Kick drum frequencies are way down the range at 200hz and below… The anecdotal subjective reaction of your sound engineer would not really make a case for your claimed high frequency superiority of the format.
When we look at what is recorded from cymbals etc and what is eq’d out (hi-hat freq starts at around 500hz and goes up beyond 10khz, but normally the lower ends are eq’d out), then what you’re hearing is below the fog band on the objective spectrum analysis outputs.
It’s all starting to look a little like emporer’s new clothes.
In conclusion, we’re happy for those of you who believe in it and like it, but the rest of us would be awfully grateful if we could be excused from it and left with the choice to take another path; a path which Tidal and some other commercial music organisations seem to want to block.
Is there a chance you listened to this album?
If so, I’ve got bad new for you as track 2 “Child in Time” - and tracks 6 and 7 as well - are labeled as “master”, BUT it’s regular 16/44 PCM and not 24/96 MQA like all the others.
So if the cymbals seemed so good in that particular track, then it’s because that track
was not downgraded to mqa, and all the details are still there. No fog here.
I see a golden “master” when playing tracks 1 3 4 5 (24/96) but not with
tracks 2 6 7, then it turns into a cyan “hifi” = 16/44 PCM
And yes those 3 tracks sound much better.
Maybe this albums is all mqa in the US, but it’s not here (Europe) and our friend who started about this track is from the UK so…
It actually made me realize mqa is very bad when music gets complicated (lots of frequencies happening at the same time). This is the same problem mp3 files have. When it gets complicated they mess up. The compression (“mqa-encoding”) can’t handle it.
What I don’t understand is mqa is supposed to be from the original, and the version we have here is a studio mqa file that is a remastered version from 2014.
So the original recording was actually a remaster?
I am not taking any sides here or trying to pile it on, but you see, like you have a good sense of humor.
I though your story was funny because it sounded just like all those “I didn’t tell me wife I had changed anything and she came in the room and said the music sounded much better, more clarity, she was really impressed”. lol Thats how you know you made the right decision.
My second question is what kind of sound engineer didn’t know about MQA?
Ok, just though it was funny. at least you have held on tightly to your beliefs about all this!
I can only give you my experience, it is what it is… it’s not scientific, it’s not meant to be, it’s an anecdote of a real life event by a real person listening to real music. It is what it is and if MQA was as bad as detractors profess, it would never have happened.
Also I know Kick Drums are not high frequency Doh! They sound like Kick drums via MQA… funny that
Independent Sound engineers running small studios or touring with live bands may well not know about MQA, certainly in the early days. Would you believe it, they know bugger all about Hi Fi and certainly rarely own systems like many of us here. Why not you ask? Well they get their fix with Live Music…
A remaster is an artistic decision and it can be presented in MQA as easily as the original mastering.
I cannot see how that is confusing at all. They are two different pieces of work as much as two entirely separate albums are in this regard.
Yes, they just batch process original pcms to create mqas from it.
They don’t care if it’s a remaster. Everything is “original”.
Did you know they even have “studio dot” mqas in both 24/96 and 24/192?
Check out David Bowie… you’ll find >10.
Actually they even don’t seem to care what is coming out of their encoder neither
as I still see 16/44 mqas wrapped in 24 bit flac containers.
They show up as 24/44 in Roon, but hey… they are only 16/44.
But it’s mqa, it’s allowed to use higher numbers anytime.
examples (I can show more)
These are 16/44 but show as 24/44 in Signal path, because they put them in the wrong FLACs.
Track “Stone Rose” (2L-048-SACD) from the 2L test bench.
Spectrum analysis of that 24/96 mqa after fully decoding,
shows a fog band that was not there in the original recording.
Well, “Bob” is gonna tell you that such aliasing/band adjustment is simply needed to “restore” psychoacoustics, namely that “flow of air” between speaker and listener…
My problem with MQA is in treble high frequencies, particularly vocals. I can typically tell that the regular flac version sounds better in this category. I don’t really think i can tell that much in other areas though.
All that matters to me is what sounds good to me on my system(s). I don’t hold any preconceived grudges or favoritism one way or the other. I listen to hours and hours of music every day. I’ve been retired for quite a long time and have given up all of my dangerous, adrenaline producing hobbies. Music is one of my main hobbies now.
For me, sometimes Tidal MQA sounds best. Sometimes, Qobuz 24/96 and 24/192 sounds best. Many times 16/44.1 sounds best. I think it’s probably more about the master used than the format. It would really be great if these MQA wars would cease and people would simply enjoy what they like and let others do the same.
What I wonder instead is whether at some point Bob or MQA decides to litigate this kind of grossly ignorant slander. It does not even constitute opinion since there is not the slightest attempt to understand the algorithm. It does, however, drive people away from a website like this that tolerates it.
Thats how you know you made the right decision.
