, doesn’t mean it’s better.
Click to expand...

I agree Mike. I’m just not ready to buy into MikeB’s belief that the reason why 16/44.1 files sound better than MQA files is that the DSJ is putting lipstick on the pig while making “superior” files sound worse. We will see.
 
imprezap2 said:
IMO keep the MQA files coming, transients are tighter, increase of soundstage and generally more "foot tapping" musicality (timing)

I am using an Aurender N10 as streamer and a dCS Rossini as DAC. (Tidal/Qobuz/Aurender SSD)

Reading so many positive/negative opinions on MQA, to me it is just another option to play music, in the end the recording itself is most important, a bad recording will not sound good through any file format.
Click to expand...

My experience is similar. I like it. Que ball, not so much.
 
Having had Tidal for a while now and having listened to a lot of familiar music, the music is just not consistent. Some albums sound possibly remastered or manipulated somehow where others sound not so good. I know they tag the album titles but I suspect that isn't to be trusted. Off the top I can't remember an example but I know I've seen albums with the wrong track line up. Billy Cobham, Power Play doesn't match my LP. I just thought of that :)

As to MQA, my experience so far is similar to Mike and Mike, it seems softer and can sometimes bring out the melody better. I find the opposite of Imprezap2, MQA seems to have softer transients.

When I get to where I can have regular comparison, it will just depend on what version sounds best. From following Still One on the music forum I can see why he likes MQA, it would certainly fit his taste in music. I don't see it helping Rock or higher energy music. Maybe, depends on taste
 
Mr Peabody said:
Having had Tidal for a while now and having listened to a lot of familiar music, the music is just not consistent. Some albums sound possibly remastered or manipulated somehow where others sound not so good. I know they tag the album titles but I suspect that isn't to be trusted. Off the top I can't remember an example but I know I've seen albums with the wrong track line up. Billy Cobham, Power Play doesn't match my LP. I just thought of that :)

As to MQA, my experience so far is similar to Mike and Mike, it seems softer and can sometimes bring out the melody better. I find the opposite of Imprezap2, MQA seems to have softer transients.

When I get to where I can have regular comparison, it will just depend on what version sounds best. From following Still One on the music forum I can see why he likes MQA, it would certainly fit his taste in music. I don't see it helping Rock or higher energy music. Maybe, depends on taste
Click to expand...

This is pretty consistent with my observations from a year ago or so.

1) The quality of MQA files vary, sometimes it’s better, sometimes it’s worse.
2) MQA suits some music styles better than others, I still prefer to listen to rock in other formats, as I find them snappier, especially with distorted guitars.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Mr Peabody said:
Having had Tidal for a while now and having listened to a lot of familiar music, the music is just not consistent. Some albums sound possibly remastered or manipulated somehow where others sound not so good. I know they tag the album titles but I suspect that isn't to be trusted. Off the top I can't remember an example but I know I've seen albums with the wrong track line up. Billy Cobham, Power Play doesn't match my LP. I just thought of that :)

As to MQA, my experience so far is similar to Mike and Mike, it seems softer and can sometimes bring out the melody better. I find the opposite of Imprezap2, MQA seems to have softer transients.

When I get to where I can have regular comparison, it will just depend on what version sounds best. From following Still One on the music forum I can see why he likes MQA, it would certainly fit his taste in music. I don't see it helping Rock or higher energy music. Maybe, depends on taste
Click to expand...


If you don't like MQA, it must be your DAC. :rolleyes:
 
So I did a comparison with cuts from two different albums. One cut was Diana Krall singing Desperado from Wallflower and the other was Andrea Bochelli from the Sogno album singing The Prayer that Mike recommended.

Andrea Bochelli is not my cup of musical tea and I didn't find the album to be recorded very well, at least on the two versions available on Tidal. When Bochelli starts singing, the bottom end is deeper on the MQA version, and I think the MQA version was mastered at a louder level than the 16/44.1. When Dion starts singing her voice sounds good and the violins sound soft and sweet. When they both start singing, it tends to sound a little glassy which makes the voices sound a little shrill. On the 16/44.1 version, Dion's voice sounds lighter, but you can actually here her breathing better. The bottom line is that I don't care for either version and I'm not a fan of the way this album was recorded.

The Diana Krall song Desperado from the Wallflower was an interesting contrast between MQA and 16/44.1. On the MQA version, there is some digital flatulence at the very beginning of the song and it was there both times I played it. The MQA version sounds brighter and Krall's voice has a glassy edge to it. Piano sustain is MIA on the MQA version. The 16/44.1 version sounded much better to me. You can hear all of the sustain of the piano notes, you can hear her breathing into the microphone and it sounds like you were there in the recording studio when the song was recorded. Oh, and Krall's voice sounds much better than the MQA version.

So here is a recommendation for those who love jazz, Dave Brubeck, and excellent live recordings. The Dave Brubeck Quartet Live At Carnegie Hall is simply outstanding and it's a 16/44.1 recording. If your system is anywhere near being full range, you are in for a treat. You seldom hear drums recorded this well on modern day recordings. This is simply a great recording with great musicianship. Mike talks about the DAC putting lipstick on the 16/44.1 pig, but that's nonsense with this recording. It's a natural beauty.
 
We did the same comparison with a DAC that doesn’t upsample everything to DSD and found the opposite.

I’m telling you, converting everything to DSD is not giving you a true result.

Can you try your Mytek?

I just tested the theory and using Roon DSP converted MQA to DSD. Uh...no thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Here’s another one to try:

Elton John - Mad Man Across The Water - Levon.

Listen to how much more rich and full the piano notes are at the beginning of the song with the MQA version.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mike said:
We did the same comparison with a DAC that doesn’t upsample everything to DSD and found the opposite.

I’m telling you, converting everything to DSD is not giving you a true result.

Can you try your Mytek?

I just tested the theory and using Roon DSP converted MQA to DSD. Uh...no thanks.


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

Mike-The Mytek won't work with the Roon Nucleus+ because it's not a Roon endpoint. I wish I could hear it though. Additionally, I struggle with the concept that converting PCM files to DSD via the DSJ only affects MQA files and not PCM files of all resolutions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top