mansr Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Okay. First, I'm not sure the software isn't going to be setup to take care of this. We were talking about what MQA files sound like on non-MQA equipment. AFAIK, nobody here has any MQA capable hardware or software. This sounds to me like the typical audiophile tempest in a teapot - making a very big deal over a very small difference. These differences are much more likely to be audible than the difference between 96k and 192k or even between 48k and 96k. 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... I've heard the opposite. Link to comment
firedog Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 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. Certainly not baseless, as user reports of all sorts of streaming problems, or issues with sound quality are all over various forums. And paying for better SQ is not necessarily the same as intending it for "critical listening". I wasn't dismissing anyone by my comment,or dismissing Redbook quality. Did I write that critical listening can't be done with Redbook? I don't think so. That's just you projecting some of your assumptions onto me. Main listening (small home office): Main setup: Surge protectors +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Protection>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three BXT (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments. Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three BXT Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup. Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. All absolute statements about audio are false Link to comment
jeffmudrick Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 "I doubt that anyone uses Tidal for critical listening," is painting with a rather broad brush, delivery or SQ issues notwithstanding. I don't think Tidal is interested in MQA to better market to fans of Norwegian choral music. Link to comment
DanSmedra Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Maybe. I'm not sure that what we've "determined" is correct. It's based on several assumptions. +1 Source: TIDAL HiFi/Masters, Pandora One > iPeng 9.2.1 on iPhone6s/iPad Great Room: SBT#1 > Cullen Coax > PS Audio DL3 DAC > Audio Envy cables > Martin Logan (ML) 200Wpc Purity. SBT#2 >JVC 110w amp > ML Motion 4 & AudioEngine 5. Garage: SBT3 > Audioquest TOS > Wyred mINT > Cullen Cables > Martin Logan Motion 12 Carry Anywhere: TIDAL/Pandora >iPhone 6s > Bose Mini Bluetooth speaker. Link to comment
MikeJazz Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 We were talking about what MQA files sound like on non-MQA equipment. AFAIK, nobody here has any MQA capable hardware or software. yeah, that would be my next question... is there an mqa equiment already available? by hearing straight mqa from tidal am I in fact just listening to a cd with some kind of "mqa" dps run on them? or it's really nothing different at all? http://www.computeraudiophile.com/members/mikejazz/ funded this campain: http://igg.me/at/geekpulseaudio/x/5216671 Link to comment
MikeJazz Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 "I doubt that anyone uses Tidal for critical listening," is painting with a rather broad brush, delivery or SQ issues notwithstanding. I don't think Tidal is interested in MQA to better market to fans of Norwegian choral music. When I compared Tidal CD quality with my own CD and ripped by dbpoweramp, I never tought that Tidal was any better. True also, the difference was minimal...sometimes at a subjetive level... Worst, when there are several editions of the same CD, usually Tidal has the latest remastering which, many times, is not the best and is the most compressed. http://www.computeraudiophile.com/members/mikejazz/ funded this campain: http://igg.me/at/geekpulseaudio/x/5216671 Link to comment
crenca Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 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. True. Also, is contradictory to some of the marketing speak by Meridian that MQA will be "the same" as 16/44 through a non MQA DAC. However, they also speak of "an improvement", but according to analysis around here it will be (at least slightly) worse. In any case, I suspect we are all walking right into an MQA format future... As someone who will be avoiding any format entrapment, I suspect I will be dropping Tidal and switching to Spotify 320 soon. I will pay the cost in degraded sound quality, but at this point I think it will be worth it. This will actually be a boon for the industry in the short term, because I will likely accelerate my purchasing of 16/44 and PCM/DSD high res, because as Corpernicus (aka J. Robert Stuart) says these are for "legacy systems" Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
jeffmudrick Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 "I doubt that anyone uses Tidal for critical listening," is painting with a rather broad brush, delivery or SQ issues notwithstanding. I don't think Tidal is interested in MQA to better market to fans of Norwegian choral music. True. Also, is contradictory to some of the marketing speak by Meridian that MQA will be "the same" as 16/44 through a non MQA DAC. However, they also speak of "an improvement", but according to analysis around here it will be (at least slightly) worse. ) If Tidal will be delivering an MQA decoded stream, as has been suggested, that would be wrong. If Tidal is simply passing an undecoded stream then yes, the analysis thus far raises legitimate concerns . Link to comment
crenca Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 If Tidal will be delivering an MQA decoded stream, as has been suggested, that would be wrong. If Tidal is simply passing an undecoded stream then yes, the analysis thus far raises legitimate concerns . Not exactly following. Tidal will be stitching to MQA (and dropping the 16/44 "hi-fi" service), though the timeline is obscured by Meridian's behavior. I will probably wait at least until more than 1 or 2 of my favs become MQA only...probably, maybe. Such is the life of someone with a "legacy system"... edit: I don't really care about any software encoding that Tidal supplies that patches my "legacy system" (other than as a curiosity) - I am not interested in an MQA proprietary ecosystem... Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
DanSmedra Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 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? Market Segmentation: No. There exists a large base of younger (and a few older) consumers who currently play Premium-level ($10) music on cheaper mobile/smartphones with earbuds, and are not interested in SQ...as hard as that is for people on this forum to believe. Some people are content with fast food; others dine at elegant restaurants if they can afford it. Source: TIDAL HiFi/Masters, Pandora One > iPeng 9.2.1 on iPhone6s/iPad Great Room: SBT#1 > Cullen Coax > PS Audio DL3 DAC > Audio Envy cables > Martin Logan (ML) 200Wpc Purity. SBT#2 >JVC 110w amp > ML Motion 4 & AudioEngine 5. Garage: SBT3 > Audioquest TOS > Wyred mINT > Cullen Cables > Martin Logan Motion 12 Carry Anywhere: TIDAL/Pandora >iPhone 6s > Bose Mini Bluetooth speaker. Link to comment
jeffmudrick Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Not exactly following. Tidal will be stitching to MQA (and dropping the 16/44 "hi-fi" service), though the timeline is obscured by Meridian's behavior. I will probably wait at least until more than 1 or 2 of my favs become MQA only...probably, maybe. Such is the life of someone with a "legacy system"... edit: I don't really care about any software encoding that Tidal supplies that patches my "legacy system" (other than as a curiosity) - I am not interested in an MQA proprietary ecosystem... Your lack of interest is well understood. Be that as it may, saying that a software encoded MQA stream from Tidal will sound worse is at best unfounded. Link to comment
james45974 Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Market Segmentation: No. There exists a large base of younger (and a few older) consumers who currently play Premium-level ($10) music on cheaper mobile/smartphones with earbuds, and are not interested in SQ...as hard as that is for people on this forum to believe. Some people are content with fast food; others dine at elegant restaurants if they can afford it. So what seems to be in the future is Tidal Premuim (320 AAC) remains at $9.95 and Tidal HiFi MQA (whether you like it or not) at $19.95. Tidal seems to be putting all the HiFi eggs in one basket of unproven technology. Kind of a big gamble I would think. Jim Link to comment
crenca Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Your lack of interest is well understood. Be that as it may, saying that a software encoded MQA stream from Tidal will sound worse is at best unfounded. I am not saying that, and as far as I know no one is (on this forum or elsewhere). I fully expect software encoded MQA stream (i.e. a patched "legacy system" ) will sound impressive and largely (or at least partly) deliver on the "hi-res on streaming promise" (though the SQ vs this or that will no doubt be endlessly debated). The cost to the audio ecosystem (if MQA ever becomes the de facto standard) will be quite high however and I recoil at that. The MQA through a 'legacy DAC' (without software patch) is "the same" as 16/44 is what has been debunked by several around here. Which begs the question why did Meridian allow 2L, Onkyo, and others to release MQA files into the wild before MQA is even "finalized"? Poor management no doubt... Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
mansr Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Which begs the question why did Meridian allow 2L, Onkyo, and others to release MQA files into the wild before MQA is even "finalized"? Poor management no doubt... Have you read what Morten Lindberg is saying about MQA? They couldn't wish for better marketing. Link to comment
crenca Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 So what seems to be in the future is Tidal Premuim (320 AAC) remains at $9.95 and Tidal HiFi MQA (whether you like it or not) at $19.95. Tidal seems to be putting all the HiFi eggs in one basket of unproven technology. Kind of a big gamble I would think. Well, they may have believed Meridians diverse assurances that MQA will sound "the same" or even "better" through legacy systems, OR they are relying and software decoding (but what happens to the roon/hqplayer folks in this scenario?) OR it is a gamble by a company needing to take risks to become profitable OR both Tidal and Meridian are as poorly managed as they seem to be OR... It will not matter that much because it is all about moving the 99% unto a proprietary/closed format for future $fleecing$ and management... Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
R1200CL Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 I wouldn't know.. Alpha software just slipped through. How did you get ? I just download and no such option with my W7 PC. Can you find a way to share the installation file ? Link to comment
Jud Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 If Tidal will be delivering an MQA decoded stream, as has been suggested, that would be wrong. If Tidal is simply passing an undecoded stream then yes, the analysis thus far raises legitimate concerns . Tidal will deliver an MQA *encoded* stream, which it has been suggested by Meridian will sound slightly better than or the same as RedBook on non-MQA equipment. Several folks have done analyses of the available samples, and these have uniformly shown small frequency response changes from the RedBook, one component of which is high frequency noise. This would indicate that listening with non-MQA equipment would give either inaudible differences from RedBook or if the changes are audible, slightly worse fidelity/accuracy. This might be experienced by listeners as a slight improvement or a slight deterioration of the sound. Therefore folks are understandably concerned about a slight deterioration of the current user experience when paying more, unless they buy new MQA-capable firmware and/or hardware. One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature. Link to comment
R1200CL Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 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. Read the Blue note. Appart from that, you should look at Auralic App. It telles you exactly what you are getting. Link to comment
R1200CL Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 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. Why border ? Link to comment
R1200CL Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 As we've determined elsewhere, undecoded MQA is actually slightly degraded compared to standard Redbook due to higher noise levels. That conclusion is not final, is it ? As it did not compare a original redbok with a MQA redbok. Link to comment
R1200CL Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Don't know. But if anyone missed it.... Are you able to select only MQA encoded music ? As we would expect the number of tracks are limited. Link to comment
jeffmudrick Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Are you able to select only MQA encoded music ?As we would expect the number of tracks are limited. Someone else had posted this a month or two back. It was obviously a slip up on Tidal 's part. Link to comment
mansr Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 That conclusion is not final, is it ?As it did not compare a original redbok with a MQA redbok. What would you like to see compared? Link to comment
Distinctive Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Don't know. But if anyone missed it.... Shouldn't the HIFI read FLAC 755? 1411bps is CDA (WAV) or do they intend to say 'FLAC version from a 1411bps source? I reckon they use an on-the-fly flac transcoder with compression level 5? Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now