Is MQA in your Future?

I do not have a DAC to do MQA, nor will I buy one so why bother asking me. I CAN hear differences between the various FLAC high res frequencies. That is all I need to know.

I heard MQA before - I could hear differences. That was enough for me, I have made my mind up then and there, it was that different. That was on a very high end system too (Wilson Speakers, D'Agostino Amp and pre, the DAC was an early MYTEK MQA).

Based on your own posts concerning that "test" over these many pages, that "test" is fraught with questions, both on the methods and materials used, and the biased opinions of the participants going in.
 
X is Hz as he described it. since DXD file can have sounds up to 200K.
index.php


So are those signals 100-plus dB down and > 50kHz original harmonic content of the signal or sampling artifacts of the "DXD" -- I am assuming that the two MQA traces (decode and render) are the 'bad guy' traces(??).
 
I do not have a DAC to do MQA, nor will I buy one so why bother asking me. I CAN hear differences between the various FLAC high res frequencies. That is all I need to know.

I heard MQA before - I could hear differences. That was enough for me, I have made my mind up then and there, it was that different. That was on a very high end system too (Wilson Speakers, D'Agostino Amp and pre, the DAC was an early MYTEK MQA).

I realize that you don't have an MQA DAC. That point is crystal clear but you're missing my point. You do not need an MQA DAC to play an MQA file (they will play on any DAC) so I'm asking you to compare both the MQA & 16/44 samples I provided on your non-MQA DAC and tell us what you hear, specifically.

An MQA file is supposed to sound the same (some claim better) than the equivalent 16/44 sample when played on a non-MQA DAC. Others claim that an MQA encoded file will sound worse than 16/44 when played on a non-MQA-DAC.

Point is that I'm very curious to see if the MQA samples I linked sound worse, equivalent or better than the 16/44 on your equipment and regular DAC.

Your DAC will play both. Let us know what you hear.
 
Last edited:
Koolaid taste great! Whats the problem here? (says the disciple in the compound.. )

Apparently the anti Tidal Masters is sweet tasting itself because I’m seeing a lot of opinion based on absolutely no experience with the service that was asked about by the original poster and the media delivery system in question, Tidal Masters MQA. Links to equipment manufacturers and anti-MQA threads started before the service was even up with MQA. Meanwhile more and more manufacturers are coming on board, updates are being pushed to older hardware and player software for no charge blowing that accusation completely out of the water.

People say it’s lossy in one breath while in the next they post , “enjoy it because it’s only CD quality.” Which is it? They have no idea because they have based their entire opinion on 3rd and 4 hand opinions or tests full of issues that were not even testing actual Tidal Masters files.
 
Last edited:
Apparently the anti Tidal Masters is sweet tasting itself because I’m seeing a lot of opinion based on absolutely no experience with the service that asked about by the original poster and the media delivery system in question, Tidal Masters MQA. Links to equipment manufacturers and anti-MQA threads started before the service was even up with MQA. Meanwhile more and more manufacturers are coming on board, updates are being pushed to older hardware and player software for no charge blowing that accusation completely out of the water.

People say it’s lossy in one breath while in the next they post , “enjoy it because it’s only CD quality.” Which is it? They have no idea because they have based their entire opinion on 3rd and 4 hand opinions or tests full of issues that were not even testing actual Tidal Masters files.
My gripe has not been about the sq of MQA, but the control over the music industry and ultimately how it will affect the future music I buy. Having a proprietary system imposed on all music seems to be what is happening although you would call that speculation. All one has to do is look at the big picture. All those 50cent CDs out there at garage sales, flea markets, second hand stores simply refuse to die. Why is this important? Because the music industry doesn't make any more money on them once they are sold. They never thought about this when digital was first getting going, but you can bet that they are now.

Music could well be going the way of software, either restricted to one or 3 devices or now going subscription based. Once industry gets fully on board with this or something like it, just watch how restricted it becomes. They will want to sell us a copy for your house, one for the car etc, and forget about ripping to a hard drive, they will be locked down.

I fully realize you don't care, that you never intend to buy another music file again, and with your military discount, it is cheap enough, at least for now, but I, and others do care about control like this over the music we will buy and listen to.

Just want to say it isn't all about you and your desire to stream. If it were I would wish you well, but we are all getting drug along into this one way or another and I don't like it. Flac hi rez is as good as MQA sound quality and it doesn't have the potential hooks in it. Bandwidth is not an issue, why convert all our future music over to something that can so easily become simply a way to control it?
 
"I fully realize you don't care, that you never intend to buy another music file again"

Where in the world do you get this stuff?? I buy music, HD track hi-rez files all the time, new and sometimes used records, used CD's, new SCAD's.
 
If you are worried about what MQA might bring with it don't be so until Smartphones start coming standard with it.

That is by far the largest music player market.

Eric
 
"I fully realize you don't care, that you never intend to buy another music file again"

Where in the world do you get this stuff?? I buy music, HD track hi-rez files all the time, new and sometimes used records, used CD's, new SCAD's.
Oh my bad. That was soneone else talking about MQA files that had no interest in buying. But it may well be in all our future that MQA files will be all that there is to buy. Something is driving this forward and it is not the flimsy argument of reduced bandwidth. The audio publications especially are pushing it almost with an agenda in mind.
,
 
Last edited:
Streaming bandwidth IS an issue for some people (me).

I don't expect to have 10-20 MBps download speeds in the near future -- unless the gov't intervenes with BB carriers. Unlikely. No 4K either, for that matter. Just 8 MBps. Even my Verizon Unlimited plan is throttled after I use 15 GB of hotspot data. So that's not an option really.

But that's my choice based on where I live. I envy those who have high speed internet.

The graphs shown earlier show DSD artifacts above 50 kHz - no musical information there folks, just noise. It's an artifact of DSD.

I look at MQA like HDCD. That didn't exactly take off.

I'm loving Tidal but I fear it will die an early death - (it continues to lose money) and we'll be stuck with 320 kBPS of Apple Music and Amazon whatever. That will suck.

I'm not looking forward to that and had some hope that MQA might help solidify high Rez streaming services. Now I'm not so sure.
 
So....will this issue reach consensus in 2018?
I thought it reached consensus in 2018 -- January 14th, to be specific; i.e., yesterday. I thought we all agreed that MQA is a pointless moneygrab and yet another bleak attempt by music-industry middlemen to grab an unfair and controlling slice of the creative arts pie.

...

We didn't agree to that?

Oh.
 
I thought it reached consensus in 2018 -- January 14th, to be specific; i.e., yesterday. I thought we all agreed that MQA is a pointless moneygrab and yet another bleak attempt by music-industry middlemen to grab an unfair and controlling slice of the creative arts pie.

...

We didn't agree to that?

Oh.

Should someone send an email to Meridian, Tidal, Deezer,etc and let them know? It would be decent to give them time to look for new jobs.
 
Interesting discussion. Some thoughts and attempts to clear up some misinformation:

  • None of my comparisons involve MQA to Hi-res downloads. I have decided to never buy music again. I'm not interested in paying $20-30 for an album anymore. I'd rather pay $20 a month to consume, on average, 100 albums a month. I'm committed to streaming for the rest of my life. But that's just me. So when you're asking "Why not just buy the HD Track version?" Because it would cost me thousands of dollars more. Then I have to worry about the other crap associated with owning music. No thanks.
  • No one listening to MQA is buying MQA. I'm not even sure you can buy MQA. We're streaming it at no additional cost. I haven't invested a dime into it. But I get to enjoy it every day. Cool. (Of course if you don't have an MQA DAC and really want MQA, you have to buy that. I already had one.)
  • I participated in a blind test of MQA too at my audio club. We compared CD quality vs MQA (both off Tidal through the same MQA enabled DAC/streamer). Everyone heard at least some positive differences over the CD versions of most (not all) tracks. One person said it wasn't worth investing anything in MQA, another left and immediately bought an MQA DAC and signed up for Tidal. You may interpret that however you'd like.
  • For those asking about what the consumer gets out of it: For me, it's more than the sound quality improvements over Redbook. It's the artist authentication that you're listening to an untouched master, exactly as it was when the studio engineer turned off the lights and the artist said "That's it." Now, this will spark another 13 pages of arguments I'm sure. Of course there are exceptions to this. If you're listening to a 1940 recording and the artist is long gone, and the rights to the master have changed hands 6 times, how can you be sure you're listening to the "authenticated" master? That's fair. But this benefit is not nothing. Here is an example for everyone to try:
Aretha Franklin - "Do Right Woman, Do Right Man" off the album 'I Never Loved A Man The Way I Loved You'. Play the CD version. Sounds good. Has that typical pop mix where the music is clustered in the center of the mix. Great. Now play the MQA version. BAM! The difference hits you right away. The band just spread out to their typical locations on stage. This is a true stereo reproduction. You have the bass player way to the left. Drums are at the right. Aretha keeps her presence front and center. It sounds so much better. Not because the sound quality itself has improved, although maybe it has. But maybe most importantly is that this is what Aretha intended. And I see why. I don't know why some knucklehead at the record company decided that consumers can't handle a truly stereo-separated image. Maybe because when they pop the CD in their car stereo, they expect all the music to come from the same place. Whatever. But I'm glad we now have access to the original master, because it's just plain better.

THAT'S the biggest benefit to me.
 
But I'm glad we now have access to the original master, because it's just plain better.
I'd like access to the original master too, but streamed in a lossless format, not a lossy format. MQA, despite what appears to be some armwaving around the definition of "lossless" vs "lossy", appears to be lossy.
 
Back
Top Bottom