Tidal and MQA

Mr Peabody said:
" Lenbrook (owner of PSB, NAD, Bluesound and, since September, MQA) announced it was joining forces with HDTracks to launch a new MQA-powered hi-res service to rival Tidal, Qobuz, Apple Music and Amazon Music. So MQA streaming does live on..."

I think the quicker this service can get into place the better the chances. Hopefully there will be enough fans to give it a go.

Tidal also dropped 360 Reality, Sony sure seems to be hit and miss with the formats they have. I think Apple will keep it alive though, at least from the impression I get from Apple maniac friends, LOL
Click to expand...

I am not a user of streaming services; therefore, I assume my opinion is fairly minimal if not completely useless :). However, one of my biggest fears is that if this "partnership" goes forward I fear that HDTracks may take a huge overall hit.

HDTracks is one of the best sources for digital downloads. I purchase many many downloads from them and fear that if they lose a bundle in this "partnership" it might hurt their digital download side of the equation as well. MQA has proven, several times now, that although there is a small vocal following, it has not been a money maker for anyone who has become partnered with it.

Also, my personal experience with MQA is that I did give it a good listen to see if, for my needs, it is worthy. It was not.

An artist I am acquainted with was a very early on adopter of DSD as an improved digital format. He recorded his albums in DSD. He has stated in no uncertain terms that DSD is the most "analog" sounding digital format. Sounds the closes to when he is performing live. I 100% concur with his assessment. He is also a proponent of MQA and has made his catalog available in MQA. He likes MQA for portable and streaming use because DSD is simply not a viable option for streaming.

He sent me some of his albums in MQA format so that I could compare them to the DSD version. My Astell&Kern player has two very good DAC chips built in (ESS and AKM). I can choose between them. It is capable up to DSD256 and also does full MQA. I also have a very high-quality balanced cable for my Abyss headphones. Either chip can work through the balanced outputs. My comparison opinion is that while MQA sounded good and is certainly better than the "Redbook" quality that most streaming services offer, it does not compare to DSD when listening to locally stored files.

Since I do not stream, and all of my digital side of my system is played using Roon and HQPlayer, MQA simply is not worthy. I purchase my music and play it through my system from locally stored files and carry a considerable amount on my portable as well (both PCM and DSD files).
 
I hope that everything doesn’t just go back to 16/44 but bet that happens on a lot of albums. I’d be surprised if studios ever allow full catalogs on 24/192.
 
“replaced by the highest quality FLAC version that has been distributed to TIDAL”

Funny how it does t say hires or not.
 
When I got my N05xd I was receiving the full MQA, now that MQA isn't there I can tell you it assuredly had its own sound. If someone claims not to like it that's subjective. I miss it.

After the 24th my system sound degraded when I lost MQA.Not small, before totally panicking I thought to check for updates, there was one waiting for my ACS10. After getting that loaded it helped a lot. There was still a tonal quality that I wasn't quite enjoying. I even went back to my Levinson DAC for a listen. It sounded familiar and I liked what I heard. Going back to the N05xd DAC it was admittedly better but still I wasn't fully satisfied. Then I remembered the filters, the FIR filter was like something aurally snapped into place. I toggled through the other filter and turning them off, FIR was the one. I like what I am hearing now, in some, aspects, better than ever.

Would I go back to MQA it would take an A/B comparison. MQA did something to give the music a playing live sound, aur, depth, I'm not sure. MQA also seemed to smooth out the sound. I am really at a loss for the adjectives to come close explaining what I heard.

I also remember comparing MQA to non-MQA same songs back when, the difference wasn't like what I heard around the 24th. This had me wondering if Tidal changed anything else or was Aurender's MQA core decoder still somehow effecting regular files. You wouldn't think so, but I remember turning that off along time ago just to see what happens and it had a degrading affect when off.

I've been checking resolution, my Yes albums that were MQA are now 96k and 192k FLAC, it Looks like a good number of albums remain in high res. I've seen some that are 24 bit but 44.1k.
 
There seemed to be a lot more MQA fans before their marketing strategy was debunked, that and there was a surprising amount of pushback from hardware companies that saw no logic in paying for a digital compression scheme with flac already here. In my system the higher bitrate mqa did compare favorably to flac and I didn't mind paying extra for it. Hopefully HRAudio becomes available to me and I can purchase the albums I want.
 
Mr Peabody said:
When I got my N05xd I was receiving the full MQA, now that MQA isn't there I can tell you it assuredly had its own sound. If someone claims not to like it that's subjective. I miss it.

After the 24th my system sound degraded when I lost MQA.Not small, before totally panicking I thought to check for updates, there was one waiting for my ACS10. After getting that loaded it helped a lot. There was still a tonal quality that I wasn't quite enjoying. I even went back to my Levinson DAC for a listen. It sounded familiar and I liked what I heard. Going back to the N05xd DAC it was admittedly better but still I wasn't fully satisfied. Then I remembered the filters, the FIR filter was like something aurally snapped into place. I toggled through the other filter and turning them off, FIR was the one. I like what I am hearing now, in some, aspects, better than ever.

Would I go back to MQA it would take an A/B comparison. MQA did something to give the music a playing live sound, aur, depth, I'm not sure. MQA also seemed to smooth out the sound. I am really at a loss for the adjectives to come close explaining what I heard.

I also remember comparing MQA to non-MQA same songs back when, the difference wasn't like what I heard around the 24th. This had me wondering if Tidal changed anything else or was Aurender's MQA core decoder still somehow effecting regular files. You wouldn't think so, but I remember turning that off along time ago just to see what happens and it had a degrading affect when off.

I've been checking resolution, my Yes albums that were MQA are now 96k and 192k FLAC, it Looks like a good number of albums remain in high res. I've seen some that are 24 bit but 44.1k.
Click to expand...
From my own and others' tests, it is clear that MQA utilizes a significant amount of DSP to get its "sound". The easiest way to determine this for oneself is to go to nugs.net and download some digitally recorded music in both 24/96 FLAC and MQA. The source files are the 24/96 FLAC, the MQA files are generated from them and they do not sound the same; in general I find that MQA produces a wider soundstage and a "softer" treble, each of which can be desirable. The point is, though, that it is clearly NOT an accurate reproduction of the original recording, and whatever listeners may like about MQA can be reproduced on a digital audio workstation with appropriate plug-in apps.
 
rbbert said:
From my own and others' tests, it is clear that MQA utilizes a significant amount of DSP to get its "sound". The easiest way to determine this for oneself is to go to nugs.net and download some digitally recorded music in both 24/96 FLAC and MQA. The source files are the 24/96 FLAC, the MQA files are generated from them and they do not sound the same; in general I find that MQA produces a wider soundstage and a "softer" treble, each of which can be desirable. The point is, though, that it is clearly NOT an accurate reproduction of the original recording, and whatever listeners may like about MQA can be reproduced on a digital audio workstation with appropriate plug-in apps.
Click to expand...

Definitely apparent the treble was manipulated. With a regular track not only is treble more prominent but the decay is better with more harmonics.
 
I don't have any mqa downloads, wish I did, but have no tracks to currently compare back to back. I do remember when Tidal began offering EVERYTHING in mqa 16/44 I heard no improvement and thought changing the base format was a bridge too far. As a high res alternative I think mqa can hold its own in listening comparisons and should be regarded as such.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top