Hopefully there may be a way to upgrade firmware on some current DAC’s. I know that’s wishful thinking. Call me a dreamer.
My understanding is that (TIDAL) streaming at up to 96/24 (i.e. a 2x sample-rate MQA “core” was originally mooted. This would have suited me perfectly for my legacy Meridian hardware (which maxes out at 96/24); however, I’m guessing that TIDAL/MQA chose a 1x sample-rate “core” for maximum backwards compatibility.
The question for many of us is whether or not we can get from 1x --> 2x and output 88k or 96k PCM to anything. I don’t care about the MQA “Authenticated” light in this case!
Edit: If you can’t do MQA with an “unnamed” DAC, there is the interesting implication that a hardware purchase (MQA-supported DAC) is needed to be compatible with TIDAL’s Hi-Res streaming tier.
This is the best I have found so far to explain what may happen at our end.
Michael Lavorgna - MQA Continued
But it’s still not clear and still leaves a lot to be answered. Looks like we are just going to have to be patient. Frustrating with all the fuss from CES about MQA.
Yes, plus the added issue of post-processing for room corrections for those who use that.
It is “funny” that MQA is making such a big deal of DAC profiling when room/speaker/amplification have a much more meaningful impact overall.
At this point I have lost interest in MQA and it’s antics… And yes, I have listened to MQA…
Add mastering to that list.
In the demo I listened to in March 2015 the DSP8000 speakers used were decoding MQA - it even read “MQA” on the speaker display when MQA was being sent to them. I believe firmware updates are out (or close to be) for Meridian owners.
The recording/mastering part is one process, so I can see how an “encoding profile” fixes that part of the equation. The decoding is done to any number of DACs, amplification, speaker, and room configurations, so that part of the chain is much harder to control. DAC profiling is a tiny sliver of the whole process.
Let me add that, if MQA is such a fantastic technology in real world scenarios then all these antics would be unnecessary. I listened to MQA and it sounded great - but this was with Meridian chosen material. I wonder if it is such hot shot with other material.
I’m talking about poor, dynamically compressed recordings which are the norm for mainstream non-classical labels. An encoding profile isn’t going to help significantly improve that.[quote=“miguelito, post:114, topic:88”]
I wonder if it is such hot shot with other material.
[/quote]
It seems we’re on the same page.
Actually…you are Incorrect. I have tried MQA 384 which works well on the M DSP speakers you refer to. If I could figure out how to include a picture from my iPad I would show you. But, I guess you have lost interest anyway so it maybe isn’t required.
Yes indeed!!! One hope is MQA will highlight this and production will change their ways. Frankly my impression is not just that compression is used but in many cases distortion is added to the recording on purpose. When you listen to a reissue of a 50’s or 60’s recording you realize those people really knew what they were doing!
MQA is interesting, to say the least, but very much not quite here yet. Patience, patience… I don’t get the hostility and nervousness around the new format – all will be revealed in due time.
By the time the music I like to listen to becomes available in MQA, I’ll start thinking about how and if I want to integrate it into my systems – plenty of hardware will be available by then. I’m not too interested in listening to obscure recordings to just to sample the new format.
2 Likes
I used to have two things I tried not to read or get excited about:
- out of season football (the real kind, AFL);
- Royal gossip (celebrities are far more interesting).
I think I will add MQA to that list. At least until they can tell me what equipment is required.
2 Likes
I would add MQA but defo remove royal gossip… Too juicy to miss.
I am continually impressed with TIDAL’s 16/44 streaming quality… Amazing.
[quote=“digitalzed, post:98, topic:88, full:true”]
Hopefully there may be a way to upgrade firmware on some current DAC’s. I know that’s wishful thinking. Call me a dreamer.
[/quote]I think that’s a strong possibility for the majority of medium and high-end DAC’s.
I guess a lot depends on how the hardware has been designed and constructed.
An MQA file looks like a 24/44 (or 24/48) FLAC file. If you play it as-is it should play with redbook quality. It would be insane for TIDAL to get on the MQA boat if special hardware is required to even play their streams.
1 Like
At least based on the analysis I’ve done with the currently available MQA material, it is below RedBook quality… Although larger files than normal 18/96 FLAC would give, which would have one bit more than what MQA uses (17) and enough dynamic range for the original DXD source material.
1 Like
Thanks for the link.
Dark provides a better explanation rhan most, as usual
I completely agree with this. I very much prefer his style of writing over many other more “mainstream” publications.
Paradoxically, what Japan doesn’t yet have is a music streaming service.
Not MQA related but this surprises the hell out of me.
This is why we don’t yet see MQA-accredited streamers that only output (digitally) to a user-selected outboard DAC box – how does the MQA software know to which DAC chip it is talking? Stuart says an adjustable MQA software decoder will come “eventually”.
Good news as it portends to Roon and MQA i presume?
Decoding and rendering – we should take a moment to define and separate these two processes as they relate to MQA. Decoding refers to the first step: recognising the incoming stream as an MQA file and unfolding any hi-res content (should it exist). Rendering is where the MQA software optimises the signal immediately before its decoded to analogue, thus mitigating the DAC chip’s potential to blur time-domain information.
Best on this section i don’t see any reason why Roon, Auralic, Tidal, couldn’t have an option to toggle decode via software. While i think that rendering being handled through via Roon is technically possible, i have no idea what the inputs are that would need to be included to make it realistic for every DAC, and thus have no clue how feasible it is. i don’t see any reason why the selections (resolution) we already have couldn’t provide a basis to how to decode the stream though.
1 Like