I believe the diagram first appeared in A65 of https://www.computeraudiophile.com/ca/ca-academy/A-Comprehensive-Q-A-With-MQA-s-Bob-Stuart/
It is clear that conventional DSP will not work with MQA as it destroys the MQA integrity. The article points out a way to do DSP in a MQA-compatible manner, but I’ve not known a product that does it. Hopefully some day someone comes up with a MQA-compliant DSP solution.
I don’t understand why this is important. It seems most of the important benefits from decoding happens in the first unfold and if you are going to apply DSP might as well forget about the “MQA integrity” of the renderer phase. Just tweak room correction/DSP until it sounds good to you and you get to do this with any DAC as long as you use software decoding.
All i can say with any degree certainty as of now is that MQA files, fully decoded by my Bluesound Vault 2 outputting to a pair of Focal CMS65 monitors sound similar, if not identical, to hi-res pcm 24/96 hi-res files that I have purchased throughout the years.
I suppose I’d consider that a victory when one takes into account that the hi-res files I’m directly comparing against cost me anywhere from $17-$24 per album, while MQA files are currently available via Tidal for the same cost as I’d be paying monthly for redbook anyhow.
Yes it does.
It seems that the benefits of MQA are more obvious on hi end systems. I agree, MQA & 24/96 sounds very similar. But still awesome to have hi res streaming on Tidal anyway!
I guess I’ll be the dissenting voice here. In my own comparisons between PCM and MQA versions of the same material (of course, no idea if they’re from the exact same mastering), I’ve found that MQA leaves a sonic fingerprint on everything that interferes with natural-sounding timbre, room acoustics, and attack/decay. To my ear, it sounds like high-frequency artifacting, kind of like the sonic equivalent of overaggressive edge enhancement in the visual domain. I only have one MQA-capable DAC, so I can’t say if my experience carries over to other hardware.
My MQA-capable setup is:
Roon->PS Audio DirectStream (via Bridge II card)->DIY Neurochrome 8x2 Differential Preamp->Benchmark AHB2->Dynaudio Contour 30s
The other, “more serious” system I have at home does not support MQA, but I use it as an additional PCM reference:
Roon->dCS Network Bridge->Chord Blu Mk.2->Chord DAVE->Spectral DMC-30SV->Spectral DMA-300RS->Sonus Faber Amati Futuras
At some time in the near future, the dCS Network Bridge is supposed to get a firmware update that supports the first unfold, but at this point, I’m more interested in possible bugfixes/new functionality than MQA support.
I’m quite certain you want to feed this setup with some regular PCM as Mr Watts designed.
You have high res streaming on Tidal, it’s called MQA. The whole point of MQA is a sound analogous to the studio sound or live recording.
With MQA, The sample rate to the end user is irrelevant. Bigger samples does not necessarily mean better if the digital flaws (Pre/ Post ringing, Timing) issues) are present.
Sure they use high sample rates to get the best from tapes of a past era but you will find modern digital recordings for MQA are 24/48 and all the musical information is there.
If you don’t want MQA, then Tidal currently isn’t for you as it’s there current USP in the high res world.
I’m not saying High Res files don’t sound better than CD files. From MQA’s point of view, they are still flawed.
I guess we can have anything we want, but we can’t have everything. When was it any differant?
All the above is my understanding of things now.
I think everyone here knows there’s MQA on Tidal including me.
Here’s my advice to people who’re desperately trying to find out if MQA sounds better or worse than Redbook rips. Listen to MUSIC instead of playback formats!