I have a Nuprime Evolution DAC, and almost any MQA recording superior to red book. You should find an mqa capable system and listen to Magnificat, recorded in Norway. If that doesn’t convince you, then nothing will.
1 Like
I agree 100 per cent!
1 Like
I do have precisely the configuration and setting you are looking for.
My DAC is a Project Pre-Box S2 Digital and have configure it under ROON to do FULL MQA by Hardware.
That means ROON 's MQA Software Decoder is turned OFF so the S2D takes care of both Unfolding and Rendering by Hardware.
The Quality of the sound is better than anything I have heard before.
If somebody has experienced the following:
-
ROON doing just the Unfolding by software to a DAC that does not support MQA or
-
ROON doing the low level decoding MQB (That means ROON makes the unfolding by software and the DAC makes the Rendering by hardware) using the Dragonfly Red or similar DAC’s then…
¡¡¡YOU HAVE NOT HEARD THE REAL QUALITY OF AN MQA RECORDING !!!
Only with a Full MQA Capable DAC that allow you for a LOSSLESS MQA signal path you will experience and understand the true wonder that MQA is.
Here is an image from my own setting, the shortest and purest possible MQA Signal Path.
Hope it helps.
-Marin Rene.
1 Like
Again, let me steer the discussion back on track. Here the main point is not about MQA sounding better than redbook. It is about the extra difference between software unfolding vs. hardware unfolding+rendering. The comparison must be done with the same MQA-compatible DAC on the same MQA track (both 24-96 or 24-192 master).
I have experienced MQA in three different scenarios:
-
MQA Software Unfolding with TIDAL and LKS MH-D004 DAC with no MQA support.
-
MQA Software Unfolding with TIDAL and MQA Rendering with Dragonfly Red.
-
MQA FULL HARDWARE DECODING WITH TIDAL AND PRO-JECT PRE BOX S2 DIGITAL.
For a short response in terms of sound quality on the very same audio chain always using the DAC as a Pre Amp with an Awarded Margules U280 Tube Amp and two settings with Apogee Centaurus or PSB Synchrony One Speakers a gross quality measure from 1 to 10 would be like this:
Setup 1: 6
Setup 2: 8
Setup 3: 10 (PSB’s are more robust on the lower end, Apogee’s are far better on Soundstage)
Hope this is the right kind of answer you are looking for.
-Marin Rene.
This is helpful, but it could simply mean that the Pro-ject is a better DAC. Have you tried Pro-ject with MQA decoding turned off while Tidal does the software-unfolding?
Yes of course, in that case the S2D displays “MQB” meaning that it is only doing the Rendering and the Unfolding has already been done by TIDAL.
Only when the S2D makes the FULL MQA DECODING the display shows "MQA"
The sound quality difference is clearly noticeable, depending upon of course the resolution of the other sound chain components and the recording quality.
You might want to try this one that I found very revealing:
or this also great for the voice zone:
By the way, the recording suggested by Dave_Matison is a truly great example of a 24 bits and 352.8 Khz recording.
1 Like
A truly great example of how mastering is what matters most, and how good 17/96 can sound, you mean 
.
(N.B: MQA never, ever, goes above 17/96. Anything above that is interpolated. It simply is not some type of techno-wizardry that’d losslessly compress DXD 10 to 1, and claims to anything else are either misunderstandings due to aggressive and confusing marketing, or flat-out lies made by marketeers)
Are you telling me that the 24 / 352.8 is fake?
If it’s MQA / Tidal (as indicated by the logo in the upper right corner), then yes it is interpolated. That isn’t to say it can’t sound good (it can), it’s just that it isn’t anything more than tarted-up 17/96, and that’s fine as long as you’re fine with 17/96.
If 2L sells the actual DSD file, then that’s another matter entirely and I’m mistaken (I couldn’t find it on their store).
[edit: my wrong, you can get the DSD from Onkyo if you’re Japanese, and what looks like a PCM from HDTracks]
Yes, I’ve done that, and MQA is superior. [Moderated]
6 posts were merged into an existing topic: MQA disappointing
I am not an MQA hater. I have a highly resolving system and the Meridian Explorer 2 DAC is my DAC. I use a Sonore ultraRendu as my Roon endpoint feeding into a 2006-vintage Mark Levinson #326 preamp that feeds a McInstosh MC452 amp, with High Fidelity XLR Cables, powering B&W 804D3 speakers.
I listen to Tidal and Qobuz. Roon allows me to pick and choose versions. On my particular system, with that little $200 DAC, some of the best sound is with an MQA 192kHz MQA format. That said, on some songs, the Qobuz 192kHz Non-MQA files sounds better. Could be the master recording quality itself influencing things. I listen loud a lot, around 88-92db, so flaws are amplified.
I know my DAC is the weakest link in my sonic chain.It sounds really good on not so complex stuff like instruments separated by space, but on complex loud mixes it gets muddied together. I have on my wish list for when they start shipping new orders again a PS AUDIO Direct Stream DAC with the Network Bridge II option, which allows for MQA decoding and Roon endpoint Ethernet connection.
In other words, MQA is coming along for the ride. What I don’t know, and I think is what you are asking, is whether I will prefer MQA on the PS Audio to non-MQA files. I have no way to know yet. My best guess is that some will sound better and some won’t.
I think the sonic improvement of the PS Audio DAC in my system will pretty much raise everything to a quality level MQA may not matter as much. a $200 DAC to a $6900 DAC is a quantum leap.
I think the reason MQA sounds good on my $200 Meridian is that some of the timing issues are resolved. I don’t think the PS Audio DAC has much time issues. I think you need to consider it when contemplating a DAC upgrade.
I hope this helped your question.
Loyd
I suspect that this will turn out to be the case, but it would be interesting to hear your opinion once you have had the chance to listen to your new DAC.
I will certainly let you know. They supposedly start shipping new orders in May but since they are working on an even more expensive DAC they may be delayed past that. They’re also working on a new speaker line. I still am amazed the little $200 Meridian can sound as good as it does. I heard James Taylor fire and rain on Qobuz 96 kilohertz this morning and it’s the best sound I’ve ever had in my position so to think it gets better from here well that’s exciting! An interesting footnote is that I first tried to listen to that cut on tidal mqa but it cut out mid song LOL
This blog has been quoted in another thread, but I think it’s worth posting here.
It seem to clarify that an ‘MQA DAC’, in other words a DAC that can use the MQA filters, is indeed required to get the most out of MQA stream.
1 Like
Yes…
There is a difference between saying “This was from a 352 master” and “This is 352”.
1 Like
I have similar gear and have had a different experience.
The difference between just the ‘unfold’ done in Roon and streamed to the 818v3 vs the unfold being performed in the 818v3 itself was enough for me to notice a settings change I hadn’t initiated caused by a Roon update -
Bear in mind, beyond this consideration, how much of a difference you hear will also depend on the partnering equipment, room, etc. E.g., for an MQA final render to really be worthwhile, your amps and speakers need to meet quite specific specs in terms of bandwidth and tweeter transient response time, etc.
The difference between equipment at different price points, and different design philosophies, etc, will all come into play as normal, MQA is great at sorting the recording getting into your DAC unmolested, but it doesn’t negate other factors occurring after it in the audio chain.