Tidal High Res (MQA) news...

[mansr]

Probably not - getting the credit card up front even for a trial seems to be standard practice these days...

 

Indeed they do. I'm not curious enough about this to go through all the trouble of cancelling the trial without being charged as I have no doubt it's a complete nightmare to do so.

[crenca]

Indeed they do. I'm not curious enough about this to go through all the trouble of cancelling the trial without being charged as I have no doubt it's a complete nightmare to do so.

 

I am not curious enough to do anything about it either, as I doubt Tidal/studios are serving up an "enhanced" or "different" 16/44 for Tidal subscribers. Whatever these folks are hearing, it must be something in the chain (most likely software, probably). Perhaps they like the sound of Windows media "enhancements"...

[R1200CL]

Indeed they do. I'm not curious enough about this to go through all the trouble of cancelling the trial without being charged as I have no doubt it's a complete nightmare to do so.

Tidal support is nice guys. Quick respond. And located here in Oslo.

You have nothing to vorry about.

And the cancelling is done easy by your self in your Tidal account. No need to email support.

 

----

I do also get better than CD from Tidal

(Squeezebox Touch)

[Rexp]

Tidal support is nice guys. Quick respond. And located here in Oslo.

You have nothing to vorry about.

And the cancelling is done easy by your self in your Tidal account. No need to email support.

 

----

I do also get better than CD from Tidal

(Squeezebox Touch)

Welcome to the club! You wont convinced the closed minded folks around here though...

[mansr]

Tidal support is nice guys. Quick respond. And located here in Oslo.

You have nothing to vorry about.

And the cancelling is done easy by your self in your Tidal account. No need to email support.

 

----

I do also get better than CD from Tidal

(Squeezebox Touch)

 

Good go know. I've had too many bad experiences trying to cancel various things.

[mansr]

Welcome to the club! You wont convinced the closed minded folks around here though...

 

Maybe I'll go ahead with a trial anyway then. Before I do that, could you "believers" please give specific examples of tracks you find to be better when streamed? Is the effect noticeable if using the Windows app, or does it require something specialised?

[Rexp]

Maybe I'll go ahead with a trial anyway then. Before I do that, could you "believers" please give specific examples of tracks you find to be better when streamed? Is the effect noticeable if using the Windows app, or does it require something specialised?

So far it's only @markwb who prefers streaming to the TIDAL download, I think they sound similar and would prefer the download as my internet can be patchy.

[R1200CL]

Maybe I'll go ahead with a trial anyway then. Before I do that, could you "believers" please give specific examples of tracks you find to be better when streamed? Is the effect noticeable if using the Windows app, or does it require something specialised?

 

I use Squeezebox Touch. No experience with PC, even though I have a M2Tec EVO with a expensive USB cable. Coffé something.

I think you can challange any recording almost. Take one you know and like.

[mansr]

I use Squeezebox Touch. No experience with PC, even though I have a M2Tec EVO with a expensive USB cable. Coffé something.

I think you can challange any recording almost. Take one you know and like.

 

I was intending to capture the output of the player and compare to a reference CD rip. No need to either like it or know it that way. It would be preferable, of course, to pick a track that has only a single CD issue to maximise chances that the streamed version at least originates from the same master. Absent any pure test tracks, it could also be useful to test some electronic music with fairly clean tones but I have no idea where to start looking for that.

[R1200CL]

I was intending to capture the output of the player and compare to a reference CD rip. No need to either like it or know it that way. It would be preferable, of course, to pick a track that has only a single CD issue to maximise chances that the streamed version at least originates from the same master. Absent any pure test tracks, it could also be useful to test some electronic music with fairly clean tones but I have no idea where to start looking for that.

 

Not sure if this help, but you will probably not get better rip than found here: 2L High Resolution Music .:. free TEST BENCH

That music should also be found on Tidal.

 

Also I gues you know about the guy behind HQPlayer.

Some analysis and comparison of MQA encoded FLAC vs normal optimized hires FLAC - Blogs - Computer Audiophile

 

Discussion about that analysis is found inside this thread:

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/mqa-ces-27127/

[mansr]

Not sure if this help, but you will probably not get better rip than found here: 2L High Resolution Music .:. free TEST BENCH

That music should also be found on Tidal.

 

Those are studio masters and obviously not what Tidal is streaming. The claim was that streamed Tidal sounds better than the same music on a CD or even purchased from Tidal.

 

Also I gues you know about the guy behind HQPlayer.

Some analysis and comparison of MQA encoded FLAC vs normal optimized hires FLAC - Blogs - Computer Audiophile

 

Discussion about that analysis is found inside this thread:

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/mqa-ces-27127/

 

Interesting but not particularly relevant to the question at hand.

[master]

Those are studio masters and obviously not what Tidal is streaming. The claim was that streamed Tidal sounds better than the same music on a CD or even purchased from Tidal.

 

The argument is that Tidal supposedly has access to better master tapes (yes even over the ones from which CDs are made) and hence sounds superior to the same audio CD you have in your collection.

 

The studios own the master tapes, and obviously will never hand them out.

 

Audiophile Kool-Aid is a real thing and precisely the reason why MQA is getting even this little bit of attention.

 

PS: Tidal could be applying DSP to enhance the SQ though.

[mansr]

The argument is that Tidal supposedly has access to better master tapes (yes even over the ones from which CDs are made) and hence sounds superior to the same audio CD you have in your collection.

 

Yes, and to determine if this is the case, we need to compare to a CD, not whatever version of the master 2L puts up as a demo.

 

Audiophile Kool-Aid is a real thing and precisely the reason why MQA is getting even this little bit of attention.

 

PS: Tidal could be applying DSP to enhance the SQ though.

 

MQA is looking a lot like Kool-Aid indeed, but either way Tidal are not using it (yet) AFAIK, so it can't be the cause the perceived differences. Unless of course people think they use MQA and that's enough for them to "hear" better sound.

[james45974]

I don't currently subscribe to Tidal but have a question. With the Tidal move towards MQA will this negate the need for the two levels of service or will Tidal have 2 separate libraries of music, MQA and non-MQA? I mean if the final playback quality determination is made by your MQA or not capable DAC how can Tidal provide the current two levels of service?

[jeffmudrick]

Don't know. But if anyone missed it....

 

[alligatorman]

Wow Jeff! How does it sound ?

[jeffmudrick]

I wouldn't know.. Alpha software just slipped through.

[firedog]

I don't currently subscribe to Tidal but have a question. With the Tidal move towards MQA will this negate the need for the two levels of service or will Tidal have 2 separate libraries of music, MQA and non-MQA? I mean if the final playback quality determination is made by your MQA or not capable DAC how can Tidal provide the current two levels of service?

 

they've previously said that eventually they will MQA everything (at least in CD quality and up), so there won't be 2 libraries. It's just that some users won't get the full benefit of MQA. If your setup isn't MQA, essentially it just doesn't unpack the MQA, and plays the file "as is", supposedly as Redbook.

[mansr]

they've previously said that eventually they will MQA everything (at least in CD quality and up), so there won't be 2 libraries. It's just that some users won't get the full benefit of MQA. If your setup isn't MQA, essentially it just doesn't unpack the MQA, and plays the file "as is", supposedly as Redbook.

 

As we've determined elsewhere, undecoded MQA is actually slightly degraded compared to standard Redbook due to higher noise levels.

[jtm]

Which build is it ?

 

Can't see it in 1.11.2 (build 286) here ...

 

 

Don't know. But if anyone missed it....

 

[james45974]

they've previously said that eventually they will MQA everything (at least in CD quality and up), so there won't be 2 libraries. It's just that some users won't get the full benefit of MQA. If your setup isn't MQA, essentially it just doesn't unpack the MQA, and plays the file "as is", supposedly as Redbook.

 

I guess I am confused, it seems like if everything is labeled simply as MQA then as a listener you don't know what you are getting. Is it redbook, 96, 192, etc? Of course your DAC may have resolution limits but is MQA coded material all going to be at a very high resolution and then the end user DAC set the ultimate listening resolution?

 

I don't see how Tidal can maintain their two tier pricing because they will not be the arbiters of quality, the users equipment will be doing that. No more 'Premium' and 'HiFi' levels as far as I can see.

[firedog]

As we've determined elsewhere, undecoded MQA is actually slightly degraded compared to standard Redbook due to higher noise levels.

 

Maybe. I'm not sure that what we've "determined" is correct. It's based on several assumptions.

[mansr]

Maybe. I'm not sure that what we've "determined" is correct. It's based on several assumptions.

 

The frequency content is different starting at about 7kHz, and there's a burst of noise at 18-22kHz. The FFT does not lie.

[firedog]

The frequency content is different starting at about 7kHz, and there's a burst of noise at 18-22kHz. The FFT does not lie.

 

Okay. First, I'm not sure the software isn't going to be setup to take care of this.

 

And if not, how much of this difference is going to be audible when streaming over Tidal?. Not much, if any, I bet. I subscribed to Tidal to get better than mp3 quality streaming (and b/c the other streaming services aren't available where I live).

 

I don't have it for "critical listening" - I doubt many people do.

 

This sounds to me like the typical audiophile tempest in a teapot - making a very big deal over a very small difference. I'm waiting for someone to tell me that the non-MQA version of a Redbook file sounds like it has "had the veil lifted" when compared to the MQA version...

[jeffmudrick]

 

I don't have it for "critical listening" - I doubt many people do.

 

 

A baseless assumption. Anyone who'd pay extra for the CD/MQA stream would be doing so for sound quality. I wouldn't dismiss audiophiles who listen primarily to Tidal Redbook.