Unfortunately, Tidal lists it as “unavailable” currently.
Philr that sounds like a different master to me.
How about the hires download version?
Actually, the Rumours album is available on TIDAL in MQA. It’s a bit weird: if one searches by albums under Fleetwood Mac, you don’t see the “M” designation for Master quality on either of the two listed Rumours albums. But if you search for, say, “The Chain” track by Fleetwood Mac, then bingo, up comes the Master track! Further, linking from there to the album reveals the entire album in MQA. Strange!
3 Likes
HI Jim. One example, picked specifically because there are so many obvious and verifiable examples of the same master, is The Smiths, _Strangeways Here We Come. The MQA and the non-MQA for the mix circa 2012 are both on Tidal, I think. But I also have the box set CD and the HDTracks version.
I’ve noticed it on such a regular basis I assumed most were having the same experience. I wonder if this is limited to the Pro-Ject S2 Digital? I mean, it is about every MQA title I have tried…louder.
Don’t get me wrong…it sounds very good. But my understanding is that turning up the gain is kind of like adding a lot of salt or sugar to something you are cooking – a crutch, people have a tendency to prefer it at first, until things are equalized. I think MQA does a lot more than this with many titles, BUT I think in some cases that seems to be the only discernible difference for me.
1 Like
Stranger still: When I searched for it last night–searching on “Fleetwood Mac”–the Rumours album didn’t appear at all. Searching some other way (don’t remember) got me to one copy. When I clicked on it, all the tracks were listed as “Unavailable.” There were no links to any other copies.
Then this morning, I do the same simple “Fleetwood Mac” search and find three copies. Unfortunately they are different issues–hence, likely, different masterings. There’s the regular issue in MQA, the “Deluxe” reissue, and the “Super Deluxe” reissue. I’ll check these out later today. Thanks.
2 Likes
Thanks James. I’ll check it out soon–later today.
Regarding The Smiths, I really like the MQA version of “The Queen is Dead.” In a word, it’s supurb. You may also listen to the non-MQA version of the album in Tidal as well. I have Roon set up with my Devialet 200 with both the Devialet and a Bluesound Node 2 in the chain. So, in order to get full benefits of MQA, I must bypass Roon and play my Bluesound Node 2 through its line out to the Devialet to get both unfolds of MQA (thus accessing the Bluesound MQA-enabled DAC). I think it sounds superior to the excellent sounding Roon playback. (Note: Devialet aficionados will know that when I send a file to the Devialet, it will re-process the signal through its DAC but it’s all about the quality of the original signal that reaches the Devialet DAC… sorry if I am confusing the issue for some!)
Thanks I will check out Queen is Dead in MQA. This weekend is my first foray into organizing MQA titles into my library rather than just happening upon them in Tidal. The spreadsheet MQA List is very helpful. Still kind of a clunky process to get them into the library, but not more so than any music library task.
1 Like
Assuming your DAC handles all three, and a new release is available in PCM, DSD, and MQA, which do you think will sound better?
1 Like
Not sure of others, but I prefer listening to MQA versions of albums. I use my Bluesound Node 2 and its line out – again, it’s accessing the MQA-enabled Bluesound Node 2 DAC but then re-processing it via the Devialet DAC. I find that MQA is profound on some albums. Not sure why but could be the original recording values. I am eager to try MQA on Roon once the first unfold is available.
3 Likes
James, you have a good ear for level. I, frankly, heard little obvious difference in level. So I recorded the analog output of a converted signal and checked the statistics. First CD-res (from Tidal):
Sorry those don’t quite line up. CD res is on the left. As you can see, it’s slightly lower in level. Also note though, that it has much more limited bandwidth. Here’s an FFT comparison. MQA is orange:
That’s an honest 96kHz recording, with none of the upward imaging seen in some MQA files. Below Nyquist, frequency response matches superbly. I’d need to think about this quantitatively–haven’t yet–but it’s possible that the difference in level could be explained by the HF removed in the 44.1 version. Doing more smoothing (to simplify the display) and zeroing in on the audible range (indeed, just through presence region), it looks like the difference is real, even in the audible range, and fairly consistent over the most audible range (which, btw, suggests that this is not the effect of aliasing)–but very small:
continuing on up to the top of the audible range, the difference is pretty consistent–at most half a dB across the audio band. Anyway, though the difference is small, you’re correct that the CD version is slightly quieter. If someone wanted to claim a slight presence-region boost in the MQA version, I wouldn’t argue.
Now I should do some listening. If these are not made from the same master, the remastering is very subtle; still, I’m not 100% convinced that these are from the same master.
Edit: Measurements above are from the first minute of “Death of a Disco Dancer.” I compared the MQA version with the CD-res version on Tidal.
Jim
3 Likes
What would those be in relation to MQA?
First you said the CD is quieter and then in your final statement you say MQA is quieter?
Sorry, I mis-typed. I’ve fixed it now. The CD version appears to be slightly lower in level.
Jim, no need to record analog output – I am dubious that will provide the level precision necessary for some comparisons. However, last spring, I used the Tidal desktop app and ancillary software to create some bit perfect 30 second captures of Tidal streams, both HiFi and MQA. I then ran DR metrics on those captures. See several of my posts in this thread (you will need to scroll to find all posts with capture data):
In short, level or mastering differences in some cases, no differences in other cases – as was expected. But the real takeaway is that digital domain comparison is possible and relatively easy to accomplish.
AJ
1 Like
As for feasibility–great, thanks. I think each is useful for different things; certainly for corroborating audible phenomena (including relative level/volume), analog output is an appropriate tool. Anyway, I’ll check out the thread and your comments…
The Smiths albums were remastered by Johnny Marr in 2017.
1 Like
That might be true, but he also ran through their catalog circa 2011. There was a box set…
Oh come on. The point was that MQA is cheating because they make the albums louder. The Smiths album on Tidal MQA is the 2017 remaster. No point comparing levels with older releases of different masters.
1 Like