Can you put song’s links?
It seems to be a comparison between apples and pears from the same orchard.
1 Like
I don’t have a tidal account anymore but a quick search will bring it up
It’s been 30 days without Tidal. We don’t miss it at all. I wish I had tried this experiment sooner.
Goodbye Tidal.
7 Likes
These are not even the same album or singer???
Unless I’m missing something this comparison makes no sense at all.
2 Likes
This is the same underlying recording (I have no idea about whether it is the same mastering). Steve Winwood was in Blind Faith and sang lead vocal on the song. The song was also included on a Winwood compilation.
1 Like
For format comparisons (any format comparisons, not just MQA vs PCM) this is highly iffy. Older titles and later compilations have no reason to be the same version. Given the unknowns, it’s better to stick with comparisons that are likely to be the same. For example brand new releases that haven’t yet had the chance to spawn a lot of versions.
1 Like
I agree. Proper comparisons (and these should preferably be double-blind ABX tests) should be sure to use the exact same underlying recording. In this case, one would want to compare the MQA and nonMQA container versions of the exact same recording.
Roon users here can already verify downgrading the quality to HiFi from Master for 44.1kHz-multiple Tidal MQA albums, and see that 16/44.1 MQA CD can still be Core decoded by Roon as shown in the signal path.
I happen to have tested Tidal iOS app (to compare it against MQA albums on Apple Music, see the other thread) and have an additional finding. With an iPad connected to a MQA USB DAC via Apple Lightning to USB3 Camera Adapter:
MQA album Magnificat is MQA Core decoded by Tidal iOS app when quality is Master. The MQA DAC therefore shows OFS correctly to indicate MQA rendering.
When you downgrade the quality from Master to HiFi, unlike Roon or Lumin hardware, Tidal iOS app skips over the MQA Core decoding, passing the 16/44.1 signal to the USB DAC (if you correct the wrong default settings). This 16/44.1 MQA CD signal can still be fully decoded by the Full decoder MQA USB DAC showing MQA.
Summary: Tidal iOS app performs MQA Core decoding for MQA albums only when the quality is set to Master, but does not perform this step when quality is set to HiFi, even if the 16-bit truncated HiFi signal can be decoded if the album sample rate is a 44.1kHz multiple.
1 Like
First MQA album I have found on the hifi tier.
Even though the single Phantom downsamples again to 48 it sounds good to my ears…
It’s been nine months now without Tidal. To be honest I haven’t thought about it in eight months. Qobuz is now my one and only streaming service.
5 Likes
Hi, interesting discussion. I did some investigations myself. As an ITer bytes can easily be checked.
So I compared the files delivered by Tidal in their “HiFi plus” tier with those from the same tracks delivered in their “hifi” tier. Hex Editors are freely available so anyone with some experience can check this
This is what Tidal is delivering with their HiFi tier (might be mentioned before here but don’t have the time to read the whole thread)
1-- original is 16/44 pcm in hifiplus: you get the 16/44 pcm in hifi
2-- original is 16/44 mqa(cd) in hifiplus : you get the 16/44 mqa cd in hifi !?
3-- original is 24/44 88 176 352 mqa (these come in a 24/44 flac)
Every 3rd byte is stripped reducing it to a 16bit “mqa-cd like” flac. Proof? it’s 16 bit now but still showing “mqa”, sample rate and even a studio dot when there’s no longer data to unfold !?!
4-- original is 24/48 96 192 mqa : these come in a 24/48 flac
This is now downsampled to a 16/44 flac. (This is harder to prove, but I can guarantee those are no longer the same 16/44s that were on Tidals servers before they were removed and replaced by 24/48, 96, or 192 mqa versions)
So you get various results here,
1=HiFi (ok),
2=mqa-cd (so not hifi),
3=corrupted mqa (shows “mqa”, sample rate and even studio dot on the dac… but no longer unfolds,
4=corrupted mqa (shows “pcm 44” but this is not the original 16/44 that was on Tidal before the mqa version was released).
3 is pretty serious, as it looks like mqa, even the dac still believes it, but is not, it’s unfolding zeroes this time.
So yes, this the HiFi tiers seems to be lossless HiFi ONLY for tracks labeled “HiFi” and for every new mqa emerging, those “hifi” files are being removed.
For all tracks labeled “master” you get either mqa-cd, a corrupted mqa that looks like mqa-cd but , or a corrupted mqa that looks like 16/44 pcm.
Last year I ended my Tidal subscription because of this. This is laughing with customers.
Very happy now with Qobuz + HQPlayer. I’m just looking now for a better interface and Roon might just be that. Is there be a reduction / couponcode for the lifetime subscription ? 700 seems a lot of money to me and paying every month is something I want to avoid as I’m already subscribed to Qobuz Sublime and I’m considering taking a Ukrainian family for shelter next month.
1 Like
Don’t call me Shirley
3 Likes
Never have. Never will.
MQA authentication survives 16-bit truncation. This is a feature, i.e. normal.
You get 24 bits Tidal Master if you pay more for HiFi Plus and choose a Tidal Master album to play. You get 16 bits if you pay less for Non-Plus.
I think you’re missing the point here, which is :
In their HiFi tier, they promise a lossless file, but you don’t get the original lossless pcm. Instead you get a truncated (24 bit mqa to 16 bit pseudo mqa-cd).
This is not “a feature”. In fact when this is not even a true mqa-cd as a true mqa-cd has folded hires in the first 16bits (Bob talks about mqa cd) and these truncated versions no longer have any.
The issue however is Tidal promised lossless HiFi, but delivers damaged mqa in stead which is - of course - audibly worse then undamaged mqa. It seems to me this is just a trick to convince people mqa sounds better then hifi (read damaged mqa) which fits their marketing strategy of lying.
I even sold my mqa dac and replaced it with a Holo may as I no longer want to support the hoax.
I lost a lot of money investing in mqa and it offered me nothing but frustrations. And reading this and other forums (reddit f.i.) it seems I’m not the only one and people massively left Tidal and went to Qobuz and I can’t blame them as I heard and felt the same quality loss with mqa (sounding muddy etc)
2 Likes
I think you may be overstating how many people left Tidal. People did. But in view of the fact Qobuz doesn’t service an awful lot of the world, there are still many more takers for Tidal than Qobuz.
What DAC did you sell?
Did you blind test the DACs and the files?
I think the main point is many people on here moved down to the lower HiFi tier and seem more than happy with the sound.
I think it sounds fine on my system and offers a better service than Qobuz.
Surly if you’re happy with the sound is the main point?
3 Likes
Perhaps the only point.
2 Likes