The Brinkman Ship MQA Listening Results

[Brinkman Ship]

The Brinkman Ship has docked and I can report on between 8-10 hours of listening to MQA and Non MQA files

 

(When it is FREEZING out, plenty of incentive to get cozy with music, wine, and a great system).

 

The listening took place at a long time friend's East Side apartment.  The system was beyond reproach:

 

-MSB Reference DAC / Roon / Tidal

 

-VPI Prime table / Audio Research PH9

 

-Audio Research Ref 6 Preamp

 

-Ayre MX-R Twenty Mono Block Amplifiers

 

Wilson Alexx speaker system

 

Wireworld cabling for all

 

Audience power conditioning, Symposium Acoustics isolation devices and platforms

 

My host has a very large digital library stored on a NAS. And a decent size vinyl collection.

 

We listened to approx. 50 albums where we confirmed there was both an MQA version, and an official

24 bit digital download  and where we could confirm the mastering was the same. We listened to quite a few new releases as well.

 

Volumes matched as close as possible.

 

I had my host select albums play MQA streams from Tidal, then the same tracks from his NAS without telling

me which was which, and we turned off the display of the DAC.  We also muted the first 3 seconds of every track.

 

We repeated the process with me selecting tracks from Tidal and his NAS.

 

We also broke things up by playing tracks from his vinyl collection of some of the same albums.

 

Verdict:

 

In each an every, case, without exception, we both preferred the non MQA version. Some by a little, and some it was not even close.

 

The MQA version created a whole in the center and an artificial Left and Right Spread, and a digital sheen that was

off putting to say the least. We both concluded MQA was DESTRUCTIVE to the music.  It was quite an eye opener.

It sounded like what happens when you hit the "3D" or "Loudness" buttons on mid level home theater receivers.

MQA was putting far too strong a stamp on the music.  We even preferred his 24 bit vinyl rips to the MQA versions.

 

MQA screws up the tonality and the soundstage. Period.

 

Bob Stuart, John Atkinson, Michael Lavorgna, Robert Harley, Jim Austin, John Darko (did I miss anyone?)..

you should all be ashamed of your selves.

 

MQA is by far the biggest farce ever perpetrated in "high end audio". 

 

Couple this with all the data presented here, the measurements, and looking behind the curtain at the financials,

the motives, and the players, it is clear MQA is a wholesale fraud.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Brinkman Ship]

First, for all those trying to "apologize", no need.

 

I initially perceived a a witch hunt here and on other forums, and I am not a big fan of that.

 

I also just could not bring my self to believe that the editors of Stereophile and TAS would stake their

entire reputations on something that had no merit..live and learn. This has destroyed their credibility, without question.

 

It blows my mind that my listening test was more intensive then any of these "journalists".

 

I also took the time to read all posted links here, and there were many..it was very time consuming.

It seems some "reviewers" are still doing "research". No rush. Only been 3.5 years.

 

Second, a few more notes..

 

The bass really suffered..bloated, and loss of articulation...

 

I could clearly hear the "lossy" aspect of MQA...I really don't know who they think they were fooling...

 

 

[Brinkman Ship]

1 hour ago, Em2016 said:

 

Can you share this list of albums?

To name a of few...a bunch of ECM (we are both huge fans of the label), Pretenders, Marvin Gaye, Mavis Staples, Amadou & Miriam, The Doors,  Van Morrison, Rush, Sonny Rollins...

[Brinkman Ship]

4 hours ago, GUTB said:

 

Achimago's "work" doesn't prove anything.

 

There is a large improvement in MQA in that music in which the source I am confident in as well as some high quality Tidal examples. It's way beyond a minor difference that might be in your head -- that part of the OP's made up story is believable, you won't mistake it when you hear it vs non-MQA of the same albums. I will say, though, that of all the MQA DACs I've tried, I couldn't hear any improvement with the Explorer 2 or the Bluesound Node 2 -- both of these are pretty bad DACs. I first heard the promise of MQA with the DragonFly Red, and later with the Pro-Ject S2.

 

"I will say, though, that of all the MQA DACs I've tried, I couldn't hear any improvement with the Explorer 2 or the Bluesound Node 2 -- both of these are pretty bad DACs."

 

Well, now, that is pretty hilarious. Because "Golden Ears" Atkinson and Lavorgna, as well as Darko RAVED about the sound of MQA through those DACs.

 

Thanks for helping confirm they have no credibility.

 

The only thing made up is your MQA enthusiasm.

[Brinkman Ship]

1 hour ago, mcgillroy said:

 

GUTB is a joke. All he/she has to offer is trying to devalue other posters without offering anything on his/her own.

 

Come back when you have something to show or stay being a joke.

Classic trolling techniques...

[Brinkman Ship]

3 hours ago, GUTB said:

 

Archimago is a joke. Did you know his study found no clear preference for MQA -- but here you are with a clear preference. Of course his test included people without MQA dacs -- it was just a hobby horse project to spread FUD.

What is a joke is that little blue light makes you feel all cozy. Regardless of the junk technology.

[Brinkman Ship]

22 minutes ago, GUTB said:

The Explorer 2 is not a good DAC. Its a little chip on a stick. The DFR is better...its by no means a real DAC, but its MQA implementation resulted in a very obvious improvement. The Pro-Ject S2 took it a step further. I posted about the very albums both Tidal and purchased and my impression of them in other MQA threads.

 

The sonic differences with MQA vs non-MQA are very significant...in one album it was so large I wondered publically if there wasn't some dirty pool EQ-ing going on. Way beyond any change some phase / ringing filter would account for.

On the previous page you posted JUST THE OPPOSITE:

 

"I couldn't hear any improvement with the Explorer 2.."

 

Now you claim:

 

"The Explorer 2 is not a good DAC. Its a little chip on a stick. The DFR is better...its by no means a real DAC, but its MQA implementation resulted in a very obvious improvement."

 

You need to go back to your MQA Club and get your story straight. Thanks for the laugh however.  Do you need

a napkin to wipe the egg off your face?

[Brinkman Ship]

This cracks me up:

"The Explorer² is an easy purchase, but what makes it a compelling value is its ability to fully decode MQA files. MQA is the result of a rethinking of audio principles by Meridian's co-founder Bob Stuart and others, in the light of recent insights from neuroscience into how human hearing works. MQA takes the focus off sampling frequency and the frequency domain and puts it on the time domain, where music lives. MQA's main objective is to avoid and repair the blurring, or time smearing, that occurs every time a conventionally designed low-pass (especially brick-wall) filter is employed in the recording and/or playback chains. MQA uses knowledge of the specific digital converters involved in that chain to restore timing information so that the temporal resolution is much better than even in high-frequency, high-bit-rate audio files."

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/meridian-explorer2-da-headphone-amplifier#vS7E463e3h0Ygrh0.99

 

[Brinkman Ship]

8 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

What's funny about that?

Wait, even better..

 

Nothing like a little blue light to help with intimacy...lol

 

"The first recording that made the little light on my Explorer² turn blue—indicating that an MQA Studio file is playing—was Sally Beamish's Under the Wing of the Rock, with viola soloist Soon-Mi Chung, and Oyvind Bjora conducting the Oslo Camerata (SACD/CD, 2L-119-SACD). Listening through my Sennheiser HD 650 headphones and then my home system, I was struck by a remarkable sense of intimacy, a close connection to the solo instrument.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/meridian-explorer2-da-headphone-amplifier-page-2#ObkLZmkIms6Ed3Mb.99

 

[Brinkman Ship]

Just now, NOMBEDES said:

Let me fix this for you:

 

Set up a booth in the center of a large city:

 

1. Ask 1000 people "What is an audio DAC?"  You will get maybe 50 to 100 folks who can answer the question.  (this demonstration will indicate how few people give a crap about our hobby)

 

2.  Ask 1000 people to compare a high resolution audio file with a standard redbook file.   You will get a distribution of "no difference" "high rez is better" and "standard rez is better".   (This exercise will show you that few random participants can tell the difference between files.)

 

3.  Play a MQA file and a standard file for the casual listener and you may get the same distribution of no difference to better and worse.

 

Now to marketing:   The entire audio industry is based on the fact that human hearing preferences can be plotted on a bell curve.   Some audio consumers will like cable A over cable B.  If you can sell 25 sets of expensive cables for a 2000% mark up, Bob's your uncle and you have made a profit.  Please note that there is no audio advantage over cable A or B there is only human preference.   MQA is just more of the same marketing;  based upon, "let's make it sound different and will someone will spend money".  Just like cables and other audio/marketing voodoo,  there is no sonic advantage to MQA there is only the fact that some folks will like it and buy it.

 

We have had fully 36000 posts on MQA, all worthless:

 

if you like the sound, it follows that you should embrace the technology, if you don't like the sound, ignore it.

 

  

Wrong.

[Brinkman Ship]

3 minutes ago, mav52 said:

How do you like your MSB Ref DAC compared against the Brinkman Nyquist, non MQA of course

???

If you read the OP, I don't own an MSB DAC. I also do not own a Nyquist, which does do MQA btw.

[Brinkman Ship]

10 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

We in the UK must be somewhat backward. l suspect less than 1 in a  1000 would know what a DAC is, let alone a 'music' one.

I meant "wrong" about "liking" MQA or not. There is far more to it then that.

[Brinkman Ship]

I am perplexed. Fair who? It seems the Pro MQA posters are just trying to discredit my findings. It seems to be their Modus Operandi. Anything or anybody who puts MQA in a bad light immediately gets attacked as either incompetent, a sock puppet, or is accused of having a crappy system. Enough.

 

I put in the hard yards of doing long hours of comparisons, and it seems the MQA fan boys do not like that. I was attempting to provide some sort of feedback to folks who may not have the opportunity to do valid comparisons. I am sure this is by design, but it requires a lot planning..an MQA DAC, hi-rez files, a Tidal account, etc.

 

So it seems the witch hunt has gone from MQA shills to MQA disbelievers. Fancy that.

[Brinkman Ship]

Thanks for the heads up. I think I have been nothing but civil, if also rather straight forward.

 

BTW, my personal listening to MQA via Tidal for the past few months was through the MyTek Brooklyn.

[Brinkman Ship]

1 minute ago, GUTB said:

 

He’s lying. He doesn’t have a rich audiophile friend, and they didn’t spend a day together performing careful blind listening tests with vinyl palette cleanses of the same albums to make a judgement call on MQA. It’s crazy that I have to even point this out...

..and you know this HOW? It is clear to me from your posting history you are a few bubbles short of a bath.

[Brinkman Ship]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

Because he's not on your list (if a single entry can be called a list) of approved audiophiles.

Just imagine if I preferred the MQA streams to the HD files..then he would be saying what a great, tuned in listener I was with great acuity and taste.

[Brinkman Ship]

Just now, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Or at least, you hope he's lying.  But you don't know.  I know a guy (I guess we call each other friends) who has a mid six figure system, dedicated listening room with furniture that's shockingly (at least to me) expensive and an ocean view than most would envy.

 

Just because you don't seem to have any affluent friends doesn't mean no one does.

I think it is a case of he does wish I was lying..because my findings do not fit his pro MQA narrative.

 

 

[Brinkman Ship]

Just now, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Based on his posting history, spending increasingly more and more money on audio is something like his raison d'être.

Yes, that too. I have spent a decent sum too, but I have chosen very carefully, if I may say so:

Turntable:

Rega Planar 3

Cartridge:

Elys2

Digital Front End:

Bryston BDP-3 streamer / Bryston BDA-3 DAC / MyTek Brooklyn (MQA)

Analog Front End:

Rogue Triton

Pre Amplifier:

Conrad Johnson ET3SE

Amplification:

Ayre Acoustics V-5xe

Speaker System:

Magnapan 3.7i

Speaker Cables:

Transparent MM5 Super

Interconnects:

Transparent MM5 Super

Other Accessories:

Audience / Bryston power conditioners, Acoustic Zen power cords.

[Brinkman Ship]

Just now, Norton said:

 

Straightforward? Lets see:

 

29th Jan "As someone who has been enjoying MQA for the past few months via Tidal"

 

5th Feb "MQA is by far the biggest farce ever perpetrated in "high end audio"

 

Also on 5th Feb (your recent testing) "...requires a lot planning..an MQA DAC....a Tidal account, etc." although you presumably had already had a Tidal account and a MQA DAC for the past few months, so not much planning needed really?  Bit of a cock up on the backstory there.

 

According to Chris you joined with the email address "mqatruth"  (48 hrs after a member who shares a certain stylistic approach was banned) and went to some lengths to conceal your identity.

 

 

I don't know what you are on about it. Carry on.

[Brinkman Ship]

7 minutes ago, MetalNuts said:

 

I must say you have an open mind and has spent substantial effort in finding out what you believe despite the result proved your earlier belief of MQA being better cannot stand.  It is hard for one without an open mind to accept.  You did great!

 

 

thank you kindly!

[Brinkman Ship]

7 minutes ago, rischa said:

CA rocks. This highly entertaing thread would have been closed 3 pages ago on SHMF. I don't know who to beleve here, but the drama and intrigue make for a great read! 

Interesting. I don;t see any reason why this thread would be closed..it has been civil, and not really controversial.

 

But why find out about SHMF...I will post there.

[Brinkman Ship]

6 minutes ago, rischa said:

I'd say it is controversial, but that's what makes it interesting. SHMF is highly regulated and controversy isn't tolerated there for long. It makes for a civil forum, which has its merits, but too often threads get closed just as they're getting to be a fun read (like Lee Scoggins' MQA article thread). Now, please carry on!

Thread up.

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/reference-level-system-mqa-listening-results.729556/

 

[Brinkman Ship]

1 hour ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

Could you give a link to where I raved about the sound, listening to MQA files with those DACs, please. TIA.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

 

You are correct, it was with the Meridian Prime initially. I stand corrected. I had a Prime for a short while and found it unsatisfying. Link below for reference.

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/listening-mqa

[Brinkman Ship]

1 hour ago, Albrecht said:

I am not saying that you're doing this, - (as I haven't read every single post in this thread), - but i don't think that you need to sell the fact that high end audio consumers have wholeheartedly rejected MQA. I DO agree that the audiophile enthusiast review publications are largely supporting MQA, - with a big, notable exception in Doug Schneider. What my take is that a fair number of supporters have been bamboozled by some vague, (pro-tech gadget), propaganda. "If it's high tech, it's good."

What MQA is, is akin to a cheap reverb tank.  (Musicians, are very woke or easily awakened to these things). These "digital filters" are just another flavor of formaldehyde cookies.

While running MQA, Meridian, & a cowed media into the ground, - don't forget to add Tidal, the criminal record labels, ISPs, and streaming music in general to the list. All are part of the problem, and all are harmful to the artists and the listeners who love them.

Lots here to digest but of course I largely agree!

[Brinkman Ship]

38 minutes ago, John_Atkinson said:

 

Thank you for the correction. And perhaps you could now also withdraw your statement that I raved about the sound of MQA files with Bluesound gear.

 

I have no problem with people criticizing me for things I have said or done. But  that doesn't mean anonymous posters can just make stuff up about me.

 

John Atkinson

Editor, Streophile

Yes, it was Jim Austin who raved about MQA with the Explorer 2. Not you.

 

Actually I was trying to attribute the Bluesound (and Explorer2) rave to a group of reviewers: John Darko, Michael Lavorgna, and others,  WHO DID use them , and it seems I did not do this correctly.

 

For the record, you clearly did not use those units, but the Prime and the flagship Meridian DAC in your MQA write ups.