Anders I’ve never described the sound of MQA.
We all know you like MQA. I truly believe that in your system it might require Bob’s filters to sound it’s best. Many love Ayre and how their filters match in systems as well.
1 Like
No it isn’t if it is Authenticated. Bob had an answer for everything! The point being with a blue light you are not just trusting MQA to do a good job, you have third party corroboration! Now, I am fully aware that is marketing at its best, but it would be his response I think!
Marketing speak and a fair assessment on your part to indicate it as such. It brings up a question for me, who is the third party in the corroboration and what credentials or experience with the original master gives them the expertise to authenticate it?
We already have had some original mastering engineers indicate the MQA version isn’t what they envisioned it to sound like. Yet the blue light comes on.
Dr Tone I apologize for my comment about that you described Analog Sound!
You was answering a completely different question! Sorry
Yes I love MQA and maybe it’s like your writing!
MQA maybe is perfect for my system, but so is DSD and PCM as well!
I have beginning to think that my ears are damaging after 40 years of load music, maybe I shall go and testing them!
Love & Respect
I know my ears are damaged. But oddly they now work as a tool to quickly point out treble issues in components and listening spaces. My right ear is super sensitive to it and will fatigue fast.
next step: not interested in digital anymore and forget to login 
I would say, both technical expertise and subjective listening. You need the in-depth knowledge how to do a proper mastering. Your ears can tell how good it is going to sound. However, subjective is a very personal, so if it sounds good to you, it may not necessarily sound good to others.
Well I did my time comparing MQA with originals from 2L’s sample files and it can sound remarkably like the original on my mid tier kit. If it is truly that capable then one can only presume it ends up sounding like it is supposed to!
It will be system dependent. Personally I find the new ESS to be very close to analog but without any warmth. Rather thin sounding and extremely resolving. At moderate volumes, I like a tube preamp to warm up the sound.
From my understanding those got special treatment, what’s happening mass at the studios is a rather vague process.
You should bring your Benchmark over and compare it to the Mirus Signature Pro. It has everything you like about the ESS plus not thin at all and has warmth.
I think I remember you being in Calgary?
But they are not all Authenticated with a capital A! Just MQA encoded!
2 Likes
I find ESS is rather ‘thin’ and highly revolving in the highs but the mid and bass are where it is somehow lacking. It is quite consistent with every ESS DACs I heard to date even with different implementation. The Asahi-Kasei or AKM DACs tends to sound a bit ‘warm’ in the mid while overall texture is ‘thicker’ with the highs is ‘silky’ smooth. Overall, AKM have a more consistent textures from the low to the highs.
Of course implementation can make ESS sound a bit more ‘warmer’ by implementing a tube line output stage or a tube pre-amp but the typical sound signature of ESS is still there.
I did compared with 2L DXD master vs the processed MQA version of the similar recordings and quite consistently I can listen the different in tonal quality. I would say the processed MQA version sound a bit ‘sweeter’ and a bit more ‘thicker’ than the DXD masters. However, DXD masters devoid of any colorations (transparency) while the dynamic range of the overall music contents are much better than the processed MQA version. I still prefer the DXD master when it come listening to studio sound. For the processed MQA version when compared with the CD, I would say MQA sound better than CD quality.
That I wrote about and you know is referring to!
Is that my Studio Mentor said to me, when I was 15 year!
So of course have my technical experience, developed in the years.
But not by reading books, by working with it!
I may have not wrote properly and you may have misunderstood me!
Your touching a bit that I have discussed with other producers, for many years and also Mastering Engineers have been involved!
But it’s not about MQA and we who’s been discussed it, well we haven’t come through to anything else but it’s a matter of taste!
Love & Respect
I like the Benchmark implementation of ESS. The thin sound is because it has among the lowest 2nd harmonic and 3rd harmonic distortion due to THD compensation. It is the sound of accuracy. It has no added warmth.
1 Like
Hi @MusicFidelity
It’s a good and nice reading about your comparing. Your ending words are great, because that comparing haven’t been talked much about!
I copying you straight from your writing, I hope it’s okay for you!
@MusicFidelity “For the processed MQA version when compared with the CD, I would say MQA sound better than CD quality”.
But is it so much music on DXD as on MQA, by that does I of course mean (Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Fleetwood Mac, Phil Colin, Coldplay, Tina Turner, Steely Dan, and so on and on…)? Or is it like DSD, most classic music
I wonder because I haven’t checked it out, the same is with Hi-Res that’s also is a complement for whose that not like MQA?
Okay it’s another great factor between the DXD, DSD and Hi-Res!
Compared to MQA and even if the most music albums, are in the other music format, so is MQA free or it’s coming with a TIDAL HIFI subscribe!
So for example myself should a new Brooklyn + Dac or the Manhattan II, becomes cheaper to buy against buy and download all the MQA music I have in DXD, DSD or Hi-Res Format!
It’s a huge parameter to take into this discussion, anyway for myself and I think many other people, or that’s your fought about it?
It’s a lot of money, the most DSD Music I have buying costs more, pretty much more than CDs! The same thing is with SACD (that almost all CD players or Blu-ray). Today can play!
MQA needs a special Dac for getting the best out of that Format!
I guess/believe that a Manhattan II, PS Audio DS both with the extra card or the new Auralic Aries G1/G2 as streaming to their new Auralic Vega G1/G2 DAC’s! To Auralic so does it make a Huge Difference to use their new Aries G1 or G2, as a streamer connected to their new Vega G1 or G2 DAC’s! When I hope that MQA sounds Much better than using a Meridian Explorer 2 
But to the ones who don’t like MQA or believe that it’s big flopping, Music Format! They probably say, buying DXD or Hi-Res music instead for spending that amount of money on expensive DAC’s!
In one way so can I actually, also thinking like that! Yes you was reading right!
But on the same time, so does I naturally think, if MQA “in my ears and giving me so much joy, with my E2 Dac”!
How much more would I Love MQA, if I buy one of whose expensive DAC’s and expensive products use to sound great!
Of course so will I listening to each one more than one time, before I decide who’s the lucky winner! So we will see what it will be!
Love & Respect
Auralic advises their customers to play regular PCM even if only redbook over MQA to get the best experience from Auralic hardware.
1 Like
They would. No love lost there!
Because they implemented their own renderer and realized some shortcomings with MQA like reduced dynamic range?
No love lost would definately be Bob’s feelings towards Auralic.