Jump to content
IGNORED

MQA is Vaporware


Recommended Posts

It was interesting to see Sandy Gross (of GoldenEar Tech - I owned Tritons until recently) express enthusiasm about MQA in a recent interview here:

 

http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/qa-with-sandy-gross-of-goldenear-technology/

 

"What I would say is that digital audio has finally achieved a level of quality that makes it acceptable to me. Initially, despite claims of perfect reproduction, it drilled holes in your head. Now, it has really matured into a very satisfying medium for music enjoyment. And with advances like MQA and Edgar Choueiri’s digital acoustic crosstalk cancellation device, it is really cooking!"

 

 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, synn said:

lol.

 

I had always known that a “Digital acoustic  crosstalk cancellation device” was the missing link that I needed to enjoy my music!

 

 

 

Actually that BACCH 3D stuff (which is what that refers to) does sound interesting from what I've read. Looking forward to hearing a demo one day.

 

Anyway there are other threads about that:

 

 

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, MetalNuts said:

I cannot afford USD54,000 for the startup microphones and cameras needed to experience Bacch-SP 3D sound.  Sad!

 

Hehe yes but it's a little like how F1 tech sometimes trickles down to affordable production cars some 5-10 years later.

 

Maybe some of that tech will trickle down (or maybe not). But would love to have a listen.

 

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, MetalNuts said:

I would like to experience how it sounds but it is remote that the price will go down dramatically to be within my budget.

 

As per my F1 example, I doubt an F1 price (can't be bought anyway) will ever drop down to within my budget but it's tech does trickle down to production cars. See this: 

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/technology/a24799/racing-innovations-real-engineering/

 

I've gone way off topic but my point isn't really about the current price but where it may lead to later, for affordable products - if it's any good...

 

Like I said, I've never heard this BACCH 3D but heard a lot of raving about it and would love to hear a demo myself.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

Does anyone know if Xstream is actually MQA? Or something entirely different?

 

Xstream will be designed to be adaptive, and stream in the highest quality a user's connection will allow.

 

"Xstream is one file, streaming for all with 15,000 seamlessly changing levels of playback quality," Young said.

 

Old April 2017 article here: https://www.cnet.com/news/pono-is-probably-dead-long-live-xstream/

 

Edit: more Googling says it's different.

 

"That effort has led to a technology developed by Orastream, a small company in Singapore that we’ve been working with. Together we created Xstream, the next generation of streaming, an adaptive streaming service that changes with available bandwidth. It is absolutely amazing because it is capable of complete high resolution playback."

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/neil-young-preps-new-high-quality-streaming-service-xstream-w478281

 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, #Yoda# said:

 

That is correct, but the Neil Young Archives seems to be very different in the available catalog to what was announced as XStream a view months ago. It simply uses the same technology.

 

Noted. It may be a starting point, for a larger catalog/library later.

 

Or might be a dead end. Let's see how it unfolds.

 

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, synn said:

All the information is on the site.

 

"5.1 SURROUND + STEREO produced in DXD (Digital eXtreme Definition 352kHz/24bit) by Lindberg Lyd, Norway "

 

Does this mean it was recorded in 24bit/352kHz? A fair assumption? Please excuse my ignorance.

 

Link to comment
47 minutes ago, synn said:

 

 

Yes, that would be correct.

 

Interesting, it's available in 352k MQA as well on Tidal. But Audirvana only plays it at 88k for me (first unfold only), to my Hugo2 non-MQA DAC.

 

What are your thoughts on the MQA version?

 

Since it's at 352k, is it a fair assumption that the the same DXD version that can be purchased, was used to make the MQA version? Seems like a reasonable assumption but hard to know I guess unless 2L is asked.

 

Needs an MQA DAC that unfolds up to 352k at least, for a proper comparison I guess?

 

Link to comment
48 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

even the cheer leaders could tell the difference between Advent Loudspeakers, AR-3a’s and JBL L-100’s.

 

This is the coolest thing I’ve ever read on this forum. Sorry for going off topic but it deserves kudos. Most importantly, the cheer leaders deserve major kudos.

 

 

 

Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...
7 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

The Direct DAC from Meridian doesn't mention MQA either on their website. Are we seeing a trend?

 

That was released in early 2014 though, no?

 

To me it's more of a surprise that it's still available and up on their website. Not sure we should read too much into the Direct DAC advertising. 

 

But I could be very wrong.

 

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

I'm looking at marketing literature and noticing the MQA is moved down the marketing points. Meridian seems to going back to their other filters in their marketing it is noticeable in Europe especially in home theater where MQA has made a big push in the United States. 

 

Noted.

 

But another angle for friendly consideration: if the labels decide they want to lock down music streaming one day and go full throttle with DRM and they decide to go with MQA to do this, I don't think it matters what is in Meridian Audio's marketing literature.

 

Here is a December 20th Instagram pic by Meridian Audio. No mention of MQA but there is mention of encryption lol

 

:

Link to comment
20 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

You forget people are happy with the $9.95 streaming services.

 

Agreed, music subscriber numbers continue to climb.

 

But what if the labels decided to make 24/44 and 24/48 the standard across all music streaming services, for the price of $9.95? i.e. quite a change from the pricing and what is offered, at present. Different to current contracts/plans (like the higher priced Tidal HiFi plan I'm paying for, which already includes MQA streaming of course).

 

I agree though it's a stretch, for all the reasons you noted above. Apple retreated from DRM long ago (iTunes) and I agree with you, and can't see them going down that path again.

 

BUT, is it a stretch to think that $9.95 will always buy us the same quality/resolution forever? Are there plans to offer better quality streaming for the same price?

 

Link to comment
20 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Apple isn’t going to invest in a label just to keep losing money with its streaming service. 

 

Is it crazy to think that one day Apple may give you 2 years of Apple Music for "free", with the purchase of a new iPhone or Mac?

 

I'm talking out of my bum here but I think 3 years from now, the standard pricing model (currently $9.95 per month) will look very different to how it looks right now.

 

But who knows. Crystal ball stuff.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
5 minutes ago, FredericV said:

 

So the mastering engineer is no longer needed to authenticate MQA?

 

Brian Lucey already confirmed on these threads, that he had nothing to do with the MQA versions of his recent works (Liam Gallagher and Shania Twain albums). He said these were done by the label.

 

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, Norton said:

I'm sure MQA would argue they actually support streaming up to 384kHz

 

There are MQA 353kHz titles available in Tidal already (see attached below). This title has a DXD copy that you can purchase, so I assume this was the master used.

 

Also, the streaming itself is only ever at 24/44k or 24/48k

 

I don't have an MQA DAC btw but I do use Audirvana sometimes if I want to listen to MQA (first unfold) to try and compare.

 

I don't see/hear the fuss personally, in terms of better SQ. CD quality can still sound stellar to me.

 

I'm more concerned about the DRM potential.

 

5a55d12a515f7_ScreenShot2018-01-10at7_37_38pm.thumb.png.2addb9f4a94730c9fe843a829dcd7eb4.png

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, FredericV said:


So the node2 can do the first unfold to the digital output? So the samplerate of MQA via the digital output is up to 96 Khz? Or do they also do the second unfold and expose this on the digital out (so in case of first unfold 96 K, this would mean 192K on the digital output).
 

 

The Node 2 can only do the first unfold (up to 96k) via it's digital outputs.

 

The 2nd unfold is only possible via it's analogue outputs.

 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, firedog said:

Their "vault" isn't a vault.

 

Agreed, I should have used "vault"

 

2 minutes ago, firedog said:

a) they aren't being given a chance to buy the rights for non-MQA versions and/or: b) the MQA versions are cheaper. 

 

I think b). The Qobuz Sublime+ streaming pricing has probably been set by the labels so HDTracks probably thought that's too much to charge their potential customers?

 

Maybe?

 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, FredericV said:


MQA gets away with it, here's why:
 

 

 

Right, we don't need 24 bits resolution and maybe 15-17 bits is enough.

 

On the technical issues with un-decoded MQA, there has been a bit of a mixed message in the past discussion - some saying it's worse than redbook CD.

 

Are we now all in agreement it's not worse (technically) than CD quality? Putting potential DRM aside for a small moment.

 

@mansr has done the deepest analysis I believe. What are your thoughts mansr at present? 

Link to comment

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...