The Dragonfly is one of the few (if only) devices out there that only support the second stage of the MQA, called “render”. Takes you from 96khz to 192khz.
The first stage, called “decoding” is what some other software products support. That takes you to 96khz
Most hardware products that support MQA (the DF beeing the exception), support “decoding” + “rendering”. Taking you from 48khz to 192khz.
(obviously all the above applies to 44.1khz, 88.2khz, and 176.4khz as well)
Not exactly… 
[quote=“danny, post:41, topic:26336”]
The Dragonfly is one of the few (if only) devices out there that only support the second stage of the MQA, called “render”. Takes you from 96khz to 192khz.[/quote]
The “second unfold” which happens on the Dragonfly take you FROM the first unfold (always 2x the file’s sample rate) to the target rate. For example, Joni Mitchell’s “Both Sides Now” remains at 96KHz (a filter might be applied), whereas some 2L recordings go to 352KHz (via filters/upsampling).
The “first unfold” takes you to 2x the original FLAC file’s rate - if it was 44KHz it goes to 88KHz, if it was 48KHz it goes to 96KHz. It is DAC and configuration independent.
My experience with the “second unfold” is that it always goes to a power-of-2 upsampled rate - the 2L recordings I mentioned above go 44->88->352 for example, where the 88->352 happens in the ESS DAC in the Dragonfly.
PS: Sorry for the multiple edits, I am not smart.
And if I’m understanding all of this correctly, the only way for me to experience this at the moment with the Dragonfly Red is through the Tidal PC app (not the iPad app) and with the Dragonfly plugged directly into that computer. Is that correct?
Nope. It’s entirely down to the hardware implementation. It is absolutely allowable to up-sample the fully decoded MQA to whatever rate the renderer supports.
Ok, I meant to say that this particular release is not set to upsample to a higher rate than 96KHz (which happens to be the rate of the first unfold). The embedded data in the PCM stream after the first unfold seems to indicate both what filter to apply and how high to upsample, at least from the examples I have played.
Even though the Dragonfly input sample rate is limited to 96KHz this is not an issue at all as the first unfold never yields a rate higher than that. The Dragonfly can then filter+upsample to 384KHz, and it does so in the 2L recordings I mentioned (to 352KHz in that case). The ESS DAC in both Dragonflys go all the way to 384KHz.
Having said this, I could take the first unfold and upsample it as high as I want, but this would not be the MQA-specified upsample. Maybe that’s what you mean?
Correct. If you had a mac you could do the first unfold of MQA files with Audirvana and then have the Dragonfly render the final “unfold”. I don’t know of a way to do this on a Windows machine.
Personally I’d love to have MQA software decoding in Roon (at least partial decoding), hence why I first requested in nearly 2 years ago.
With the close links between MQA and Roon, and the fact that Tidal have had a software solution in use for several months now, I’d be surprised if Roon haven’t already got the technical solution through testing. If that were to be the case, the only genuine logical reason that springs to mind for holding off are commercial agreements. Maybe Tidal have paid to be the only MQA software decoding group for say a 6 month period?
Just hoping that Roon will get the go ahead soon.
You would use the Tidal app on a Windows machine.
I didn’t know you could use the Tidal app to play local files… How do you do that?
Sorry, I misread. Obviously you can’t at the moment. But it has to be said, what is MQA encoded that isn’t on Tidal?
2L downloads for example.
There is some 2L stuff there but only a sampler I think. In fact it makes sense to restrict their streaming output to encourage purchase of the downloads.
Not always the case. There are many MQA albums where the final decoded and rendered resolution is still 44k or 48k.
For these there is no 2x decode. The master that was available was max 44.1 (or 48k) and MQA does not upsample to create a false hi-res file (like certain hi-res sites used to sell back in the day)
In this case I am not exactly sure what the DF would do. I assume the MQA render may still happen but I am not sure if it would need decoding even at 44k.
FWIW I find many of these 44k MQA sound very good.
[quote=“ncpl, post:54, topic:26336”]
Not always the case. There are many MQA albums where the final decoded and rendered resolution is still 44k or 48k.For these there is no 2x decode. The master that was available was max 44.1 (or 48k) and MQA does not upsample to create a false hi-res file (like certain hi-res sites used to sell back in the day)
In this case I am not exactly sure what the DF would do. I assume the MQA render may still happen but I am not sure if it would need decoding even at 44k.[/quote]
Ah yes, correct. I suppose the DF could apply a specified filter anyway.
Possibly from careful mastering and/or mastering “deblurring” (as MQA calls it). Not a bad thing.
one more speculation: the management team of MQA consists of so many very experienced managers and all of them are participating in any licensing and contract negotiation to justify their high salaries, therefore that process takes some time … 
have a look at: http://www.mqa.co.uk/professional/meet-the-team
Rest assured, outside of the Hifi industry, MQA isn’t trying to do anything that is unique or particularly clever. It just seems that there are still quite a few people in the Hifi industry (the press in particularly) that still desperately want to believe and have yet to seriously consider the consequences (unintended or otherwise).
As a lifetime subscriber to Roon, and the owner of a non-MQA DAC, is one even allowed to ask whether the MQA SW decoding in Roon is coming in:
You could ask, but if you have an MQA device, streaming Tidal Masters works just great through Roon,- turn off all of the DSP features, and it passes through Roon without a hitch.
I believe weeks to months, mainly because Roon has said it is a priority.
In the case of MQA discussions regarding external licensing arrangements add a further indeterminate and appear to be continuing. Danny has said as much about this as he can further up the thread because those discussions are subject to non disclosure agreements.
Roon has tried providing an estimated delivery timetable for content in the past and the experience was bad for development and users alike. When dates were announced we had “countdown threads”. People worked themselves into various degrees of lather if times were extended. Resources that could have been spent solving the issues preventing release had to be diverted to managing expectations. I’d be very reluctant to return to that.
Mods will close down solely “are we there yet” threads because they don’t add meaningfully to discussion. Otherwise users are free to talk amongst ourselves about timing but the most that can achieve is to summarise prior announcements rather than add new information.