There’s nothing to suggest that MQA sounds like MP3, what I’m comparing is MQA vs Hi-Res PCM master. I’ve a Mytek Brooklyn DAC (borrowed) capable of unfolding up to 24/352.8k and compared to a Hi-Res PCM master with the same sampling frequency. When it is properly setup with revealing system, I will able to hear the difference. Have you try doing that?
Am I just claiming from others or deduced my facts through critical listening test? Have you listen to live performance recording? Get involved in studio mastering? I do, this is my experience. I can confidently tell you what MQA is trying to project the ‘sound’ they think is good for you and everyone but fail short of capturing the original performance faithfully.
Tom, if you like what you are listening nobody can stop you, music is like wine, if you like the taste, enjoy!
I agree. If MQA accelerates provision of high res streaming then it will be beneficial to the industry and hobby as a whole. If it means I get access through Tidal to 96kHz/24 bit first unfold with no extra cost then that would be great. The process of identifying and using the best available masters in the hands of the recording companies would be an added bonus.
I have not setup a borrowed mytek brooklyn DAC.
I would be happy to try and obtain the albums that you have compare though. Can you list them here? I am sure that it will make for more interesting conversation then is current on this discussion.
Your background in the music industry is insightful, but the fact that other technicians are Pro MQA suggests even very qualified listeners have different tastes.
A good place to start with is 2L test bench downloads there you can test different formats and compared for yourself. 2L, the Nordic sound uses DXD 24/352.8k Hi-Res PCM as their reference masters.
The album which I brought both in DXD and MQA format and compared:
2L, The Nordic Sound mastering is considered one of renowned and excellent recordings, this is a good place to build up your Hi-Res collections, a must if you serious about sound quality.
That makes it 25+ partners. I think there’s still along way to go before MQA can be considered a commercial success, but this is a move in the right direction.
What would make people stop thinking MQA was going to fail commercially i.e. what is the tipping point which will make you say “back when we were uncertain that MQA would take off”
Not MQA exactly but pertinent. We hosted a gig last weekend and some friends came with their daughter who is perhaps 14.
Talking to her mother on the phone last night she told me firstly about how good live music felt to all of them and then in the car the daughter said. “Mum, the sound of the radio is not as good as the CD is it? I suppose it’s because it has to go up in the air and come down again”.
I must admit I was surprised to hear that coming from a young girl and they have no idea about Hi Fi, MQA etc.
So to say young people don’t want and won’t appreciate better sound is plain wrong, in this case anyway.
MQA took on new staff at roughly the same time as Tidal began to stream MQA. The bottleneck in getting accreditation should ease now as they get to grips with demand and the process moves more to accreditation of new products rather than adding it to old products.
As time lines go, the red book standard for CD was laid down in 1980. The first commercial CD release came in 1982. The hardware was launched in 1983. It was probably another 3-5 years for CD content to get close to being able to make CD a primary or sole source. On that evidence it could be a while before we can say anything about the success of MQA supported by anything other than supposition based on our own personal dogmas. The vested interests will talk it up, the rivals will resist and talk it down. Sales will be the final arbiter of its success and it will be a while before we can see what the trends are.
Do you have an other albums for me? I’ve got an MQA decoder coming in the post so I will be able to A/B as you suggest. (What does it mean if I actually prefer MQA?)
You can try Euroda Records, coincidentally, Tidal has the same album. I brought Jonas Norberg, this album is mastered in DSD256, so I got the highest quality available. For Tidal, this is converted to MQA 24/352.8k.
They do have downloaded MQA version too. Haha! If you prefer MQA vs the original master then I think you something is seriously wrong here… By the way, what MQA DAC you are going to use?
Thanks Guy - I’ve got a Meridian 218 on the way which will feed Meridian 5200SE speakers. So full fat MQA.
Were you referring to the original maser of the hi-res master (or are they both one and the same?) - I’m not denying there is something seriously wrong with me!
Yes, the original master is digitized at DSD256, I’m not sure your system can playback DSD256 but it is worth a try. I brought this album from NativeDSD. Whatever you like, this is good album worth buying. I’ve listen from Tidal MQA version I must say it pretty good to DSD256 on the Brooklyn DAC.
Hi All,
I’m a bit surprised regarding the power and emotions linked to this topic – for me there is no either DxD/PCM or MQA. After spending quite some time listening to samples, for sure with limited equipment (Node 2 => (NAD C510 =>) Exite X14A / MAC => Meridian Explorer 2 => AKG N40), I’m still no fanboy of MQA. But I can see a couple reasonable use cases and also some no way situations, at least for me.
Just a few thoughts to share:
You can hardly compare 44/16 CD quality with “any” 44/24 or 48/24 material, assuming the master can deliver more than 44/16. No surprise for me that untouched MQA already outperforms some CD content. But things become far more complex if you listen to 192/24 PCM compared to unfolded, uncompressed MQA delivering 192/24.
Tagging MQA just as a new MP3 version is not fair, but on the other hand near to where I see the main potential => streaming in reasonable quality where bandwidth is limited (eg. even inhouse we don’t have unlimited WiFi bandwidth – just thing about 2 TV HD streams and 2 HiRes music streams, no easy job for the WiFi in our house, and we are only five people …).
Talking about streaming service we can, or should soon be able to, compare quality and costs for TIDAL Hifi/Master and Qobuz Sublim+.
I would not buy any MQA material, because I’m limited to dedicated hardware to consume it in high quality. If MQA content is offered like CDs for 5-10€, you can delete this argument if HiRes is not our main target.
But I would never use MQA for archiving, never ever. The MQA remaster process may fix some issues, but every lossy conversion removes also “something” from the master. Reprocessing: YES, Archiving: NO, just because it is no reversible process (bit perfect copy). And storage (capacity) is for sure no reason, challenges a more based on the medium used to archive. A few 25-30 year old CD based archives are already lost because some CD types did not last as long as expected …
Now you can start kicking me, for now (and me) the MQA usage is limited, not sure if it is worth the money – time will tell.
Bye
I’m not sure I know what “usual” would be in this case. If we compare to how long it took (is still taking) for hardware to adopt DSD, >192/24 etc then I am not sure it feels longer.
@gmt
Take a look at the Tidal MQA XL sheet. One of the tabs there had >2600 albums listed as available. Well worth grabbing a copy and scanning for stuff you recognise, already own or would like to own. Add them to your library and then spend a few weeks trying them out.
I have been very pleased with both the stuff I already had and also the new discoveries.
A rich period of new music for me.
“As a long-running supporter of MQA’s high resolution audio solutions, we are encouraged to see a growing number of digital service providers and consumer hardware companies adopting MQA technology to make studio sound quality from Sony Music artists available to streaming music consumers.”
By the way, what MQA DAC you are going to use?