MQA is Vaporware

[Rexp]

13 hours ago, manisandher said:

 

Perhaps that MQA doesn't sound as good as its proponents suggest, nor as bad as its opponents suggest?

 

I tried to keep an open mind when Tidal first introduced MQA streaming, but wanted to explore things further. This led to the three 'apples-to-apples' threads, where I managed to find MQA and hires tracks from the same master. My own subjective preference was MQA 1, hires 2. Listening to a whole bunch of MQA vs. redbook tracks on Tidal (not necessarily from the same master), my interest in MQA has waned over time - redbook (done well) really does sound fine to my ears.

 

(Edit: apologies if my opinions offend anyone.)

I much prefer the MQA provided the album release date is 2018 onwards. Not sure if that indicates it's been remastered, anyone know?

Example:

Listen to "Coltrane '58: The Prestige Recordings" on TIDAL
Check out this album on TIDAL: "Coltrane '58: The Prestige Recordings" by John Coltrane https://tidal.com/album/106434653

 

This is the HiFi (mqa 16/44) version which I prefer as I don' t have an MQA dac. 

[Rexp]

38 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Remastered but the question is was this recording subject to a “white glove” treatment in the MQA version?

You mean did MQA do the remaster? I dont know, wouldn't they announce it? 

[Rexp]

10 minutes ago, Cebolla said:

 

Unless you are on the odd occasion streaming an actual MQA-CD track, your streaming device is actually receiving a doctored version of the MQA tracks from TIDAL's online server, at 16/44.1kHz, rather than the original undecoded/distribution MQA tracks themselves, which should be at either 24/44.1kHz or 24/48Hz. This is due to your streaming device deliberately requesting non-MQA access to TIDAL's online server via your TIDAL HiFi account and has nothing to do with having an MQA DAC or not.

 

May be even the TIDAL server's 'doctoring' has contributed to your positive experience -  who knows?

Maybe just a coincidence that I prefer the recent remasters that are also available in MQA. Here is another goodun:

 "The Song Remains The Same (2018 Remaster)" by Led Zeppelin https://tidal.com/album/94079380

 

[Rexp]

2 hours ago, lucretius said:

 

MQA CDs are 16/44.1. However, the only MQA files that I ever streamed from Tidal were either 24/44.1 or 24/48 (usually the latter) before the "unfold".  Maybe, some of the 24/44.1 files were really 16/44.1 with padding?

Seems like a hassle for the record company to release two 16/44.1 versions. 

[Rexp]

16 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

What are you talking about here?

 

If one has Tidal HiFi, he has access to the MQA versions of albums. I’ve never seen Tidal give access to lossless pure PCM but not lossy MQA. 

Yes I do have access to MQA just dont have an MQA ready dac at the mo. What I am finding is the latest remasters (2018 onwards) sound very good in Tidal HiFI and wondered if it had anything to do with MQA? 

[Rexp]

On 8/1/2019 at 12:47 PM, GUTB said:

 

Yes. I ended up with the Liberty specifically for that support. I had to buy a linear power supply but thanks to AliExpress that's inexpensive. As far as the CD player is concerned it's just a standard 16/44 stream.

 

My CD chain:

MHZS CD88J --Supra TOSLink-->Mytek Liberty + linear PSU. All plugged into a 500VA balanced isolation transformer.

Thanks for the report, I don't doubt your findings, most CDs sound crap. How would you say the SQ compares to vinyl? 

[Rexp]

10 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

Respectfully, this is audiophiledom.  People "hear" things all the time. 

 

Alex in this case (probably there are others) is saying (and has said for a long time) that identical (bit) PCM files have a "sound" beyond the information itself.  Not only that, but this sound changes, say when the file is transmitted from one device to another (even though the bit information remains exactly the same).

 

Most audiophiles (what, 98.5%?...or is it 99.79876%) don't have a clue about digital anything, or even really analogue anything.  Heck, they have no more grasp of sound as pressure wave through medium than they have of the basic principles behind the inner principles of the internal combustion engine in the vehicle they drive every day - they only know that when the press the gas, it goes.

 

So you keep saying, over and over again.. You must be getting bored by now. Why not switch to a fine wine forum and berate those who use their sense of taste to judge quality. 

[Rexp]

Tidal used to offer both MQA and non MQA versions, now they're removing non MQA versions. This is all part of their evil plan I guess, not sure what the plan is though. 

[Rexp]

13 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

People must also be very vocal. If you have social media accounts, you must tag/mention Tidal and the labels and demand things change.
 

Start a hashtag #BoycottMQA #BoycottTidal #BoycottWarner etc...
 

Most companies hate being called out in public. 

The Tidal store still sells FLAC downloads, no mention of MQA. So they must have both versions on their server? 

[Rexp]

6 hours ago, daverich4 said:

Are you sure Tidal SELLS downloads? I can’t find any place to purchase music from them. You can download music from them for offline listening but it will disappear the minute you end your subscription. 

They don't promote it for some reason, just google 'Tidal store' 

[Rexp]

3 hours ago, Alex McBellott said:

Just my personal opinion. 
i have subscriptions to Qobuz, Tidal, Amazon HD. I like to make direct comparisons. 
I regularly listen to music through Vinyl LPs and Sacd. 
so to say that the media is just a vehicle for music. 
Mqa, behind its technical background, has GREAT marketing. Bob Stewart is an entrepreneur and a manager and knows very well what "the industry" wants. He just took advantage of his technical and marketing skills developed at Meridian. 
This said I personally don't see , for the moment, a "big brother's watching you" situation. 
if you don't like Mqa stuff you can use Qobuz or Amazon HD. Quality is superb for both as it's hi rez Flac and Qobuz user interface is really good (Amazon HD has margins for improvements...). 
When I move from Qobuz to Tidal Mqa I don't feel I'm moving from paradise to hell: they are both great listening experiences.
And both my Tannoy Canterbury SE or Martin Logan Ethos speakers are quite revealing. 

 

Tidal MQA sounds crap through non MQA DAC's. So hopefully its not too difficult to understand the problem if they make all their ouput MQA'd.

[Rexp]

1 hour ago, FredericV said:

So those without an MQA decoder now get a degraded sound quality as some of the bits were traded for  non-nyquist data as used for the MQA crypto DRM process (so expect a much higher noise floor without decoder), and those with an MQA decoder also get a different sounding version.
 

Yes, yet Tidal are still descibing their Hifi tier as lossles, which is a lie. Maybe we can we force them into changing it to 'lossless unless you play MQA tracks' 

[Rexp]

8 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

Undecoded MQA played back with a minimum phase filter sounds no different than decoded MQA.  The problem is 7 bits have been hijacked -- doesn't matter if you have an MQA decoder or not; the decoder was always a ruse, LOL!

Well undecoded MQA sure sounds crap to me (via a Chromecast). Means I have to remove all favourited albums from Tidal that are now MQA only. 

[Rexp]

47 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

Undecoded MQA played back with a minimum phase filter sounds no different than decoded MQA.  The problem is 7 bits have been hijacked -- doesn't matter if you have an MQA decoder or not; the decoder was always a ruse, LOL!

Here is an example of a record that is now only available in MQA and below is the same artist in FLAC, do you detect a marked difference? 

 

[Rexp]

10 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

??? Was there supposed to be sound files attached?  Nonetheless, non-decoded MQA ≠ normal PCM.  Also, both examples must be derived from the same master before we can compare them. 

Out of interest, what are you using to listen to non-decoded MQA? 

[Rexp]

10 hours ago, FredericV said:

On the group managed by Veter Peth, someone is comparing those MQA CD files with the ones before, and he does not hear any difference. As he is using an MQA dac, this would mean you actually need to use an MQA decoder in some form to get what you had in the past, without MQA.

So the MQA tax is now active on Tidal:



MQA adds nothing with those green fake 16/44.1 MQA CD files for the consumer, it takes away your rights and then sells them back to you as you now need MQA to get what you already had before.

Maybe they come up with the lame excuse his system is not good enough ....

So if you play a Tidal Master at the Hifi setting, you're streaming MQA CD, do you need an MQA DAC or will the player software decode it fully? What happens if you don't have any decoder? 

[Rexp]

6 hours ago, UkPhil said:

The same test done with a Universal owned album,  the MASTER plays MQA wind it down to HIFI and we get PCM 44.1 at the moment 

 

 

How about Warner (hires) masters streamed at the Hifi setting? Thanks! 

[Rexp]

21 hours ago, dmackta said:

 

Or....https://open.qobuz.com/album/0075596077460

If Qobuz matched Tidal pricing here in Malaysia, I'd switch immediately. 

[Rexp]

5 hours ago, manueljenkin said:

Not here to defend or accuse MQA but to learn something about signals. One major thing people tend to forget is most recordings done using delta Sigma adc don't have the high frequency content at all due to the noise shaper structure (and the brickwall that follows). Pulling through a windowed fft based spectrum analyser software like spek I seldom found anything to have ANY content above 20khz regardless of recordings. Very few recordings had such content preserved.

 

 

This is 24/192, shows content above 20k

[Rexp]

4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

If I had to guess, I'd say the band has no clue and the label was under contract with mQa to put out its entire catalog in mQa. 

This topic was one of my 'ignored topics', I can see it again now, have you removed this option?