MQA is Vaporware

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, 992Sam said:

is it me, or does an MQA version of a piece just sound the same as the original piece but maybe with a "loudness" button pushed, or a V shaped EQ?

 

I was listening to a recording of Steely Dans "Hey Nineteen"  in both 44.1/16 and MQA ... and the MQA just sounded like the loudness button was activated. 

It's all over the board. MQA ltd demonstrated the technology with "white glove" masters that were gone over with a fine tooth comb and made to sound great. The reality for 99.99999% of all the MQA files is that they are DSP'd in batches and don't sound like the white glove versions.

[KeenObserver]

22 minutes ago, 992Sam said:

is it me, or does an MQA version of a piece just sound the same as the original piece but maybe with a "loudness" button pushed, or a V shaped EQ?

 

I was listening to a recording of Steely Dans "Hey Nineteen"  in both 44.1/16 and MQA ... and the MQA just sounded like the loudness button was activated. 

 

There is nothing that MQA does that cannot be done better, without paying the cost.  If you want to compress a music file you can use a lossless free compression method.  If you want it louder, you can make it louder.  If you want to manipulate the sound, you can manipulate it to exactly what sounds best to you. If you want an original Hi def you can still download a high def.

[992Sam]

16 minutes ago, KeenObserver said:

 

There is nothing that MQA does that cannot be done better, without paying the cost.  If you want to compress a music file you can use a lossless free compression method.  If you want it louder, you can make it louder.  If you want to manipulate the sound, you can manipulate it to exactly what sounds best to you. If you want an original Hi def you can still download a high def.

and yet 50% of my streaming music source is Tidal (the other 50% Qobuz) ... and they're married to MQA.. so it would appear we are going to be forced to use this format (at least for now)... lots of recordings aren't available as both MQA and 24bit uncompressed...  at least I've not found many that are available as both.

[KeenObserver]

44 minutes ago, 992Sam said:

and yet 50% of my streaming music source is Tidal (the other 50% Qobuz) ... and they're married to MQA.. so it would appear we are going to be forced to use this format (at least for now)... lots of recordings aren't available as both MQA and 24bit uncompressed...  at least I've not found many that are available as both.

 

We are coming at this from different perspectives. I don't really stream music. I have ripped my collection of cd's to a music server.  Over the past thirty years I have  digitized my vinyl collection and have put them on the music server.  I have downloaded a number of hi rez albums and put them on my music server.  And backed them up.  I calculated how much music I have on the server. If I listened 24/7 365, after a year I still would not have listened to it all.  And I still collect cd's, sacd's, and high rez downloads. I do not have any MQA music and never will.  I do not have any MQA equipment, and never will.  I listen to music through my av system or through my Benchmark Dac 3.

I am retiring up to the mountain, where I will listen to my music and watch my movies and concerts.  I'm playing out my end game and it will never involve MQA.

[Daccord]

2 hours ago, 992Sam said:

and yet 50% of my streaming music source is Tidal (the other 50% Qobuz) ... and they're married to MQA.. so it would appear we are going to be forced to use this format (at least for now)... lots of recordings aren't available as both MQA and 24bit uncompressed...  at least I've not found many that are available as both.

Most MQA albums on Tidal are also available in standard format. Tidal just hides them, perhaps due to some licensing deal with MQA. If you search, usually you can find the non-MQA version. I refuse to add MQA anything to my Tidal favourites.

[KeenObserver]

If my source of music only offered MQA,  it would no longer be my source of music.

 

I will not be forced to accept an unwanted scheme and be forced to pay for it.

[botrytis]

I will not pay for a substandard product, period. That is all MQA is. If I wanted compressed, I would listen to MP3's or others that do not manipulate the original data.

 

MQA is just a train wreck.

[FredericV]

How many times was the third unfold debunked? And still we see this on our professional FB account in the news feed:

 

there is no third unfold, everything above 24/88.2 or 24/96 is upsampling

MQA second unfold = upsampling with modified filters

no new entropy is being recovered

[randyhat]

I realize that bringing up a topic related to how a particular MQA album actually sounds as opposed to how it looks on a graph is a touchy one here but nonetheless here goes....

 

I generally am nonpartisan when it comes to MQA but I am concerned with sound quality.  I just discovered an MQA version of Dire Straits best of..."Private Investigations" compliation album on Tidal.  I am listening to it now.  I am very familiar with all of the songs on this album and I have vinyl and CD versions of all of their albums as well as Mark Knofler's solo work.  I have to say that the versions on the album sound better than I have ever heard them.  Maybe it's totally unrelated to MQA but something about this version of the album just sounds better to me.  Not sure how my impressions now would hold up to intensive and tedious A/B comparisons to other versions but for me, now, this is the best I have ever heard these songs.

[992Sam]

10 minutes ago, randyhat said:

I realize that bringing up a topic related to how a particular MQA album actually sounds as opposed to how it looks on a graph is a touchy one here but nonetheless here goes....

 

I generally am nonpartisan when it comes to MQA but I am concerned with sound quality.  I just discovered an MQA version of Dire Straits best of..."Private Investigations" compliation album on Tidal.  I am listening to it now.  I am very familiar with all of the songs on this album and I have vinyl and CD versions of all of their albums as well as Mark Knofler's solo work.  I have to say that the versions on the album sound better than I have ever heard them.  Maybe it's totally unrelated to MQA but something about this version of the album just sounds better to me.  Not sure how my impressions now would hold up to intensive and tedious A/B comparisons to other versions but for me, now, this is the best I have ever heard these songs.

 

I have had similar experiences with some recordings,  most recently with REM's Automatic for the People...   While I feel MQA sounds good, I can't help but feel there is some kind of EQ boosting happening, like I said above, a V Shape, or loudness effect..   At a minimum, the MQA recordings to tend to play 2 or 3 db louder..   

[The Computer Audiophile]

33 minutes ago, randyhat said:

I realize that bringing up a topic related to how a particular MQA album actually sounds as opposed to how it looks on a graph is a touchy one here but nonetheless here goes....

 

I generally am nonpartisan when it comes to MQA but I am concerned with sound quality.  I just discovered an MQA version of Dire Straits best of..."Private Investigations" compliation album on Tidal.  I am listening to it now.  I am very familiar with all of the songs on this album and I have vinyl and CD versions of all of their albums as well as Mark Knofler's solo work.  I have to say that the versions on the album sound better than I have ever heard them.  Maybe it's totally unrelated to MQA but something about this version of the album just sounds better to me.  Not sure how my impressions now would hold up to intensive and tedious A/B comparisons to other versions but for me, now, this is the best I have ever heard these songs.

Nobody should have a problem with personal preference and one's enjoyment. 

 

I think the problems come into play when one considers the pros and cons of an MQA ecosystem. 

[KeenObserver]

Everyone's preferences are their own personal business.  They are developed from their personal experiences.

 

I have a standing joke with a friend of mine.  He "came of age" in the back seat of a 57 Chevy with Buddy Holly playing on the radio.  The joke is that his wife had a radio and speaker from a 57 Chevy installed in the bedroom with a Buddy Holly loop.  When she is in an amorous mood, she turns it on.  Works better than a blue pill.

 

One of my favorite songs is Look of Love.  I have a number of covers of it.  When I hear a new cover, I think: that's interesting!  But I always go back to Dusty Springfield.

 

Listen to the version for a while and see if you still favor it.  The manipulation of the original may just be catching your attention.

[KeenObserver]

There are a number of cd's I have that are just terrible.  Whoever mastered them just threw it together and stuck it on a cd to push it out the door.  I have several remasters that were done properly.  There is a world of difference.

The biggest difference to me is how well they were originally recorded and how well were they mastered.

I have 24/192 that are terrible and I have 16/44.1 that are outstanding.

[sandyk]

On 11/5/2020 at 9:03 AM, KeenObserver said:

If you want to compress a music file you can use a lossless free compression method. 

 Is there currently such a universal animal ? It would be great to be able to use the same recording both at home and in the family car, while just enabling/disabling a feature.

[992Sam]

1 hour ago, KeenObserver said:

 

I have 24/192 that are terrible and I have 16/44.1 that are outstanding.

now that I am listening to music via a VERY high resolution system... I am seeing this to be the case more than anything else... 

 

not only is some of the production (engineering) work crap on some albums especially the "loudness" of some of the mid 90's and newer recordings, but worse yet... in the classical realm, some of the best recordings (conductors and symphonies that I prefer) are only available in 44.1 and some of the not so good interpretations are of course readily available in 192/24... which just sucks! 

[Allan F]

On 11/7/2020 at 1:59 PM, KeenObserver said:

The biggest difference to me is how well they were originally recorded and how well were they mastered.

I have 24/192 that are terrible and I have 16/44.1 that are outstanding.

 

Very true. The quality of the original recording has always been far more important than the format. However, music that is well recorded and mastered in high resolution PCM or DSD format can be wonderful.

[Currawong]

On 11/5/2020 at 6:26 AM, 992Sam said:

is it me, or does an MQA version of a piece just sound the same as the original piece but maybe with a "loudness" button pushed, or a V shaped EQ?

 

I was listening to a recording of Steely Dans "Hey Nineteen"  in both 44.1/16 and MQA ... and the MQA just sounded like the loudness button was activated. 

 

I was listening to the Beatles Remasters in both normal and MQA, and it seems that they had enhanced the quieter sounds in the MQA version. This worked very well with this particular album.  

 

On 11/8/2020 at 12:20 AM, randyhat said:

I realize that bringing up a topic related to how a particular MQA album actually sounds as opposed to how it looks on a graph is a touchy one here but nonetheless here goes....

 

I generally am nonpartisan when it comes to MQA but I am concerned with sound quality.  I just discovered an MQA version of Dire Straits best of..."Private Investigations" compliation album on Tidal.  I am listening to it now.  I am very familiar with all of the songs on this album and I have vinyl and CD versions of all of their albums as well as Mark Knofler's solo work.  I have to say that the versions on the album sound better than I have ever heard them.  Maybe it's totally unrelated to MQA but something about this version of the album just sounds better to me.  Not sure how my impressions now would hold up to intensive and tedious A/B comparisons to other versions but for me, now, this is the best I have ever heard these songs.

 

I think some pop music works with it well, but it destroys classical, at least from what I've tested. Depth cues from instruments are removed and the notes sound artificial.   I was listening to Miles Davis Mystery, from the Doo-Bop album. It never struck me as being particularly well-mastered, but I found out I'd been listening to the MQA version the whole time, and when I switched to the regular, CD-Quality version, it was noticeably clearer!

 

I have another investigation I'm doing... about the 3rd unfold, to verify for sure whether or not it exists (and we're not talking about "rendering" upsampling) but it requires a good ADC.

[KeenObserver]

There are many ways to manipulate a sound file.  And any time you manipulate a sound file there will be someone who thinks that it sounds better.  If MQA corrupts the original recording and tells you that it sounds better,  there will be those that say they prefer it.

Ultimately, it is the quality of the original recording and the quality of the mastering that is the most important aspect.

You do not need any of the MQA garbage to produce a quality recording.  The MQA scheme only adds a layer of cost to the end product.

[DuckToller]

Just got introduced to the ES9068 DAC chip, which includes MQA on the chip. (The first one with mqa?)
"When equipped with ES9068AS, not only it supports MQA full decoding via USB, but also can directly process SPDIF and I2S input MQA first-order expanded digital audio signals. There is no need for X16 to add MQA-related identification and control circuits, so as to achieve as little interference as possible by external control signals when the DAC is working, and finally achieve the ideal MQA playback experience." (Gustard X16)
Given the price/performance ratio - the well equipped balanced DAC with 2xES9068 goes at some reasonable 379 Euros incl. shipping at shenzhenaudio -  the unit may be predestined for high demand. 
This looks like MQA will using the hardware strategy as a way to intrude the living rooms.

 

[Tintinabulum]

Sounds like great news!

[KeenObserver]

With the Absolute Sound and Stereophile claiming the sun, the moon, and the stars for MQA,  without actually doing deep research, it created somewhat of a demand for MQA.  Manufacturers, always concerned with the bottom line, sought to fill the demand.  Some knowledgeable and ethical manufacturers could see that MQA was not good for the music consumer and refused to produce mqa products.  When MQA dies, it will go the way of HDCD and eventually disappear.

[firedog]

40 minutes ago, DuckToller said:

Just got introduced to the ES9068 DAC chip, which includes MQA on the chip. (The first one with mqa?)
"When equipped with ES9068AS, not only it supports MQA full decoding via USB, but also can directly process SPDIF and I2S input MQA first-order expanded digital audio signals. There is no need for X16 to add MQA-related identification and control circuits, so as to achieve as little interference as possible by external control signals when the DAC is working, and finally achieve the ideal MQA playback experience." (Gustard X16)
Given the price/performance ratio - the well equipped balanced DAC with 2xES9068 goes at some reasonable 379 Euros incl. shipping at shenzhenaudio -  the unit may be predestined for high demand. 
This looks like MQA will using the hardware strategy as a way to intrude the living rooms.

 

What does the chip do when you feed it a non MQA stream? Does it process it with the MQA filters or does it use the other filters in the DAC?

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, firedog said:

What does the chip do when you feed it a non MQA stream? Does it process it with the MQA filters or does it use the other filters in the DAC?

This is critical.

[DuckToller]

2 minutes ago, firedog said:

What does the chip do when you feed it a non MQA stream? Does it process it with the MQA filters or does it use the other filters in the DAC?

It decodes a number of other codecs too, though I would guess , mqa free decoding is on the chip as well

[DuckToller]

specs say: USB ：   PCM 16-32bit/44.1-768kHz；DSD DOP64-DOP256；NATIVE DSD：DSD64-DSD512

 

https://shenzhenaudio.com/collections/all/products/gustard-dac-x16-bluetooth-5-0-two-es9068as-mqa-full-decoding-xu216-processor-oled-screen-high-performance-audio-dac