MQA encoding

guest110

Super Member
MQA seems to be all the buzz at CES this year. Wonder how fast device manufacturers will respond. There was an Tidal/MQA streaming demo and Pioneer's XPD-100R portable was playing files, but hardware with built in decoders are fairly thin at the moment.
 
MQA is another attempt of content owners to sell music at "high-res" prices and not to give up exact copies of original masters (which they have to do when selling FLAC or ALAC files). No free public license for decoders is promised either, which means no official support in Linux and other open-source systems.
 
Well, I've heard it and am very impressed. Sure, no open source, but decoders will be inexpensive (For example, Meridian offers the Explorer2 USB DAC for $300). And yes, the idea (and the demos heard) is to copy directly from the studio masters in a smaller, streamable format. Meridian is WAY ahead on this, just like they were when they developed SACD and Blueray codecs. It is the future for HD streaming formats IMHO.

for_p1: Not sure why anyone would expect giving away lossless copies of masters for free would be a sustainable business model.
 
Last edited:
Streaming is what would spark my interest in MQA (through Tidal)... I'll probably never get into downloads of Hi Rez ... creating a NAS server does not appeal to me either. I do use MP3's
(greatest hits, best of, essential ... etc) for DAP's ... car & walking around.

In the future ... if I can't find it on streaming ... I'll see if I can score a copy on hard media. I view digital technology as completely ephemeral.
 
Last edited:
for_p1: Not sure why anyone would expect giving away lossless copies of masters for free would be a sustainable business model.

Who said "for free"? But when I pay $25-30 for album in high-res, I do expect content identical to the master. That is what you can find today at HDTracks, iTrax and other outlets.

But with MQA Meridian wants to create something what Sony failed with SACD - completely closed proprietary ecosystem.
 
My bad p1, somehow I misread your post, merging "give up exact copies" and "free public". It does seem many want the very source yet nothing for the record companies in today's torrent world. My wife and her entire department lost their positions at a major record label in the early Napster days so I'm a bit sensitive when folks talk about record companies and their property rights/ profitability. Sorry.
 
Who said "for free"? But when I pay $25-30 for album in high-res, I do expect content identical to the master. That is what you can find today at HDTracks, iTrax and other outlets.

But with MQA Meridian wants to create something what Sony failed with SACD - completely closed proprietary ecosystem.

Actually that's wrong on both counts, but ultimately time will tell if MQA succeeds where SACD/DSD failed.

One of the core aspirations in MQA is to guarantee that the analog you feed into your system is the same as the analog source material (master tape or whatever) negating any colorations introduced by the specific ADC and DAC components used in the process or getting content from studio to to your system. Any current hi-res download is subject to such issues introduced by the studio's ADC.

Also MQA files are totally backwardly compatible - they just appear as 44.1 or 48kHz PCM data using whatever file format you choose. If you have no MQA-aware products in the playback system they play as slightly improved CD quality. If you do have an MQA-aware DAC, the additional data is extracted to the max resolution your DAC is capable of handling. So if you play a file or stream on a phone, you get CD quality but play it through a higher end device and you may get 24/192 or whatever that DAC is capable of handling.

There's a very well done interview with Bob Stewart on the subject here;
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/meridians-master-quality-authenticated-the-interview/

As a technology, MQA seems to deliver what it promises with very few strings attached. Whether it actually succeeds will probably depend on the availability of good source material from the studios and enough marketing clout from the industry to persuade the man on the street that they care about quality above MP3s played on earbuds . .
 
Actually that's wrong on both counts, but ultimately time will tell if MQA succeeds where SACD/DSD failed.

One of the core aspirations in MQA is to guarantee that the analog you feed into your system is the same as the analog source material (master tape or whatever) negating any colorations introduced by the specific ADC and DAC components used in the process or getting content from studio to to your system. Any current hi-res download is subject to such issues introduced by the studio's ADC.

Also MQA files are totally backwardly compatible - they just appear as 44.1 or 48kHz PCM data using whatever file format you choose. If you have no MQA-aware products in the playback system they play as slightly improved CD quality. If you do have an MQA-aware DAC, the additional data is extracted to the max resolution your DAC is capable of handling. So if you play a file or stream on a phone, you get CD quality but play it through a higher end device and you may get 24/192 or whatever that DAC is capable of handling.

There's a very well done interview with Bob Stewart on the subject here;
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/meridians-master-quality-authenticated-the-interview/

As a technology, MQA seems to deliver what it promises with very few strings attached. Whether it actually succeeds will probably depend on the availability of good source material from the studios and enough marketing clout from the industry to persuade the man on the street that they care about quality above MP3s played on earbuds . .

You need to read more about technical details. First thing is that MQA codec is inherently lossy. Thus you never listen exactly what was on master tape. Then their phase and time correction only works if output master was analog tape. And only one A/D conversion happened with no further processing. In that regard it is similar to DSD, which cannot be processed at mixing and mastering either. Now the key point (I am sure this is really WHY it was designed) is embedded DRM, such only allows playback on authorized devices. In that regard it is exactly what SACD did. Even if algorithm is known, you need key to decode stream extension, and this key will likely be required to be implemented in hardware, like in SACD drives or HDMI interfaces. This also clearly separates professional DACs used in studios (whith no need of MQA decoding) from consumer DACs. This also prevents any DIY DAC build (try to obtain HDMI license for instance as an individual - good luck).
 
Who said "for free"? But when I pay $25-30 for album in high-res, I do expect content identical to the master. That is what you can find today at HDTracks, iTrax and other outlets.

.
Identical masters. Everything? Not hardly always and most probably not the norm. Would it pop your balloon to know that a grand slue of tracks from HD and i outlets are merely up-sampled redbook to 24/96? The weeds are thick in this bizness. :beatnik:
 
Identical masters. Everything? Not hardly always and most probably not the norm. Would it pop your balloon to know that a grand slue of tracks from HD and i outlets are merely up-sampled redbook to 24/96? The weeds are thick in this bizness. :beatnik:

I know some are upsampled. I also know that majority of mastering is done today (and in the past) at 24/44.1 or 24/48. But main problem to content providers is inability to control distribution, be it either CD or MP3 or FLAC downloads. Wide use of MQA will solve this problem to them. Decoders will only be available in custom silicon chips or in signed and encrypted drivers running on approved computers (this is where win10 with its trusted boot comes handy). Do you recall HDCD? If you look at MQA technical architecture, you will see that basic stream (which can be played without restriction) only has 13 bits of resolution. For anything better you need authorization keys to decode extension. Look below for encoder architecture obtained from Meridian patents:

WOGB2013051548
 
Whether it actually succeeds will probably depend on the availability of good source material from the studios

Ditto and bam. That there is the linchpin to the entire Hi-Res caper!

While they are warming up to the concept...the major labels remain reluctant to hand deliver ALL of their pristine masters to content providers. Is their experimental toe in the water? Yes. But truth be told, most content providers presently are relying on redbook stock (if that) inventory they have on hand. Then, as assembly line time allows, they up-sample that same content to qualify as Hi-Res.

There's unmitigated hype room here presently for smoke, mirrors, and "well, technically" slight of hand consumer pitches going on when it comes to "Hi-Res". You can look at numbers...just don't fall victim to listening to them.

It's intriguing, it's all the rage, it's Film at 11 folks.
 
Erm...really? That's a news flash.

Just read comments made by producers and audio engineers in various places about how they mixed and mastered albums. Most of stuff made before year 2000 (and availability of Pacific Microsonics ADC) is even worse - in 16 bit format.
 
Back
Top Bottom