You are right that nothing beats live Music as you cannot compete with the live experience of musicians in the room playing freely and spontaneous, but a recording is just what it is, you are trying to catch smoke, an impossible feat but it’s all we have… The ghost in the machine, a snapshot of a moment in time that will go on for eternity. We are blessed to be living in such times.
No, I don’t have a dedicated MQA DAC, still testing the water. I rely on Tidal/Roon to do the first level of unfolding (I believe that’s enough in most of the cases, the final unfolding is nothing but upsampling and some magical filters).
1 Like
Maybe you folks missed this:
Don’t believe all you read here… It’s well worth taking a listen to the final rendering and deciding for yourself… In the finish, as long as you enjoy the music… all’s good…
In reality that should just about mean no more posts regarding MQA…ever!!
Cannot see as how there really can be anything new left to say, it’s all just regurgitating speel over and over and over.
Joel is dead nuts on there!!
4 Likes
Tidal is kaput !
1 Like
It’s incredible that Tidal would go MQA lossy while the world is going lossless .
Who made that incredibly horrific decision ??
They won’t make it unless they sell subs for 5 bucks a month . And maybe not then ,
There will be MBA case studies on this Tidal disaster .
1 Like
People have been predicting Tidal’s demise for years. When Amazon Music went lossless a couple of years ago, people said Tidal was dead then too.
Maybe Tidal know what you and others don’t? That MQA is audibly lossless, and that MQA achieves that for high resolution at the same data rate as standard redbook. Which means Tidal are far ahead; they apparently do know that since they have been acquired for their value. While Apple and Spotify are fighting over redbook from the early 1980’s.
2 Likes
Yeah that was before Apple and Spotify decided to go lossless . Like I said , they will be in trouble
Apple will be up to 24/192 FYI
Only subjectively. Objectively, MQA measures with loss and/or additional noise in audible frequencies.
3 Likes
Subjectively is all that matters.
1 Like
Jack Dorsey can keep Tidal going for a very long time. He’s not short of cash.
1 Like
Nope. MQA preserves the dynamic range that exists within the individual file. That is measured on a case by case basis by the encoder. It doesn’t encode the noise outside of that range. It also doesn’t permit additional noise in audible frequencies.
1 Like
I can hear the difference between MQA and Qobuz 16/44 . MQA’s high frequencies ,particularly on vocals are not as resolute.
1 Like
Subjectively is all that matters.
To religious zealots, yes. But really, it’s been proven that your ears and ear-brain are not always an accurate measure of things and in fact can lie to you. Actual measurements on the other hand, are accurate.
Are you really saying you don’t actually believe in measurements?
Nope. You should watch the video here:
This video has been answered by MQA and you can easily read the answer online. The individual doing the testing created many of the artifacts he “measured” by his attempts at embedding non-musical test signals. The video is not credible, don’t be misled.
1 Like
Lol. They can’t even give it away? Sad. I liked Tidal and their apps at first. I was all in. Then, MQA. Oh well.
1 Like