Yeh, so does the recent HR remaster.
1 Like
Where is the recent HR remaster? Is it on Tidal available to stream for no more than we paid before? Are you really advocating paying not to use MQA?
1 Like
If you want to help the artist, you have to buy the CD or the download.
Especially when they are starting their career.
Not so sure with Tom Waits.
2 Likes
I buy and I see live performance. I also stream and I have paid a significant sum for Roon. Yesterday I pledged a significant sum for me to a hifi startup. Later today I am making a donation for Ropieee. Is there anyone else I need to pay?
5 Likes
Itās a little more than thatā¦ Itās a campaign. You and your buddies. Would that you could get over it.
2 Likes
A thread discussing mqa in anything but a glowing light would be considered by you to be a campaign. If this thread were praising mqaās merits youād be singing and dancing. If you donāt like it, donāt read it and donāt participate in the thread.
My real bugbear with mqa is that it threatens freedom of choice and offers an inferior solution to a non-existent problem in doing so, and all for commercial endeavour touted in thinly disguised nonsense of improved SQ. If it exists alongside unfettered PCM, just like mp3 then fine, those that want it can get it and those that donāt can stick with PCM or DSD.
It is academic now though. As the title of this thread demonstrates, it is just another battle lost. Not that it was ever there to win. MQA in the wider context however is another matter so the anti brigade can and will continue.
What was the battle? The threadās title was ill conceivedā¦it was always a given that Roon would implement support for MQA.
As far as Roon is concerned, this is beneficial but on the other hand, MQA will sell less ālicensedā MQA DACs if everyone is contented with software decoding.
Roon is a premium product so it, Audirvana and the like still have little or no impact on total MQA capable DAC sales. And the Tidal app has never stopped people buying the DACs if that is what they want to do. There is a small number of people who have expressly pursued MQA but most will end up with it because they have purchased a DAC with it rather than because of it. That was always the aim, to do it by stealth. The arguments amongst ourselves have been a side show. The real work has been going on in board rooms across the industry.
thatās the problem, we will all be fed the bastard child of mp3 and flac under the guise of improved sq. The trigger that will enable it is streaming services because thatās how the masses consume music at the expense of the artist whilst record coās hope that streaming can rescue their antiquated business models. End result, we as consumers have less choice and are forced to settle for an inferior product, aided by the likes of you that stream (and no, this is not a personal attack).
Genuine question here, to anyone that may know. Iāve followed most of the CA Forum analyses shared.
While I personally donāt care that much about MQA (Iām a pig in mud with Red Book) one thing I havenāt seen explained:
Is MQAās 1st unfold (not any further up-sampling/rendering past this 1st unfold) technically worse than the Red Book version produced from the same master? Or slightly better?
If itās not worse than Red Book, we shouldnāt compare it to mp3 in any way, right? In terms of sound quality.
If itās a little better than Red Book, thatās not a bad thing?
These questions I have only relate to sound quality - not potential for DRM etc etc. This is a valid concern (in my opinion) but thatās been discussed to death on every forum, so my questions only relate to sound quality.
Thoughts?
Itās covered here:
My questions arenāt covered there though 
Again, this is CD quality vs MQA 1st unfold ONLY (not any further rendering/up-sampling), from the same master.
That link doesnāt explain if the MQA 1st unfold is technically worse than the CD version. Iām not asking about file size etc, but sound quality itself.
It may not be as good as the master itself (no free lunch) but it might be somewhere in between the CD quality version and the master file (24/96kHz, for example)?
Iāve seen a lot of discussion about the MQA up-sampling filters on CA Forum, but Iām only asking about the 1st unfold, for say, something from a 24/96kHz master.
1 Like
I think in most cases most people may find that MQA Core from first unfold of 24/44.1 or 24/48 is better than Red Book CD, but thatās not a totally fair comparison in terms of PCM file size. However, Iāll not be surprised if someone else gives you an opposite answer.
Noted, thanks Peter. Just above though I mentioned letās leave file size out of my questions/discussion also and just look at SQ for Red Book CD vs MQA 1st unfold, from the same master.
Again, the question is, is MQA 1st unfold technically a little better than Red Book? Somewhere in between CD quality and the 24/96kHz master perhaps? Assuming the master is 24/96, as an example.
Or is it actually technically worse the CD quality? I havenāt seen this answered in all the CA Forum analyses but may have missed it.
The reason I ask, is in relation to āthe bastard child of mp3ā comment. I want to know if thatās technically correct or incorrect.
I donāt know how this works technically, but I have done some listening tests with my little MQA-DAC (Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 Digital). I found out that the MQA sounded worse than Red Book with this DAC in my opinion. I donāt understand whatās the point of MQA if it just sounds worse. I just donāt seem like the sound signature of the MQA, which is kind of like adding a very slight veil and smoothing over everything. Iām sure someone will like it though.
Not a problem Petri and subjective opinions should always be respected - I donāt care either side of the argument to be honest, so Iām neutral (in terms SQ that is)
But my questions are only related to the technical nitty gritty.
Also, your DAC is doing rendering/up-sampling past the 1st unfold, which is exactly what Iām asking we donāt consider in my questions (thereās heaps of that analysis on CA Forum). Iām only asking about the 1st unfold.
That is OK, I donāt take forum discussion personally! But apart from not being openly hostile to MQA, how have the likes of me aided it. I subscribe to Tidal, I am a Roon lifer and I bought an Explorer2. That is it and probably no more or less than many here. I occasionally stream MQA and I have samples in my library. Again, not much different to you probably. If this happens it isnāt because of me or anyone pro or indifferent. It is because the industry wants it and they are still in control.
Tidal and the likes are incentivised to adopt it because it saves bandwidth cost, hence uptake in streaming is likely. Without customers there would be no streaming. If you stream you by definition support it and you are facilitating the control you refer to.
I donāt steam, at all.