MQA Blind Test Summary & Summary Comments...

[barrows]

Yes, it appears you should be sorry.  I will be happy to resume this discussion once you have educated yourself on exactly what MQA is, and what it does, as I already have done so.

[GUTB]

23 minutes ago, barrows said:

Yes, it appears you should be sorry.  I will be happy to resume this discussion once you have educated yourself on exactly what MQA is, and what it does, as I already have done so.

 

Obviously you aren't a Meridian MQA engineer so you have no idea what MQA does. You only know what has been published by said engineers -- that MQA is an end-to-end streaming music delivery format that, among other things, addresses time-domain problems in digital audio via ADC and DAC compensation.

[barrows]

actually, I am quite aware of what MQA does, all of this information is already available on this.

Yes, MQA addresses time domain problems.  IT does this by using apodizing and minimum phase digital filters.  These filters are no more "special" than many other digital filters already available to audiophiles via certain DACs, or by software over sampling programs like HQPlayer and Audirvana+.

The salient point which I am making here is that there is no magical ingredient in MQA which did not already exist for audiophiles as far as sound quality is concerned; if you do not understand this, and you want to have a serious discussion about it, you will need to educate yourself first.

What is somewhat new with MQA is the compression scheme, but most audiophiles have no need for compression anyway, hence the marketing game which MQA is playing, getting people to believe it "magically" improves sound quality in a way which cannot otherwise be achieved, that is just nonsense plain and simple.

[kumakuma]

Just now, barrows said:

What is somewhat new with MQA is the compression scheme, but most audiophiles have no need for compression anyway

 

And the DRM mechanism which we certainly have no need for...

[mansr]

48 minutes ago, GUTB said:

Obviously you aren't a Meridian MQA engineer so you have no idea what MQA does.

Ever heard of something called reverse engineering?

[GUTB]

Why have these digital filtering techniques been widely considered to be a fad and a gimmick? Because you can't get consistent good results out of them; there are trade-offs. That's why it's common knowledge that there's no replacement for bandwidth. MQA seeks to deal with this issue by managing time-domain errors end-to-end, from specific ADC to specific DAC to achieve the best results possible. MQA targets an extremely low level of time-domain error.

 

We may not care about the bandwidth so much -- but the streaming services certainly do. Let's face facts, straight up: no one is going to stream hi-rez audio on a commercial basis. If MQA does literally nothing else but get studios to release hi-rez tracks for streaming, it's already worth it.

 

From a subjective listening standpoint, I listened to several MQA products, including the Explorer 2, DFR and Node 2 -- it was only after listening to the Red after it's MQA update and with certain tracks was I shocked by how much better the MQA version was. Just software unfolding didn't make much a difference; it was only after experiencing "real" MQA with tracks that seemed to truly benefit from the process was I able to admit to myself that MQA is real and is worth pursing a central feature of my setup.

[mansr]

2 minutes ago, GUTB said:

Let's face facts, straight up: no one is going to stream hi-rez audio on a commercial basis.

Qobuz does.

[mansr]

3 minutes ago, GUTB said:

From a subjective listening standpoint, I listened to several MQA products, including the Explorer 2, DFR and Node 2 -- it was only after listening to the Red after it's MQA update and with certain tracks was I shocked by how much better the MQA version was. Just software unfolding didn't make much a difference; it was only after experiencing "real" MQA with tracks that seemed to truly benefit from the process was I able to admit to myself that MQA is real and is worth pursing a central feature of my setup.

You know, we've reverse engineered the "rendering" on the Dragonfly completely. It's simple filters, nothing else.

[barrows]

37 minutes ago, GUTB said:

We may not care about the bandwidth so much -- but the streaming services certainly do. Let's face facts, straight up: no one is going to stream hi-rez audio on a commercial basis. If MQA does literally nothing else but get studios to release hi-rez tracks for streaming, it's already worth it.

And this is really a shame.  Streaming services are killing music, plain and simple, just a terrible course of events.  Hopefully, somehow, someone, somewhere will pull us back from the brink, and figure out how to make sure musicians are properly compensated again, otherwise, humanity is doomed, as the benevolent force which is music will absent itself from our lives, mostly...

[firedog]

42 minutes ago, mansr said:

Qobuz does.

So do several other sites and classical labels.

[witchdoctor]

2 hours ago, GUTB said:

Why have these digital filtering techniques been widely considered to be a fad and a gimmick? Because you can't get consistent good results out of them; there are trade-offs. That's why it's common knowledge that there's no replacement for bandwidth. MQA seeks to deal with this issue by managing time-domain errors end-to-end, from specific ADC to specific DAC to achieve the best results possible. MQA targets an extremely low level of time-domain error.

 

We may not care about the bandwidth so much -- but the streaming services certainly do. Let's face facts, straight up: no one is going to stream hi-rez audio on a commercial basis. If MQA does literally nothing else but get studios to release hi-rez tracks for streaming, it's already worth it.

 

From a subjective listening standpoint, I listened to several MQA products, including the Explorer 2, DFR and Node 2 -- it was only after listening to the Red after it's MQA update and with certain tracks was I shocked by how much better the MQA version was. Just software unfolding didn't make much a difference; it was only after experiencing "real" MQA with tracks that seemed to truly benefit from the process was I able to admit to myself that MQA is real and is worth pursing a central feature of my setup.

I love the Node, simple, inexpexpenive, flexible, great mqa, and I like the BluOS.

[witchdoctor]

1 hour ago, barrows said:

And this is really a shame.  Streaming services are killing music, plain and simple, just a terrible course of events.  Hopefully, somehow, someone, somewhere will pull us back from the brink, and figure out how to make sure musicians are properly compensated again, otherwise, humanity is doomed, as the benevolent force which is music will absent itself from our lives, mostly...

No, what is killing music is pirating. Didn't you know that?

[wushuliu]

MQA will go over just like DSD: .00001% will buy the kool-aid as a must-have without reading the fine print. The labels and god knows who else will be able to track these people with the DRM, learn their habits and upsell them on who knows what, or do who knows what with their info - which is fine as it'll likely be a demographic willing to open their wallets for the newest and latest anyway.

 

Meanwhile everyone else will stick with Mp3 for <$10.

[witchdoctor]

1 hour ago, wushuliu said:

MQA will go over just like DSD: .00001% will buy the kool-aid as a must-have without reading the fine print. The labels and god knows who else will be able to track these people with the DRM, learn their habits and upsell them on who knows what, or do who knows what with their info - which is fine as it'll likely be a demographic willing to open their wallets for the newest and latest anyway.

 

Meanwhile everyone else will stick with Mp3 for <$10.

DSD has been available and has not gotten traction. MQA was basically made available on Tidal 10 months ago, let's see what happens at the next CES. 

[firedog]

4 hours ago, witchdoctor said:

DSD has been available and has not gotten traction. MQA was basically made available on Tidal 10 months ago, let's see what happens at the next CES. 

CES? Irrelevant.

Lets see what happens when they start asking for a premium for it - and not even a premium over Redbook, but a premium over mp3.

None of my  well off friends who pay $10 a month for Spotify "premium" mp3 have the least interest in paying $10 a  month more for Tidal CD  quality. Mention (and explain) MQA and they are even less understanding of why anyone would pay money for it. 

And don't kid yourself: many of these people have expensive systems from "the old days" and high end car stereos.

But they just aren't interested. Convenience and portability are what matters to them, and 320k mp3 sounds fine to them. Why pay more, they ask? Audiophiles don't get that the majority are happy with the SQ of good mp3 or the like - and that ain't gonna change. We are a niche, a will remain one.

[Fokus]

6 hours ago, wushuliu said:

MQA will go over just like DSD: .00001% will buy the kool-aid as a must-have without reading the fine print. The labels and god knows who else will be able to track these people with the DRM, learn their habits and upsell them on who knows what

 

So MQA is the Trojan that will have to boost the future sales of cat-litter-grounding-boxes?

 

A mechanism to find and label audiophools?

 

So it has its use, after all ...

 

[MikeJazz]

11 hours ago, witchdoctor said:

I love the Node, simple, inexpexpenive, flexible, great mqa, and I like the BluOS.

It's a great mid-fi dac!

[wushuliu]

16 hours ago, Fokus said:

 

So MQA is the Trojan that will have to boost the future sales of cat-litter-grounding-boxes?

 

A mechanism to find and label audiophools?

 

So it has its use, after all ...

 

 

Of course. This is a fact of life in every online/electronic transaction now. When people hear DRM they are thinking of 20 years ago and some simple tag on your music. A minor sacrifice in their eyes no doubt.

 

This ain't 20 years ago. If a music studio embeds in the MQA file, you better believe that in the deep fine print of Tidal,etc. usage there'll be a clause saying the studio gets to do whatever they want with that information - including passing it on to other commercial interests. For a fee of course.

[jabbr]

21 hours ago, witchdoctor said:

DSD has been available and has not gotten traction. MQA was basically made available on Tidal 10 months ago, let's see what happens at the next CES. 

 

DSD is two things.

1) a data format both SACD ISO and DSF as well as DFF files,  as well as the proprietary SACD format

2) SDM which is the native format of 99% of DAC chips. Streaming DSD, converted from PCM has traction.

 

SACD as a physical format has not gotten traction. MQA, being closed like SACD, is another SACD. Like PCM, DACs will convert MQA streams to SDM and it  is highly unlikely to get traction as a native DAC format.

[witchdoctor]

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

 

DSD is two things.

1) a data format both SACD ISO and DSF as well as DFF files,  as well as the proprietary SACD format

2) SDM which is the native format of 99% of DAC chips. Streaming DSD, converted from PCM has traction.

 

SACD as a physical format has not gotten traction. MQA, being closed like SACD, is another SACD. Like PCM, DACs will convert MQA streams to SDM and it  is highly unlikely to get traction as a native DAC format.

Please post a link to where I can stream DSD, thanks

[jabbr]

Just now, witchdoctor said:

Please post a link to where I can stream DSD, thanks

www.signalyst.com

[witchdoctor]

Thanks, I meant a streaming service like Tidal or Napster. That www.signalyst.com looks like software.

[jabbr]

6 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

Thanks, I meant a streaming service like Tidal or Napster. That www.signalyst.com looks like software.

 

I've heard of people streaming using Roon, and Roon can use HQPlayer to stream SDM across the local network to a DAC (NAA). 

[barrows]

10 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

Thanks, I meant a streaming service like Tidal or Napster. That www.signalyst.com looks like software.

I suspect that what jabbr is suggesting is using software to convert a (cloud streamed) PCM signal to DSD, and then send it on to the DAC.  Because so many DACs these days are doing their final conversion at DSD (and higher) rates using SDM converters, this approach the DAC to do less, and often sounds better than just using the original PCM.  Of course Jussi's excellent filter algos also have something to do with this...

 

[Allan F]

14 minutes ago, witchdoctor said:

Thanks, I meant a streaming service like Tidal or Napster. That www.signalyst.com looks like software.

 

You asked the question. He answered. While you believed you understood what you think he said, you apparently did not realize that what you assumed is not what he meant.