If you restricted yourself to the first unfold, which is device independent, then there should be no issue - the current code out in TIDAL/A+ would work. If you want the core to do full decoding, it would have to know a lot more about the DAC.
Additionally, there’s one part that’s unclear to me: MQA’s second unfold seems to be to the target sample rate of the original. If that rate is, say, 192 then (most) DAC that works at 352/384 will do additional upsampling to that rate. MQA must be ok with that happening? Unclear to me.
They should also dictate that you have your hearing tested, and the final output be adjusted to compensate for age related loss (or any other conditions), and presumably check that everyone in the room has identical hearing and is standing in the same place within the room. Dancing would be out obviously. I suppose gentle foot-tapping would be acceptable providing all listeners kept their heads steady.
Any DSP stage that comes before an MQA process step WILL destroy the embedded MQA data. There’s no mystery there. Developing a DSP correction that preserves the MQA data seems rather difficult. Applying DSP after MQA is fully decoded is different, it can be done if you have access to that data. I think this is done in Meridian’s DSP speakers with room correction.
My current count is 32 200 MQA tracks and I have intentionally removed some duplicates and as mentioned before a tiny portion is unavailable due to region restrictions. Some of these tracks are not MQA but still belong to an MQA album as mixed albums exists but are rare.
True before the first decode; true for a non-MQA-aware DSP process; not necessarily true for an MQA-aware DSP process between the first decode and rendering. Bob Stuart made this clear in his CA Q&A - intermediate DSP is possible.
Isn’t this a contradiction to their “end to end” slogan? Isn’t the DSP-allowance also completely against that? Seems to me as long as licensing fees are available anything actually is fine.
No, it might seem so, but it’s not. All DAC hardware implementations are different and MQA works with the vendor to implement a hardware-specific solution which satisfies the overall MQA goal of minimizing time smear (i.e. DAC correction). [Note that, in spite of that goal, a $200 DAC is unlikely to sound as good as a $20k DAC…] [Note also that I can’t go into more details as I’m under NDA.]
1 Like
James_I
(The truth is out there but not necessarily here)
94
This is my concern and why I am going to be on the sidelines for the indefinite future regarding the purchase of any MQA enabled hardware. I mean, I’m curious about the Explorer and $200 is no big deal, but I expect it just won’t sound as good as my Wyred4Sound Dac2 that I sold all my Bears tickets one season to buy. I have a strong feeling that the overall quality of the DAC is more influential than the MQA format. And I’m just not in the market for a new DAC.
That’s why I would love the max software support for MQA. I have to believe Meridian may be considering the same point - selling DACs is great but really, are that many people going to upgrade from the expensive DAC hardware they already have at any pace that will drive mass adoption of MQA? Wouldn’t it be better to just charge a license fee for content encoding and software decoding and let people use their sweet DACs?
That is highly likely. My Explorer2 sounds pretty much like an Explorer2 with or without fully decoded MQA playing - i.e. It makes very little difference (to me). Not saying the Explorer2 isn’t any good by the way, it’s a lovely little DAC and I probably wouldn’t have guessed it was £120 if I listened blind. It’s very good. MQA has very little to do with it IMO.
James_I
(The truth is out there but not necessarily here)
96
Thanks for the review. I have been tempted to hit “buy” on several occasions. I just have a number of quasi-$200 DACs already, and I figure I should stop buying multiple mid-range products and just have a single good one. But other than MQA the DAC is just not high on my acquisition list right now.
Do you have a DAC you consider your “reference” DAC? How does the Explorer do against that?
(Or, I can play Stereophile or The Absolute Sound and write your review for you: “The Meridian Explorer surprised me with its sound quality and definitely punches above its weight class. It just doesn’t match the sound of my reference DAC, being the $250k Mars Shuttle Magnifique, which was custom built for my yacht…” - sorry just had to poke some fun at seemingly every hardware review in those mags).
I use a Devialet 250Pro at home, but I haven’t really got a proper comparison because I listened to both under different conditions.
The Devialet through speakers, the Explorer primarily when I was working remotely and wanted something for headphones. I’m not a headphone guy either really, I was using modest Senheisser Momentum 2 (the over ear bigger version). I bought the Explorer because the headphone socket on my Mac workstation was too far away, and didn’t go the cheaper route of getting a cable extender because the Macs headphone out is pretty bad to the point where scrolling webpages makes birdie noises. So I chose the Explorer - partly down to MQA hype and being a Tidal user meant the cheapest way to see what all the fuss was about. Partly because it was on sale. MQA was a non event for me, so it’s completely off my radar as something to worry about as a feature. If you have to struggle to hear something, it’s not worth bothering with - that’s my motto these days. Meridian got the 'intrigue’sale out if it though I suppose!
I don’t use it and out it up for sale… genuinely because I no longer need it - but obviously if I’d been blown away by MQA I would have set it up in my hifi to try. I may still do that if I ever have a window…
James_I
(The truth is out there but not necessarily here)
98
Thanks Steve. That actually has helped me fight the urge to buy something I don’t need and will likely sit next to several other similar DACs.
My main curiosity regarding MQA is that there are a lot of MQA titles that have not come out in regular high resolution, including more Alternative than HDTracks or other outlets are offering. Some of those should have good recording quality and I’d love to hear Hi Res versions, or failing that, MQA as the closest it may get…
In which case - with your specific needs - it might be worth more than just the format alone. And anyway Id take my impressions with a pinch of salt - people hear differently and there are a few here who LOVE MQA. I do feel this is predominantly people who have Meridian gear or some affinity with the inventor or company (nothing wrong with that), but still they clearly think it’s worthwhile.
I kind of fell into the hifi ‘upgraditus’ syndrome and tried quite a few tweaks - cables, USB purifiers, linear psus on source etc. Many times I think I heard what I wanted to hear. Once you’ve fallen in love with DSP and room correction the rest of the tweaks seem pointless.
James_I
(The truth is out there but not necessarily here)
100
Yes, and that’s what has piqued my interest. I could use the Tidal app at least to hear the first unfold. I almost did that until I realized I’d have to move a monitor over to my headless RoonBridge machine to operate it. So I thought to wait for Roon to implement this via the network model. IF the first software unfold is compelling, I may jump on board. Kind of. Still don’t like the proprietary business model…
