Jump to content
IGNORED

MQA vs Auralic


Recommended Posts

I just read that Auralic no long supports supports MQA because MQA is changing their rules for what devices can and cannot play MQA.

 

Is this correct?

 

MQA is still in pending status for AURALiC due to technical conflict with Lightning streaming platform.

 

AURALiC has done a live demo during CES 2016 for MQA on ARIES and ARIES MINI. It is however after MQA realized that ARIES does not have any DAC built-in and ARIES MINI has a digital output in parallel connection of its DAC I2S signal, they pulled it back immediately. They believe the MQA process is end to end and the DAC has to be optimized for MQA playback, so any digital output of fully decoded signal is unacceptable.

 

MQA may recently updated their specification which allows limited content to be delivered from digital output (Bluesound implement) but some signal process is still not allowed through MQA signal chain such as:

 

Customize and upgradeable DAC filter

DSD upsampling

Room correction

Cross fader

Mix down of various of input signal

 

Since the above features are exactly what AURALiC working on or have done, to imply MQA means AURALiC has to drop the unique features of Lightning streaming. After carefully consideration, the team has decided not to imply MQA into existing streaming product at right moment.

 

If this is true, just one more reason to safely ignore MQA.

[br]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just read that Auralic no long supports supports MQA because MQA is changing their rules for what devices can and cannot play MQA.

Is this correct?

If this is true, just one more reason to safely ignore MQA.

 

I disagree. MQA has given hirez files to the masses for basically free. I'll take the money I save on Auralic and use it for something else. I hope you realize that the audio standards around today will be like a VHS tape in 5 years.

New formats and products are leapfrogging forward as fast as Moores Law can take you.

Another reason to just flip on Tidal Masters and let the good times roll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree. MQA has given hirez files to the masses for basically free. I'll take the money I save on Auralic and use it for something else. I hope you realize that the audio standards around today will be like a VHS tape in 5 years.

New formats and products are leapfrogging forward as fast as Moores Law can take you.

Another reason to just flip on Tidal Masters and let the good times roll.

 

First why nit just stream the hires files directly? I think Tidal should give the option of direct hires or hires with extra MQA sauce added.

 

Also it is not a new standard, as far as I know MQA is still PCM just gift wrapped in a fancy way.

 

Also what do you mean by "I'll take the money I save on Auralic"? If not Auralic I still need to buy some other streamer. From what I understood from MQA is that only streamers that only have analogue outputs will be MQA certified. Since they want MQA to be a one box solution.

 

Beside Auralic the only other decent streamer I know of is Aurender but they are a lot more expensive.

 

Also there is nothing "free" about Tidal, 20euro a month. I get the feeling I'm a goose which they force feed MQA.

[br]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First why nit just stream the hires files directly? I think Tidal should give the option of direct hires or hires with extra MQA sauce added.

Also it is not a new standard, as far as I know MQA is still PCM just gift wrapped in a fancy way.

Also what do you mean by "I'll take the money I save on Auralic"? If not Auralic I still need to buy some other streamer. From what I understood from MQA is that only streamers that only have analogue outputs will be MQA certified. Since they want MQA to be a one box solution.

Beside Auralic the only other decent streamer I know of is Aurender but they are a lot more expensive.

Also there is nothing "free" about Tidal, 20euro a month. I get the feeling I'm a goose which they force feed MQA.

 

I don't think you can stream a hirez file other than MQA because of the size of the file. Tidal did not raise it's [rice, it add tidal at no additional cost. Auralic is a premium product with a premium price. You no longer need to buy a premium priced product as you will be able to stream MQA files with whatever you currently use to listen to tidal, even a phone.

My point is MQA enable you to get SQ that is better than redbook without needing to buy anything. The $$$ hardware manufacturers are basically screwed as consumers cab get great SQ for very little $.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you can stream a hirez file other than MQA because of the size of the file.

 

Why there don't use FLAC, as example?

 

Raw stream: 24 bit x 196000 Hz x 2ch = 8.9 Mbit

 

That stream FLAC compressed (60% of compression) = 8.9 * 0.6 =5.34 Mbit

 

Me seems, it is enough for many modern internet connections.

 

If I right understand, MQA give about 2 times more compression than FLAC but with a some losses (?).

 

Why FLAC don't considered as free alternative in the MQA discussions? May be 2 times lesser size so critical for most internet connections?

AuI ConverteR 48x44 - HD audio converter/optimizer for DAC of high resolution files

ISO, DSF, DFF (1-bit/D64/128/256/512/1024), wav, flac, aiff, alac,  safe CD ripper to PCM/DSF,

Seamless Album Conversion, AIFF, WAV, FLAC, DSF metadata editor, Mac & Windows
Offline conversion save energy and nature

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why there don't use FLAC, as example?

 

Raw stream: 24 bit x 196000 Hz x 2ch = 8.9 Mbit

 

That stream FLAC compressed (60% of compression) = 8.9 * 0.6 =5.34 Mbit

 

Me seems, it is enough for many modern internet connections.

 

If I right understand, MQA give about 2 times more compression than FLAC but with a some losses (?).

 

Why FLAC don't considered as free alternative in the MQA discussions? May be 2 times lesser size so critical for most internet connections?

 

MQA sounds better than FLAC on most recordings I have compared in my rig. I'll admit being a fan of MQA. I an shocked that Tidal gave me this many tracks in MQA without a price increase PLUS I din't have to buy a new DAC. After listening to MQA for a while it is a bit of a bummer to go back to FLAC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why there don't use FLAC, as example?

 

Raw stream: 24 bit x 196000 Hz x 2ch = 8.9 Mbit

 

That stream FLAC compressed (60% of compression) = 8.9 * 0.6 =5.34 Mbit

 

Me seems, it is enough for many modern internet connections.

 

If I right understand, MQA give about 2 times more compression than FLAC but with a some losses (?).

 

Why FLAC don't considered as free alternative in the MQA discussions? May be 2 times lesser size so critical for most internet connections?

FLAC doesn't have DRM features. MQA does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you can stream a hirez file other than MQA because of the size of the file. Tidal did not raise it's [rice, it add tidal at no additional cost. Auralic is a premium product with a premium price. You no longer need to buy a premium priced product as you will be able to stream MQA files with whatever you currently use to listen to tidal, even a phone.

My point is MQA enable you to get SQ that is better than redbook without needing to buy anything. The $$$ hardware manufacturers are basically screwed as consumers cab get great SQ for very little $.

 

Sorry but I do not understand this. Are you saying a Auralic mini the Aries LE are $$$ products? Maybe the Aries is a premium product. What hardware do you use for playback? I never use my phone to listen to music. I only listen at home.

 

MQA sounds better than FLAC on most recordings I have compared in my rig. I'll admit being a fan of MQA. I an shocked that Tidal gave me this many tracks in MQA without a price increase PLUS I din't have to buy a new DAC. After listening to MQA for a while it is a bit of a bummer to go back to FLAC.

 

I have heard an MQA vs PCM shootout once. The major difference was the MQA was about 2db louder. But since they used different DACs Metrum non MQA DAC vs Meridian MQA DAC I think the whole exercise was a bit pointless.

 

But back to the topic. I do not understand why MQA is fighting with Auralic. I don't understand what the problem is.

[br]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but I do not understand this. Are you saying a Auralic mini the Aries LE are $$$ products? Maybe the Aries is a premium product. What hardware do you use for playback? I never use my phone to listen to music. I only listen at home.

I have heard an MQA vs PCM shootout once. The major difference was the MQA was about 2db louder. But since they used different DACs Metrum non MQA DAC vs Meridian MQA DAC I think the whole exercise was a bit pointless.

But back to the topic. I do not understand why MQA is fighting with Auralic. I don't understand what the problem is.

first of sll I am saying that I don't need Aurlic, a Dragonlfly, a Meridian Explorer or even a 99 cent download to enjoy the benefits to my ears of MQA. If Aurlalic states they won't support it fine. Everyone has to decide for themselves if a track is worth an upgrade. For my system to my ears I like MQA tracks more than redbook/flac. Not all MQA tracks are created equal but as a general rule. I personally am not going to buy 95% of the DSD tracks or 96/24 tracks available today because I can't justify the $$$ for the benefit of the SQ. maybe it is unique to my system, my Parasound Zdac upsamples to 192/24 and so does the sound card in my HT. Now remember, your standards may be higher than mine. Everyone knows about the law of diminishing returns and I would just say that for me to spend $$$ the bar is set at what I currently get with MQA. If I buy an Auralic or whatever it would have to be a stunning improvement.

My front end in the HT is a Sony UHPH1 which I can use as a Roon endpoint as well as a streamer, universal disc player, or DLNA device. In my desktop is is the Parsound Zdac.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but I do not understand this. Are you saying a Auralic mini the Aries LE are $$$ products? Maybe the Aries is a premium product. What hardware do you use for playback? I never use my phone to listen to music. I only listen at home.

I have heard an MQA vs PCM shootout once. The major difference was the MQA was about 2db louder. But since they used different DACs Metrum non MQA DAC vs Meridian MQA DAC I think the whole exercise was a bit pointless.

 

But back to the topic. I do not understand why MQA is fighting with Auralic. I don't understand what the problem is.

 

BTW, you can do a shoolout by picking a Masters and Hifi version of the same album and loading it into a playlist in Tidal. Hit shuffle, close your eyes and see how many times in a row you can guess the format.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

first of sll I am saying that I don't need Aurlic, a Dragonlfly, a Meridian Explorer or even a 99 cent download to enjoy the benefits to my ears of MQA. If Aurlalic states they won't support it fine. Everyone has to decide for themselves if a track is worth an upgrade. For my system to my ears I like MQA tracks more than redbook/flac. Not all MQA tracks are created equal but as a general rule. I personally am not going to buy 95% of the DSD tracks or 96/24 tracks available today because I can't justify the $$$ for the benefit of the SQ. maybe it is unique to my system, my Parasound Zdac upsamples to 192/24 and so does the sound card in my HT. Now remember, your standards may be higher than mine. Everyone knows about the law of diminishing returns and I would just say that for me to spend $$$ the bar is set at what I currently get with MQA. If I buy an Auralic or whatever it would have to be a stunning improvement.

My front end in the HT is a Sony UHPH1 which I can use as a Roon endpoint as well as a streamer, universal disc player, or DLNA device. In my desktop is is the Parsound Zdac.

 

The solutions you mention still require a streamer of Some kind, a pc or laptop. However since i do not own a laptop nor is there any computer in my living room. That would mean I'd have to buy own. A dedicated streaming computer is at least as expensive as a of the shelve streamer.

 

Also it was not a decision made by Auralic. They were told b MQA to stop supporting MQA since the streamers can do things like possible dps and MQA does not want that.

[br]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The solutions you mention still require a streamer of Some kind, a pc or laptop. However since i do not own a laptop nor is there any computer in my living room. That would mean I'd have to buy own. A dedicated streaming computer is at least as expensive as a of the shelve streamer.

 

Also it was not a decision made by Auralic. They were told b MQA to stop supporting MQA since the streamers can do things like possible dps and MQA does not want that.

 

OK, I do have a PC. If I were going to buy a dedicated streaming computer today I would seriously look at the one coming out from Nuprime, the Omnia which will be based on the android OS. It will be out soon and you can find more info here

 

A few jaw dropping features of Omnia

 

I have no idea if it will decode MQA but as a PC you could at least install the tidal app.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to put words in the mouth of the OP, but I think the distinction here is that this thread is concerned with end to end MQA hardware support by Auralic in the Aries. I think that it is still anticipated but not officially confirmed that Auralic will support the Core or Software decoding of MQA. Please correct me if I am wrong on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to put words in the mouth of the OP, but I think the distinction here is that this thread is concerned with end to end MQA hardware support by Auralic in the Aries. I think that it is still anticipated but not officially confirmed that Auralic will support the Core or Software decoding of MQA. Please correct me if I am wrong on that.

 

Yes AURALiC supports software decoding of Tidal-streamed MQA using the TestFlight version of Lightning DS, plays 24 bit with a cap of 48 MHz at this time.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes AURALiC supports software decoding of Tidal-streamed MQA using the TestFlight version of Lightning DS, plays 24 bit with a cap of 48 MHz at this time.

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

Auralic can pass through the MQA stream to a MQA compatible DAC.

What Auralic will do is this with a no MQA compatible DAC :

Unfold and decompress the MQA stream to 24/44.1 or 24/48 max. And they will upsamle to 88.2/96. Not unfold the stream to retrieve the original informations, but upsampling (create artificial datas).

 

I would like to have at least my Auralic Aries and Auralic Vega be full MQA compliant ...

 

I do not know the price of the MQA licence but i think it's not cheap :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the Master Albums are not listed in the lightening app, I did play an album yesterday that showed 24 bit, so the Auralic Aries did pass it through and it did sound a good recording, forget the album...was in a haze of red wine...so could have been a dream I guess :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the Master Albums are not listed in the lightening app, I did play an album yesterday that showed 24 bit, so the Auralic Aries did pass it through and it did sound a good recording, forget the album...was in a haze of red wine...so could have been a dream I guess :)

 

In LDS 4.1 Beta, you have a Masters category in Tidal. I will arrive in the next official version of LDS i think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree. MQA has given hirez files to the masses for basically free. I'll take the money I save on Auralic and use it for something else. I hope you realize that the audio standards around today will be like a VHS tape in 5 years.

New formats and products are leapfrogging forward as fast as Moores Law can take you.

Another reason to just flip on Tidal Masters and let the good times roll.

MQA is not VHS, it is Betamax

mini+Roon > dCS Rossini DAC + Rossini Master Clock 

SME 20/3 + SME V + Dynavector XV-1s > vdH The Grail

Audio Note Kondo Ongaku > Avantgarde Duo Mezzo G2

system pics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Auralic can pass through the MQA stream to a MQA compatible DAC.

What Auralic will do is this with a no MQA compatible DAC :

Unfold and decompress the MQA stream to 24/44.1 or 24/48 max. And they will upsamle to 88.2/96. Not unfold the stream to retrieve the original informations, but upsampling (create artificial datas).

 

I would like to have at least my Auralic Aries and Auralic Vega be full MQA compliant ...

 

I do not know the price of the MQA licence but i think it's not cheap :)

24/44 or 24/48 is UNDECODED. People should do just a little research.

mini+Roon > dCS Rossini DAC + Rossini Master Clock 

SME 20/3 + SME V + Dynavector XV-1s > vdH The Grail

Audio Note Kondo Ongaku > Avantgarde Duo Mezzo G2

system pics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Auralic can pass through the MQA stream to a MQA compatible DAC.

What Auralic will do is this with a no MQA compatible DAC :

Unfold and decompress the MQA stream to 24/44.1 or 24/48 max. And they will upsamle to 88.2/96. Not unfold the stream to retrieve the original informations, but upsampling (create artificial datas).

 

I would like to have at least my Auralic Aries and Auralic Vega be full MQA compliant ...

 

I do not know the price of the MQA licence but i think it's not cheap :)

 

Why should a DAC be MQA compliant at all? Couldn't the streamer just remove the MQA layer and send the data stream minus MQA to the DAC?

[br]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share



×
×
  • Create New...