Tidal and MQA Files

Don’t you need a true MQA DAC first and foremost if you want to evaluate MQA format? Saying a bunch of things without doing this ^ first is just being difficult and pointless.
 
still-one said:
If your position is that upsampling PCM files to DSD or DXD cannot improve SQ that is your opinion and it might be valid for you but you will find many who disagree.

If you are just trying to be a smart ass and paint all MQA files as bad sounding then you have proved your options are worthless. You really don't want an answer.
Click to expand...

First of all, you are distorting what I said and you are missing what other people are saying. I’m being told that converting bad sounding PCM files to DSD makes them sound better but converting MQA files which are also PCM to DSD makes MQA sound worse. That’s the head scratcher for me.
 
kzhtoo said:
Don’t you need a true MQA DAC first and foremost if you want to evaluate MQA format? Saying a bunch of things without doing this ^ first is just being difficult and pointless.
Click to expand...


Has MQA taken a position that you shouldn’t use the DSJ to play MQA files?
 
I have 3 MQA dac's although not $10k and up dacs but I can hear a difference, sometimes MQA sounds better sometimes not.. I have a Lumin, ExaSound and Brooklynn +. I think it all depends on the recording and since we do not know the masters used by Tidal its a hit and miss on which recordings do improve with MQA vs say, 16/44 or 24/96 or 24/192 or the LP. But to flat out say MQA is better than all and its the way of the future of music delivery, well if thats the case I'll just keep my LP's and CD's at least I own them, because i'm 50/50 on the MQA being better than any format/medium thats been put out.
 
mep said:
Has MQA taken a position that you shouldn’t use the DSJ to play MQA files?
Click to expand...

DSJ converts MQA to DSD. Have you taken a position that that how you should judge MQA format?

I personally don’t find MQA exceptionally better or worse. Some files sound better some don’t. But at least my DAC decodes MQA the way it’s supposed to.
 
kzhtoo said:
DSJ converts MQA to DSD. Have you taken a position that that how you should judge MQA format?

I personally don’t find MQA exceptionally better or worse. Some files sound better some don’t. But at least my DAC decodes MQA the way it’s supposed to.
Click to expand...

MQA shows PS Audio DACs in their list of industry partners so why shouldn’t I judge the sound of MQA using a DAC from a company that MQA obviously approves of?

https://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/our-partners
 
I’ve been communicating with a few folks involved with MQA.

The consensus is that converting MQA to DSD is not the desired approach and is not “true” MQA since ultimately, MQA is a PCM format and not a DSD format.

To quote one source:

“MQA decided to open up their end-to-end philosophy a bit and offer 1st unfolds to those manufacturers who do not want to be restrained by MQA hardware certification demands. For this reason some early naysayers like PS Audio joined the MQA bandwagon for marketing reasons, but not whole-heartedly in their approach and implementation...”



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mike

They will tell you whatever you want to hear to further their cause and get dealers to keep pushing their gear. Since you are a PSA dealer why don't you run that MQA statement by Paul and get his input. I doubt he will agree.
 
Jack said:
Mike

They will tell you whatever you want to hear to further their cause and get dealers to keep pushing their gear. Since you are a PSA dealer why don't you run that MQA statement by Paul and get his input. I doubt he will agree.
Click to expand...

I don’t need to. The DAC’s convert everything to DSD. In that case, all bets are off for things staying constant.

Did you forget how Paul was against MQA and then decided to adopt it? What changed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
No Mike I haven't forgotten anything, but I am pretty sure you have sold DS DACs based on their ability to play MQA files and that they are certified by MQA so it's kind of convenient for them to back track when things are found to be different from what is favorable to them.
 
Jack said:
No Mike I haven't forgotten anything, but I am pretty sure you have sold DS DACs based on their ability to play MQA files and that they are certified by MQA so it's kind of convenient for them to back track when things are found to be different from what is favorable to them.
Click to expand...

I actually haven’t sold one since the flip. Haven’t sold one in years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The Directstream DACs themselves are not and never will be MQA compatible as you know. Conversdigital who manufactures the Bridge streaming card included in the DSJ and an option on the DS Sr. decided to upgrade their product to be MQA compatible hence the change in designation to Bridge II by PSA. Ayre is using the same streaming card in their products but didn't chose to enable MQA for their line while Charlie was alive. Whether or not they change time will tell. So yes a "flip" was made but it is in the Bridge and not the DAC itself kind of like Auralic is doing with their products. All software related. Other than that if you like MQA or even "adore" it like some here do then good, but if you don't care for it one way or the other like some of us then everybody gets to be happy with their choice. But contrary to the opinion of some it doesn't take a 5+ to six figure DAC to make the decision. Entirely too much of the "mine's better than yours because it cost more" going on around here lately.
 
When I compare what's available on Tidal and Qobuz, I often see that where Qobuz offers a 24/192 file (for example with the Blue Note remasters), Tidal offers a MQA version.
Often, not always.
Qobuz still has way more hi-res.

So, these remasters - that are splendid by the way - quite surely use the same masters.
I don't see the point in converting them into MQA instead of listening to them uncompressed.
Unless you don't have the bandwidth to listen to hi-res of course.
 
bart said:
So, these remasters - that are splendid by the way - quite surely use the same masters.
I don't see the point in converting them into MQA instead of listening to them uncompressed.
Click to expand...
What you are missing is those HD masters, despite being encoded/filtered at >2X minimum what any old human guy can hear, need to be refiltered to add a nice dose of aliasing distortion "folded back" into the very audible band and then reEQ'd.
Only then can they be considered "authentic".

cheers,

AJ
 
What we need to keep in mind is that early A2D converters sucked ass. The ones today aren’t a lot better, but they’re better. Anything that improves on those lousy first attempts at digital is ok by me.

Now tape direct to vinyl, that’s a whole different discussion!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top