There is a lot of information on the subject, pre ringing, post ringing unnatural audio artefacts not known in the real world and certainly not known in Music as played live.
If I have used an incorrect term, I apologise profusely
1 Like
I wasn’t winding you up. I honestly don’t know what it sounds like. I remember Archimago releasing clips with increasing amounts of jitter to see if people could detect it. Never seen it done for temporal blur though.
1 Like
Well, that is at the heart of what MQA is about and a reason why high res sounds better that CD. That’s also what apodizing sets out to achieve.
You get rid of the blur and things come into focus.
This is why people love the analog sound of vinyl, (Pre digital corrupted Vinyl) It may have many flaws, but there is no pre ringing. MQA delivers this sound down a digital pipeline without the drawbacks.
1 Like
I think I’m just trying to propose a thought experiment… if you stripped the lossy part out of MQA, there are a number of characteristics that I think can be framed as a trade-off that is easier to debate. If MQA stopped with the “saving bandwidth” origami and delivered lossless hi-res files with authentication & DRM & the potential to have a canonical for each mastering… would that be interesting to any of us who are currently in the “anti-MQA” camp? Because I think that is an instructive question.
1 Like
I’ll bite, no audible or perceivable information is lost in MQA.
There is no DRM in MQA.
The saving bandwidth origami is how it works…
I know, people cry, but they have a master plan to implement it. (DRM) But that’s non sense. I could run people over in my car as could anyone… But guess what… We generally don’t do this willingly. People and companies could do a lot of things but don’t. That’s life…
On the origami bit, I’d have a car if it wasn’t for those bloody wheels. 
A good comparison is Natalie Merchant - Tiger Lily.
The original sounds much more organic, bass has more tone and depth.
The MQA file sounds over detailed and processed.
Listen to Carnival.
Also Fleetwood Macs dreams.
I find this typical of remastered MAQ tracks.
Are you listening in a full MQA system? I ask as my observations are the opposite. I was listening to The Bonzo Dog Doo Dah band last night. The Intro and the outro and it was all so much cleaner and more defined… Individual instruments separated out.
Playing Dr Feelgood Down by the Jetty, I heard base lines I have never perceived before. The list goes on and on…
1 Like
yep you’re pretty much the MQA Duracell bunny.
3 Likes
This game is all subjective.
I use Roon, which does the first unfold.
I don’t support MQA, and I’m not interested in buying a new DAC, when my RME ADI 2 FS sounds amazing.
Do you see the issue with MQA? its a money, control, power play.
It has nothing to do with music.
2 Likes
That’s my honest impression why is it of less value than yours?
Yes, of course it is.
I would be happy with no MQA as to would many others.
Like I stated. I would switch to Spotify HD, Amazon HD etc if Roon supported them, and they were competitively priced, and available in Australia.
I suspect Tidal wont have a Roon user advantage for much longer.
This sums up why MQA is bad for audiophiles:
https://www.linn.co.uk/blog/mqa-is-bad-for-music
I’ll take a nibble back
- no audible or perceivable information is lost: Yes it is, it might not be audible but it’s measurable and therefore perceivable. The compression IS lossy from an information theory POV, terms like “audible” and “perceivable” are just used to muddy the water. Regarding audible, is this the “use your ears” folk telling us not to use and trust ours?
- there IS DRM in MQA right now: you need to use licensed hardware/software to access the highest-quality copy. That’s just not debatable, it’s DRM…
- The saving bandwidth origami is how it works: @Chrislayeruk your enthusiasm for music, in general, do you credit BUT your postings have done little to illuminate me as to how MQA works, sorry…
It’s been a long week and sorry if this comes over as grumpy…
1 Like
UV radiations are measurable but not perceivable for a human eyes.
1 Like
Agree and I thought about that and checked the definition of perceivable first. The jury’s out on whether it’s the senses but the Oxford definition of perceive is “become aware or conscious of (something); come to realise or understand”, so not necessarily restricted to the senses. I admit that I was generous in my interpretation. Also @Chrislayeruk took the time to distinguish between “audible” and “perceivable” suggesting they’re different things.
Put another way “UV radiations are measurable but not perceivable for a human eyes.”, well if I use a UV camera I can see them and this is, effectively, “perception by proxy”.
1 Like
*** there IS DRM in MQA right now: you need to use licensed hardware/software to access the highest-quality copy. That’s just not debatable, it’s DRM…**
What you are talking about is not the DRM that the majority of the anti-MQA crowd comments on. Those individuals are worried the labels could turn on DRM and prevent people from playing those files at all without MQA decoders.
What you indicate is that without the proper hardware/software you cannot unfold to the highest quality. That is not DRM. That is no different the SACD, You cannot play a SACD without a SACD player. You cannot play a 356 or 384 file without a capable DAC. You cannot play a 4K video file without a 4K device.
2 Likes
I agree, but I’m also talking about the standard definition of DRM, it NOT just copy protection.
With all respect, I think you should check the definition of DRM, it’s a restriction on use and qualifies as DRM.
1 Like
Yes but where are speaking about audition which a sense. How to apply such perception by proxy to sound quality ?
That is plain wrong. That definition of DRM would mean that because you cannot use Verizon on ATT network that’s DRM. Because DirecTv and Dish are not interchangeable that would be DRM. Because you cannot play some WAV files on other devices that is DRM. You can play a MQA file on any 16/44 capable device. Whether you can tell the difference is the dead horse people continue to beat.
2 Likes
Spectrum analyser?
1 Like