Big MQA News (Really - Tidal and Software Decoding, etc...)

[The Computer Audiophile]

This simply is a "subjectivist" suggestion, one that leads some folks to tape pebbles onto their cables. I can take any song you would choose, add a little EQ here, perhaps just a touch of DSP (perhaps a subtle reverb) there, and have you listen and you would "like it" more (or less). I could patent it, and then sell it to you and yes subjectively you would be a happy camper - perhaps up until the point you learned of my snake oil - or perhaps even after.

 

Obviously, a fundamental "problem" or fact-of-life in High Fidelity is how the consumer relates to all this. Obviously, I (and many others) lean to "objectivists" understanding and solutions.

 

Besides, MQA is not really about SQ anyways...

 

If you produce a product people like I have no problem with that. If it's EQ or DQ who cares?

[crenca]

If you produce a product people like I have no problem with that. If it's EQ or DQ who cares?

 

Almost everyone, including yourself. If anyone were to take this radical "subjectivity" argument of yours seriously, your reviews of product would be moot because it would all be based SOLELY on personal taste, how you were feeling that day, and what level of alcohol was in your blood. You would have no bases to COMPARE any one thing to any other thing. Nobody is really interested in that, because that is a world where no one can talk to each other except to say the obvious "I like blue", "well I like green", "well, then why would I read your review of blue because I like green?".

 

Nope, instead we lived in a shared world where not every opinion is equal, where real things exist, and (in the context of this discussion) all of us (well, most of us) recognize the validity of something called "High Fidelity", which is to say some things (software or hardware) are more "equal" than others. Not very political correct, but it IS one of the legs on which this hobby rests on.

 

Besides, MQA is not about SQ anyways...

[kennyb123]

Almost everyone, including yourself. If anyone were to take this radical "subjectivity" argument of yours seriously, your reviews of product would be mute because it would all be based SOLELY on personal taste, how you were feeling that day, and what level of alcohol was in your blood. You would have no bases to COMPARE any one thing to any other thing. Nobody is really interested in that, because that is a world where no one can talk to each other except to say the obvious "I like blue", "well I like green", "well, then why would I read your review of blue because I like green?".

 

Music is meant to be listened to and enjoyed. This seems not to matter to you.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Music is meant to be listened to and enjoyed. This seems not to matter to you.

 

Recorded music requires electronic gear (which implies software as well) in order to be consumed. This discussion is about gear (software in this case). It has pretty much zero to do with how invested someone is in listening to and "enjoying" music.

[Dr Tone]

Ok ok! So I gather that MQA is being decoded on the Tidal app to a PCM stream!

 

Can someone verify whether the output is higher res than 24/48? Thx.

 

I got 24/96 when I quickly tried Zac Brown. I think each album can have a different decoded sample rate.

[crenca]

Music is meant to be listened to and enjoyed. This seems not to matter to you.

 

Dig deeper (or, as your mother would say, "Think harder Kenny!!!" ). The truth is just the opposite...

[Dr Tone]

Looking forward to Roon 1.3 so I can run the decoded stream through HQPlayer!

 

I don't think it's coming as quickly as 1.3, unfortunately.

[Samuel T Cogley]

I don't think it's coming as soon as quickly as 1.3, unfortunately.

 

Can you elaborate?

[MikeJazz]

Is there a way to disable getting MQA stream and get just regular unbroken RedBook?

 

Seems not...the quality setting says "HiFi / Master". So it's the same options.

I suppose if you use a streamer compatible with Tidal, MQA is not processed??

[Dr Tone]

Can you elaborate?

 

I got a reply from Danny on their forums but I might have misinterpreted it. To hard to explain over here without looking at all the question and responses.

 

Chris would know better.

[Samuel T Cogley]

I got a reply from Danny on their forums but I might have misinterpreted it. To hard to explain over here without looking at all the question and responses.

 

Chris would know better.

 

Would you mind providing a URL to the Roon forum discussion?

[Dr Tone]

Would you mind providing a URL to the Roon forum discussion?

 

 

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/roon-tidal-and-mqa/1375/35?u=drtone

[The Computer Audiophile]

Almost everyone, including yourself. If anyone were to take this radical "subjectivity" argument of yours seriously, your reviews of product would be moot because it would all be based SOLELY on personal taste, how you were feeling that day, and what level of alcohol was in your blood. You would have no bases to COMPARE any one thing to any other thing. Nobody is really interested in that, because that is a world where no one can talk to each other except to say the obvious "I like blue", "well I like green", "well, then why would I read your review of blue because I like green?".

 

Nope, instead we lived in a shared world where not every opinion is equal, where real things exist, and (in the context of this discussion) all of us (well, most of us) recognize the validity of something called "High Fidelity", which is to say some things (software or hardware) are more "equal" than others. Not very political correct, but it IS one of the legs on which this hobby rests on.

 

Besides, MQA is not about SQ anyways...

 

Wow. Talk about radical. I must live in a different world from you.

 

All product reviews are subjective. In all industries.

 

It seems like you wish robots did reviews and decided what's good so you could then like it.

 

I listen. If I enjoy it, I purchase it. Bottom line.

[firedog]

Just tried playing MQA version in Roon. See screen shot results below of difference between normal (16/44) and MQA (24/48) versions, both played from Tidal through Roon plus HQPlayer (Tidal labels the MQA version as "(Deluxe)":

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]32082[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]32083[/ATTACH]

 

There is a noticeable sonic difference between the two.

 

yes, but is the difference b/c of MQA or because it is a different mastering. You can't be sure.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Chris,

 

If you have an opportunity to ask questions re: Roon and MQA, could you please ask this?

 

"Assuming Roon will decode MQA from Tidal as the desktop Tidal app does today, will this decoded stream be made available to HQPlayer? Or is this decoded stream considered in line with Spencer Christlu's "crown jewels" statement and will be restricted somehow?"

 

I'm concerned that the "crown jewels effect" is in force now and all of us HQPlayer users will be left in the cold.

 

Thanks in advance!

[bogi]

Assuming Roon will decode MQA from Tidal as the desktop Tidal app does today, will this decoded stream be made available to HQPlayer?

 

Problem for me is that this decoded stream is already 'MQA DSP-ed'. I want to choose what for DSP to use and not some DRM company instead of me.

[Samuel T Cogley]

Problem for me is that this decoded stream is already 'MQA DSP-ed'. I want to choose what for DSP to use and not some DRM company instead of me.

 

I completely share your concern. There's no reason to believe there won't be a significant impact to downstream DSP. But if MQA won't even allow that decoded stream to be further processed, it's a moot point. I'm hoping it's a pure coincidence that Roon 1.3 will have built-in DSD upsampling. But will that upsampling be disabled when playing MQA content?

 

I can just imagine the MQA people suggesting that HQPlayer is "no longer needed".

[bogi]

I completely share your concern. There's no reason to believe there won't be a significant impact to downstream DSP. But if MQA won't even allow that decoded stream to be further processed, it's a moot point. I'm hoping it's a pure coincidence that Roon 1.3 will have built-in DSD upsampling. But will that upsampling be disabled when playing MQA content?

 

I can just imagine the MQA people suggesting that HQPlayer is "no longer needed".

 

There is simple answer: Don't tidal and stick on ordinary (non MQA) downloads. That's the only way how to resist against undesirable DRM impacts.

[crenca]

Wow. Talk about radical. I must live in a different world from you.

 

All product reviews are subjective. In all industries.

 

It seems like you wish robots did reviews and decided what's good so you could then like it.

 

I listen. If I enjoy it, I purchase it. Bottom line.

 

What is radical is taking the fact that the subjective aspects of this or that (in this context, product reviews) and pushing too hard by saying "all product reviews are subjective" which is objectively not true (taken to the extreme). For example, all products are measurable in many different ways. This amp or that gizmo has this or that level of fill-in-the-blank (e.g. distortion). These things are measurable and objectively important, in that "everyone" (with only a few exceptions to prove the rule) will agree that this sounds better than that. This is why you have equipment reference level, "High Fidelity" equipment (TAD speakers, Constellation amps, etc.) and not a Best Buy receiver and Best Buy speakers - your equipment is BOTH objectively and subjectively better in every way that counts in terms of High Fidelity. It is why "audiophiles" read your reviews and not my aunt and uncle - who prioritize other things over High Fidelity and thus Best Buy works for them. We are more alike than different - we obviously share the same biology, which means we both are attracted to harmony, melody, rhythm, etc. The radical subjectivist view runs up against reality (and fails) pretty quickly. I am not saying anything that has not been said by many others better. The point is that neither I nor many others are going to look at something like MQA from a purely subjectivist viewpoint based solely on a radical subjectivist understanding of SQ - just ain't going to happen. We are going to ask the WHY, and HOW of the digital SQ "magic" that is happening inside the black box, because the very nature of digital information is quantum, mathematical, and thus measurable (MQA is an obvious example of this - it would not work or exist without this objective fact).

 

Also, do you judge the tires you put on your wife's car based on a subjective evaluation (say, how the look) alone? OR, do you read how well they break the vehicle, in objective measurable terms (say, how many feet they stop the vehicle vs other similar tires)?

 

Are you (or is you doctor) going to prescribe something to you that does measurably improve your symptoms?

 

I could go on of course but I think you see my point...

[The Computer Audiophile]

What is radical is taking the fact that the subjective aspects of this or that (in this context, product reviews) and pushing to0 hard by saying "all product reviews are subjective" which is objectively not true (taken to the extreme). For example, all products are measurable in many different ways. This amp or that gizmo has this or that level of fill-in-the-blank (e.g. distortion). These things are measurable and objectively important, in that "everyone" (with only a few exceptions to prove the rule) will agree that this sounds better than that. This is why you have equipment reference level, "High Fidelity" equipment (TAD speakers, Constellation amps, etc.) and not a Best Buy receiver and Best Buy speakers - your equipment is BOTH objectively and subjectively better in every way that counts in terms of High Fidelity. It is why "audiophiles" read your reviews and not my aunt and uncle - who prioritize other things over High Fidelity and thus Best Buy works for them. We are more alike than different - we obviously share the same biology, which means we both are attracted to harmony, melody, rhythm, etc. The radical subjectivist view runs up against reality (and fails) pretty quickly. I am not saying anything that has not been said by many others better. The point is that neither I nor many others are going to look at something like MQA from a purely subjectivist viewpoint based solely on a radical subjectivist understanding of SQ - just ain't going to happen. We are going to ask the WHY, and HOW of the digital SQ "magic" that is happening inside the black box, because the very nature of digital information is quantum, mathematical, and thus measurable (MQA is an obvious example of this - it would not work or exist without this objective fact).

 

Also, do you judge the tires you put on your wife's car based on a subjective evaluation (say, how the look) alone? OR, do you read how well they break the vehicle, in objective measurable terms (say, how many feet they stop the vehicle vs other similar tires)?

 

Are you (or is you doctor) going to prescribe something to you that does measurably improve your symptoms?

 

I could go on of course but I think you see my point...

 

All reviews are subjective. Objective measurements are data sheets and data points that may help so done review a product.

 

Product A has distortion of 2%. That's not a review, that's a data point available in a spreadsheet. The 2% distortion sounded terrible. That's a review.

[crenca]

All reviews are subjective. Objective measurements are data sheets and data points that may help so done review a product.

 

Product A has distortion of 2%. That's not a review, that's a data point available in a spreadsheet. The 2% distortion sounded terrible. That's a review.

 

Ok, so you did not see my point

 

No, I don't need your "subjective" description (i.e. "sounded terrible") to interpret or relate to distortion - we share too many objective commonalities (biology, etc.) for that.

 

We are going to have to agree to disagree. Your subjective "review" only has objective value to me because we share the same biology and live in a shared world where sound is sound, music is music, digital is digital, etc. Beyond that, we share a common quest - high fidelity and it is its and ours commonalities and not our eccentric, subjective preferences that enable this - indeed it is in spite of those things...

[MikeJazz]

There is simple answer: Don't tidal and stick on ordinary (non MQA) downloads. That's the only way how to resist against undesirable DRM impacts.

 

I just found that mqa software decoding can be disabled: check here:

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f13-music-downloads-and-streaming/mqa-processing-can-be-disabled-31161/

[Dr Tone]

I just found that mqa software decoding can be disabled: check here:

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f13-music-downloads-and-streaming/mqa-processing-can-be-disabled-31161/

 

That's not solving their issues with mqa content on Tidal.

[MikeJazz]

OK, so I did a first (and very preliminary evaluation).

 

Using LH Geek Pulse infinity as dac I compared 3 versions of the same classical track (Aria "Nell'Aspro Tuo Periglio" from Vivaldi's cantata, Che Giova Il Sospirar, Povero Core - 2L edition, Tone Wik, Barokkanerne).

 

Track A - Source Laptop > USB > DAC

Played from Tidal in two variations

A1. with both MQA ativated (showed 88kHz)

A2, and MQA by-passed (44kHz)

 

Track B - Source Linn DS > SPDIF

B1 track from Tidal (44Khz)

B2 track from NAS (24/192Khz from 2L).

 

The best and less fatiguing was the B2 (hi-rez)...this is specially noted on the soprano's highest notes, where there is no feeling of compression. On all the other options there is slight compression and sound hardening, making it less clear and a bit fatiguing. B2 sounds just extended in a natural way (like when you hear a glass ringing) and with a feeling of more "air" or natural "echo" around.

Tone is also a little more dense on B2 but here there is less apparent differences to the other reproductions.

 

The other "perceived" differences are not so clear, so they remain at a more "subjective" level...I can only say that found no superior sound on this track between A1 (MQA software decoding) and A2... I will perform some more comparisons...

 

So the comparison maybe it's not yet fair - the perceived differences could well be attributed simply to the different source (Linn, spdif) and less to the file itself. I am sure my laptop is not an ideal source, even when the services are minimized, and using a good cable (LH lighspeed)...

 

To be continued....

[Melvin]

For Bluesound users .. MQA is working! So far everything I've tried has shown as 24/88.2 or 24/96. Sounds pretty good I might add.