MQA is Vaporware

[UkPhil]

Universal has bought Dylan's back catalogue, this will be another good marketing angle for MQA as I am sure Universals MQA processing is going on behind the scenes at the moment and this scoop will be just what MQA needs to keep the ball rolling

 

https://news.sky.com/story/bob-dylans-entire-back-catalogue-bought-in-nine-figure-deal-12154238?fbclid=IwAR0fRufgsqAmTwInHxfrECSXseZjUhAudqCZfxjHsqqkV-TLDyZXOPeT8Yo

[UkPhil]

20 minutes ago, dmackta said:

Universal Music Publishing has nothing to do with the audio. They bought the compositions. Not the recordings. 

Good to know thanks :-)

[UkPhil]

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Absolutely!

 

Let me make that screenshot a bit larger. It's a no-brainer. The 13 bit MQA version or pure PCM lossless version from Qobuz. 

 

Covering the release of Warner’s red book conversions on Tidal, MQA has released their latest info on the project 

http://bobtalks.co.uk/blog/provenance/provenance-and-containers/

 

[UkPhil]

15 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

According to the patent diagram, the 0-24kHz is mapped to the 13 MSB bits .  The next 3 bits are then used to trigger the blue light and selection of the MQA filter, etc.*  That would make MQA-CD 13 bits -- not just 13 bits but 13 bit playback with a leaky filter.  [For 24 bit MQA, HF -- 24-48kHz -- seems to be packed into the 4 LSB bits (bit 21 to bit 24).]

 

*Further, more than 1 bit is needed to indicate, authentication, filter selection and, possibly, sample rate.

 

 

Would this be the concept to hide all the upsamping they were pushing on CD, with these being just straight 16bit they don’t need any of that craziness so wouldn’t 15bit be a truer figure even so it’s still reducing the audio capability regardless 

[UkPhil]

So we could have three variables to play with reading into all this.......

 

CD  13 bit reserved for audio (with 3 bits for MQA data blue/green light / filters & upsampling ?)

 

16/44.1 file 14/15 Bit reserved for audio (with 1 /2 bit for MQA data blue/green light / filters only no upsampling ?) 

 

24/44.1 (48) file 17 bit reserved for audio (with 7 bits MQA data blue/green light / filters & upsampling ?)

 

What a god damn mess 
 

[UkPhil]

53 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

The 13 bits (LF - 0 to 24 kHz) comes from the patent diagram (there is no upsampling with MQA-CD so that the 3 bits does not have to indicate any upsampling scheme).

Thanks for the info,

 

I have a few ripped MQA CD's that show 16/44.1 as base data but expands to 352.8 (8x) on the output screen when played back, does this mean their is no upsampling be it even lossy in these files so it just  BS ?

[UkPhil]

2 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

What output screen?  Roon or the DAC?

Hi

 

It appears on the DAC 

[UkPhil]

42 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

There are two sources for MQA-CD. The first is where the master is 44.1/16 bit. The second is where an MQA 16-bit file was made by removing the lower 8 bits of an 24 bit MQA file (this appears to be the case for the file you noted). And in this latter case, it would appear that there are no unfolds or upsampling. I could be wrong -- there definitely is no unfold to 88.2/96k but there could be straight-up upsampling?

 

 

[UkPhil]

15 minutes ago, bogi said:

 

16bit MQA is probably 15bit PCM content + 1bit control stream.

24bit MQA is 16bit MQA and 8 bits in group 4+4: 4 bits for lossy encoding of high frequency content and another 4bits to control "unfolding" = upsampling, filtering.

So where does the MQA CD version sit as this version shows upsampling 8x from an alleged 16/44.1 file when played ? 

[UkPhil]

@The Computer Audiophile

We seem to have MQA’s marketing machine rolling again on the back catalogue release from Warner’s,  basically bit depth and sample rate is a thing of the past welcome the new era of masters 

 

https://www.mqa.co.uk/newsroom/opinions/the-original-is-the-best?fbclid=IwAR2ZwJQexdff4iLTVep-SkhO2sgmifTQdPbAP-G4d8m1f0vjT-UFIx0WyP4

[UkPhil]

5 minutes ago, FredericV said:

So now we have three files:

 

The undecoded MQA (the middle one) is the worst, and sounds more agressive, and this is most obvious with percussion which sounds more harsh. But TBH I was first impressed by the decoded version, but off axis when I was preparing these  files.

The decoded vs redbook sound more alike and the agressive aspect of the undecoded version is gone, but when listening to these files in the direct sound field of the Amphion Krypton 3's, I recognise the same signature as when I did my MQA listening test long time ago on the Amphion One 18 studio monitor in nearfield, on an actual MQA dac.

In the current setup the PCM goes to a DAC without MQA (I explicitly ordered my Sonnet Morpheus without the MQA module), so the DAC would no try to post-process the middle track in the list.

First impression is that the percussion is a little bit more clear with decoded MQA-CD (and for some that should sound like the better version), but at the cost of shortening the post echo's. The decay of the echo's and reverberation is longer with the redbook version. The redbook version is slightly warmer and more natural. To some ears the decoded MQA may sound too bright.

In this track the main big difference is the percussion.

So now we have it: while MQA CD is slightly different from redbook, it will never be the original redbook and the decay of the post echo's will never be the original. It will improve one aspect of the sound, at the cost of another aspect.

And to have the version which was closest to the redbook, you now need an MQA decoder.

So this is a good example of the MQA TAX.

And since Tidal is no longer serving the original redbook files, which I still prefer, it's time to jump ship to another service which does not batch process their redbook files.

To me it proves why introduce a proprietary DSP into the process chain which you cannot control or eradicate, I am sure all these refinements can be applied manually with many personal processes incl bespoke filtering, EQ and room treatments 

[UkPhil]

2 hours ago, KeenObserver said:

Other than MQA and the studios (and the fanboys), does anyone think that MQA will be good for the future quality of music?

I am sure recording studios will keep their integrity intact at stick with PCM / DXD or even good ole analogue tape, interesting to see if 2L comes back to confirm if they archive in the format, but as far as the consumer is concerned MQA’s goal is to be the next standard playback LP  / CD / MQA. 
Once Universal and Sony have delivered the “Latex Glove treatment” and starts to send those to Amazon Deezer and Qobuz the jobs done 

My question is would the final nail in the coffin be the hidden DRM is it capable or degrading the sound output further  without the decoder akin to the days of Dolby on a cassette you needed it to enhance the playback ? 

[UkPhil]

1 hour ago, R1200CL said:

 

I was so sure MQA decoder didn’t do any upsampling. Only unfolding if the original MQA file was 88.2 / 96 or above. 

 

It’s all lossy after 88.2 / 96, no part of the original file is recovered after this and it is upsampled to suit the max your DAC can handle eg a 352khz file will stop at 176khz if your DAC maxes out to that, I have never seen any proof of  “the third unfold” yet 

[UkPhil]

41 minutes ago, bogi said:

yes

 

I understand.

 

yes and not only in this case

More confusion for the punter to wade through, most people haven’t got a chance in this, that’s why the MQA strap line for selling this technology is “just listen” , I always smell a rat when that is said to be honest 

[UkPhil]

18 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

 

12 tracks...24 tracks.  Is one of them the Rhino version?

I believe both are Rhino releases but no guarantee the source is the same 

[UkPhil]

Jeez multiple versions 16bit PCM  / 24 bit / 13 bit MQA / 15 bit pseudo MQA remasters / remixes / deluxe / the one copied from MP3 that no one knows about and the rare cassette remastered safety copy 8bit MQA de blurred Dolby C limited edition 

and you wonder why millions of people listen to Spotify 😂

And It’s only going to get worse when  Universal and Sony deliver their contribution to this craziness. I need a lie down 🤪

[UkPhil]

7 hours ago, R1200CL said:

@UkPhil How can one get in touch with Bob ? It seems that’s from a forum  

 

Bob Stuart is only contactable via MQA Ltd or sometimes on the MQA Facebook site where he will reply to users comments 

[UkPhil]

6 hours ago, lucretius said:

 

 

If that was a 16 bit MQA file put into a 24 bit flac, then that should leave the bottom 8 bits all as zero. Right?

 

I believe that's what Bob Stuart said when it was highlighted on the MQA Facebook site, it was put down to an error in the batch processing of these Red Book PCM files as some were dumped into a 24 bit container so I assume just padded with zeros with no difference in its "sonic" output 

[UkPhil]

5 hours ago, GUTB said:

I don't think it's an error, I believe MQA will always unfold to 88.2 kHz regardless of the original sample rate. This isn't a simple compression mechanism, it's trying to rebuild a picture of the original's timing cues along with the original information up to 50 kHz (hence the 88.2 kHz rate) and this unfold is likely generated the same across the board with the final unfold applying the remaining timing corrections. This is what I gathered from the various interviews.

I am not sure, this is true their are a lot of these conversions giving this info, 
Not sure in 1979 The Scorpions were ahead of the digital game this would have been an analogue recording

with about 11/12 bits of DR 
why output it to 88.2 ??.....such a mess 

In fact it's practically up sampling for no reason 

[UkPhil]

4 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

This is the story of MQA. Sane people who don't like being lied to, suggesting the company has some explaining to do. 

And this is what Bob Stuart said was not going to happen and wanted rid of the upsampling to larger bit buckets to sell product ???

[UkPhil]

2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

It's all about simplicity for content owners (record labels) and creating confusion for consumers, so they just see the blue light and say OK (in other words, give up trying to understand any of it).

This is pretty heavy stuff  from Bob’s blog.......and after 5 years in the public eye you would think by now most reputable recording studios would have taken this on board but no PCM 24/48 or 96 at a push is still the standard, with the boutique specials using DXD and DSD 

[UkPhil]

26 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

The MQA Core Decoder (software) always outputs 88.2k/96k - 24 bit, regardless of (1) the transmission sample and bit rate, and (2) the original sample and bit rate of the pre-MQA file.  I have confirmed this with the readings on my DAC. 

 

That is to say:

 

44.1k-16bit (MQA 44.1k)     ->  Core Decoder  ->  88.2k-24bit

44.1k-16bit (MQA 88.2k)    ->  Core Decoder  ->  88.2k-24bit

44.1k-16bit (MQA 176.4k)  ->  Core Decoder  ->  88.2k-24bit

44.1k-16bit (MQA 352.8k)  ->  Core Decoder  ->  88.2k-24bit

 

44.1k-24bit (MQA 44.1k)     ->  Core Decoder  ->  88.2k-24bit

44.1k-24bit (MQA 88.2k)    ->  Core Decoder  ->  88.2k-24bit

44.1k-24bit (MQA 176.4k)  ->  Core Decoder  ->  88.2k-24bit

44.1k-24bit (MQA 352.8k)  ->  Core Decoder  ->  88.2k-24bit

 

48k-24bit (MQA 48k)   ->  Core Decoder    ->  96k-24bit.

48k-24bit (MQA 96k)   ->  Core Decoder    ->  96k-24bit.

48k-24bit (MQA 192k)  ->  Core Decoder   ->  96k-24bit.

48k-24bit (MQA 384k) ->  Core Decoder   ->  96k-24bit.

 

I hope that's clear.

 

I don't use Roon, but Tracy Chapman recent 16/44.1 conversion when run via Volumio software using Tidal to my Project DAC hardware MQA only shows 44.1 when played  

[UkPhil]

40 minutes ago, GUTB said:What if Stuart's theory is correct and it's this timing information what actually makes hi-res sound better than Redbook?

 

Bob Stuart is not saying Hi Res is better than Red Book he doesn’t particularly care if it’s 16/44.1 or 24/192 analogue archives or digital archives, he is selling the theory of one proprietary file for all with the ability of taking away consumer choice, Tidal was just a platform to test this project, once the three majors have converted all the back catalogue which is being worked on now it won’t take long to start sending these files to other lossless platforms. Why would you want at best 17/96 as a replacement to industry standard PCM ? 

[UkPhil]

16 hours ago, R1200CL said:

Good explanation. 
I tried to change my MQA settings. I still get 24/88.2 in Roon. So if we assume the render sees 16/44.1 as claimed, then Roon displays incorrect. (Or maybe I must remove HQPlayer in my chain in order to make Roon display 16/44.1 ? Or have a non MQA DAC attached?). 
 

Are you now also confirming Roon Core Decoder is performing upsampling ? (Depending on settings in Roon). 

Tried an old Meridian Explorer 2 which I had lying around and it lights up MQA "Green Dot" 44.1 

[UkPhil]

Are 2L actively using MQA in their workflow ?

Can anyone confirm if this is what’s happening or are they just releasing MQA as their “go to” delivery streaming format. I am not aware of any other recording studio/ company that use it ?