Yes, correct.
I already messaged him.
1 Like
I will be happily surprised if it turns out that MQA Ltd. has allowed anyone to do the first unfold and then touch that stream in any manner, DSP, up-sample, or otherwise.
It may be that it, just like some MQA DACs, are just displaying the original file value from the header/control stream and not what the software or DAC is actually doing.
It is unlikely MQA will allow post unfold to undergo DSP without affecting the final rendering process. This final rendering can only be done by hardware DAC which is of course licensed, one good example is Berkeley DAC.
If we are limited to first unfold(MQA core) in Roon then the maximum sample frequency reflected on an external DAC will always shows 88.2/96kHz even though Roon will detect something higher. Ironically, people will question why their DAC display differently from Roonās detectionā¦ This added some confusion.
This has been the case up to now. Weāll have to wait and see what MQA Ltd have allowed Roon to do.
Roon havenāt confirmed what has been allowed post 1st unfold and what hasnāt been allowed, so we wait.
But remember this reply by Danny a long while back. Of course what was FINALLY AGREED with MQA Ltd may have changed a lot since this. I have to re-emphasise a 3rd time, weāre all guessing because we donāt have a clue what was finally agreed. As long as this is understood, guessing can be fun 
My initial idea is if Roon have an option to allow maximum up-sample after post unfold to match the maximum sample rate of an external DACs then thereās a high chance that ārenderingā process can be applied, making this almost an ideal solution when comparing to a hardware MQA DAC.
If it doesnāt it means MQA doesnāt allow to break the compatibility when some have a ārenderingā built in to their DACs. I guess we have to wait and see, so far it is not clear on their parts.
I am talking about the rate received by the DAC.
At home now and can test a little more (Audirvana + Dragonfly Red):
When playing an MQA file, I see the following for the various settings of the DAC type:
1- āNo MQA Deviceā --> Signal is unfolded to 96KHz but DF does NOT identify an MQA stream (pink light --> receiving standard 96KHz stream)
2- āMQA Renderer Deviceā --> DF receives MQA @96KHz and renderers it (purple light --> receiving MQA 96KHz stream)
3- āMQA Decoder Deviceā --> DF shows itās getting a 48KHz stream (it cannot do first unfold and it is not done in A+ obviously)
All of the above with upsampling turned OFF. So my guess would be that āNo MQA Deviceā is indeed unfolding to 2x original sample rate but without any MQA rendering bits added.
Whether that unfolding gets turned off when upsampling is enabled is the question. I very much doubt this is the case, I think it is indeed upsampling an unfolded stream. Damien will let us know hopefully.
Another option is to capture the stream and analyze it with MusicScope sayā¦
Would not be surprised if they unknowingly have let A+ do this.
Indeed and this is why I asked, how do you know (the bold)?
It can only be a guess because thereās been no indication anywhere yet that A+ is upsampling the 1st unfold.
Weāre all just going in circles until Damien confirms or itās seen on an analyser as you suggested. I donāt have any software to check unfortunately otherwise I definitely would.
Mans (on CA Forum) would easily be able to verify, given his MQA analyses and he uses (and contributes to) A+.
It is possible for someone to come up with a MQA-compliant DSP / room correction solution that will comply with the MQA rendering requirements. See Q65 of
1 Like
The concept advertized by MQA is that the D-to-A is as close to the original as possible. As such, it would make the most sense to do the complete decoding - ie first unfold followed by a choice of upsampling filter and target rate - before applying DSP.
Hey Roon kids: Still havenāt heard from you on this one!
Tell MQA to keep its grubby, lossy, rights-management bullcrap, get-quick-rich mits off of my music, my server, computer, DAC and my stereo system.
I donāt like it, I donāt want it, I donāt need it and I donāt want Bob Stuart mucking around in my music and property.
A pox on MQA and all its pimping hucksters.
2 Likes
I canāt tell if you like MQA or not?! 
This link was just posted on the Auralic forum: https://www.computeraudiophile.com/ca/reviews/mqa-a-review-of-controversies-concerns-and-cautions-r701/
It voices my concerns as well. Afraid it will a become dominant threat.
The CA thread is actually the most objective and straightforward discussion I have seen so far.
On MQA, I am on the fence. If it was the case that a substantial portion of MQA albums sounded amazing, I would be sold. But this is not the case. For the record I have a decent system with a full-MQA-decoding DAC, so I can speak from actual personal experience.
The massive amount of gibberish spouted by MQA Co regarding all sorts of unfounded claims also does not engender any good will with me frankly.
Like I said, if the sound blew my mind, I would be sold. But it does not.
Has Roon stated their position and opinion regarding these issues with MQA?
I donāt know what you mean. Roon is playback software and they currently support MQA as it is simply a matter of playing back streams bit-perfect to an MQA DAC.
Roon would like to do at least the first-unfold, which is currently supported by software like the TIDAL native app, Audirvana, and a few others. I have heard there are plans for that. But Roon does not (and should not in my opinion) take sides here.