The Brinkman Ship MQA Listening Results

[crenca]

3 minutes ago, rickca said:

Mani is neither. 

 

This is a perfectly legitimate question.

 

I like your conclusions because I don't like MQA.  I'm just not sure they are valid without this input.

 

Well he did say he was at a friend's house and that it was his friends collection so he probably doesn't have a list to give.  

 

What I find interesting about this particular question is that it has to be asked of both mqa supporters and detractors.  Why ?  Because it turns out the "authenticated" part of mqa is absolute garbage.

[Dr Tone]

Some type of reference list of equivalent masters would be beneficial to anyone doing the MQA comparison.

 

[Norton]

1 hour ago, Brinkman Ship said:

You and any other posters will be ignored if you ask again

 

Convenient manufactured indignance to avoid answering the question once again.  Given your considerable powers of invention and particularly  reinvention, you could show some respect to other posters by at least trying to come up with a fictitious  list.

[manisandher]

OK, I have better things to do than take BS to task over this. But there's one thing that's just occurred to me...

 

On 2/5/2018 at 10:37 PM, Brinkman Ship said:

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.

...

On 2/5/2018 at 10:37 PM, Brinkman Ship said:

... 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.

 

If I stream redbook files from Tidal, they sound different to exactly the same files sitting locally on my NAS. This is true irrespective of the software player I use. I'd describe the streamed files as indeed having a 'digital sheen' to them. Perhaps what BS and his host were hearing was down to streaming vs. playing locally?

 

(I suspect some here will think what I've just described cannot possibly be the case. Alas, it's what I'm hearing.)

 

Mani.

[Spacehound]

2 minutes ago, manisandher said:

OK, I have better things to do than take BS to task over this. But there's one thing that's just occurred to me...

 

...

 

If I stream redbook files from Tidal, they sound different to exactly the same files sitting locally on my NAS. This is true irrespective of the software player I use. I'd describe the streamed files as indeed having a 'digital sheen' to them. Perhaps what BS and his host were hearing was down to streaming vs. playing locally?

 

(I suspect some here will think what I've just described cannot possibly be the case. Alas, it's what I'm hearing.)

 

Mani.

I hear the same, but the opposite way around. I find Tidal 'dull sounding' compared to my internal PC disk or a NAS. On the same file. And I'm a 'dyed in the wool' objectivist.

[sdolezalek]

6 minutes ago, manisandher said:

If I stream redbook files from Tidal, they sound different to exactly the same files sitting locally on my NAS. This is true irrespective of the software player I use. I'd describe the streamed files as indeed having a 'digital sheen' to them. Perhaps what BS and his host were hearing was down to streaming vs. playing locally?

 

(I suspect some here will think what I've just described cannot possibly be the case. Alas, it's what I'm hearing.)

 

Mani.

 

I will second what you are hearing.  I hear as much, and probably more, of a difference between a Tidal streamed file and exactly that same file in 16/44 from the NAS as I do between a 16/44 and a 24/192 file, both from the NAS.  For purposes of his comparison, I don't understand why BS didn't just A/B the MQA and non-MQA files (both on Tidal) in streamed format.  Why add a second variable that could invalidate your entire conclusion?

[manisandher]

4 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

I hear the same, but the opposite way around. I find Tidal 'dull sounding' compared to my internal PC disk or a NAS. On the same file. And I'm a 'dyed in the wool' objectivist.

 

I'm really, really tired of saying this:

 

What a hobby!

 

Mani.

[manisandher]

3 minutes ago, sdolezalek said:

Why add a second variable that could invalidate your entire conclusion?

 

Yep.

 

(Mind you, I've made exactly the same sort of mistake many times myself. Not easy, this comparing malarkey.)

 

Mani.

[Samuel T Cogley]

10 minutes ago, manisandher said:

If I stream redbook files from Tidal, they sound different to exactly the same files sitting locally on my NAS. This is true irrespective of the software player I use. I'd describe the streamed files as indeed having a 'digital sheen' to them. Perhaps what BS and his host were hearing was down to streaming vs. playing locally?

 

(I suspect some here will think what I've just described cannot possibly be the case. Alas, it's what I'm hearing.

 

1 minute ago, Spacehound said:

I hear the same, but the opposite way around. I find Tidal 'dull sounding' compared to my internal PC disk or a NAS. On the same file. And I'm a 'dyed in the wool' objectivist.

 

I've had somewhat similar experiences (again, MQA is now out of the picture for this sub-discussion).  After a lot of listening and digging around, some of the differences I've heard can be attributed to audible digital watermarks applied to all Universal Music Group (they have a LOT of labels under their umbrella, including Decca and DG) "internet" content.

 

But the other issue is how can anyone be certain that the Redbook content on your NAS is sourced from the same CD that Tidal is using?  Without CD catalog numbers (pretty sure Tidal doesn't have this info), there's no way to know for certain.  I understand that if there's only one "known" release in CD format, both the NAS and Tidal copy should have the same bit-identical source.  But there's uncertainty afoot and it's difficult to eliminate that uncertainty without better information on where Tidal is sourcing their content from.

 

[church_mouse]

8 minutes ago, manisandher said:

If I stream redbook files from Tidal, they sound different to exactly the same files sitting locally on my NAS. This is true irrespective of the software player I use. I'd describe the streamed files as indeed having a 'digital sheen' to them. Perhaps what BS and his host were hearing was down to streaming vs. playing locally?

 

(I suspect some here will think what I've just described cannot possibly be the case. Alas, it's what I'm hearing.)

 

Mani.

1

When I tried out MQA (far less extensively than Brinkman Ship, if he tested anywhere near 50 albums), I did test non-MQA albums on Tidal specifically to be sure what I was hearing (and disliking on MQA) was not simply a Tidal factor. Tidal itself did not seem to be the culprit.

 

To be clear - my testing was not intended to be an authoritative, objective MQA assessment.  I was simply seeking to ascertain whether I should switch from Qobuz to Tidal to get the benefit of MQA. Whether what I heard was down to MQA, or the fact that the MQA album might be from a different version was, in practical terms, irrelevant - in my listening I found a sound to MQA albums which I did not like, so I could see no advantage (and some disadvantage) to switching to Tidal.

 

[mansr]

1 hour ago, manisandher said:

If I stream redbook files from Tidal, they sound different to exactly the same files sitting locally on my NAS.

Bollox. If you hear a difference, it is because the bits are different. What Tidal delivers might not correspond to any version available as CD or download, for instance due to watermarking.

[eclectic]

I hear no difference at all between Tidal and locally stored flacs. In my system they sound identical. 

[manisandher]

9 minutes ago, mansr said:

Bollox. If you hear a difference, it is because the bits are different.

 

The bits aren't different, they're identical.

 

We've been through this sort of thing before. You hold on to your beliefs and I'll go with my ears.

 

Mani.

[Brinkman Ship]

19 minutes ago, mansr said:

Bollox. If you hear a difference, it is because the bits are different. What Tidal delivers might not correspond to any version available as CD or download, for instance due to watermarking.

Exactly. An obvious attempt to muddy the waters, introduce variables, and elevate their listening skills. 

[kumakuma]

9 minutes ago, manisandher said:

 

The bits aren't different, they're identical.

 

We've been through this sort of thing before. You hold on to your beliefs and I'll go with my ears.

 

Mani.

 

Perhaps you and Sandy Alex need to write something up. I'm sure TAS will publish it.

[mansr]

14 minutes ago, manisandher said:

The bits aren't different, they're identical.

Why don't you and Alex start a separate thread for this silly notion. I promise not to post in it.

[manisandher]

7 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Exactly. An obvious attempt to muddy the waters, introduce variables, and elevate their listening skills. 

 

Now that you're here...

 

Where's your list of MQA albums with 24 bit downloads from the same master?

[manisandher]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

Why don't you and Alex start a separate thread for this silly notion. I promise not to post in it.

 

Mans, just drop it.

[Spacehound]

35 minutes ago, mansr said:

Bollox. If you hear a difference, it is because the bits are different. What Tidal delivers might not correspond to any version available as CD or download, for instance due to watermarking.

It's 'true'  for me too. Though I didn't say 'exactly'.  And Samuel  has said why it might be, which is what you say plus another  possible reason.

 

I accept them all. Game  over..

[Brinkman Ship]

13 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

It's 'true'  for me too. Though I didn't say 'exactly'.  And Samuel  has said why it might be, which is what you say plus another  possible reason.

 

I accept them all. Game  over..

FYI, I have sat through dealer demos using Tidal exclusively where they were showcasing mega buck gear, and the sound was consistently immersive, with CD streams only. The dealer also had a NAS with CD rips, but felt there was no advantage. Just offering up that tidbit.

[Spacehound]

21 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

FYI, I have sat through dealer demos using Tidal exclusively where they were showcasing mega buck gear, and the sound was consistently immersive, with CD streams only. The dealer also had a NAS with CD rips, but felt there was no advantage. Just offering up that tidbit.

It's very likely that mine is the same piece as the CD. It's an early disk, recorded 1978/1982, Christopher Hogwood/Academy of Ancient Music, Handel Watermusick 1978/Fireworks 1982 or the other way around. And as far as I know it has never been re-released though it is still available I believe.  And it has the same cover and lasts the same time.  But it is Decca so might well be watermarked for Tidal. I'm not able to check that.

[Spacehound]

34 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

FYI, I have sat through dealer demos using Tidal exclusively where they were showcasing mega buck gear, and the sound was consistently immersive, with CD streams only. The dealer also had a NAS with CD rips, but felt there was no advantage. Just offering up that tidbit.

If it s truly the same piece (I have no 100% way  of telling), played on the same equipment, it will sound the same. But bear in mind I play one via JRiver, the other via  Tidal. so the 'paths' will be different. I can't  however think of a way  it  would matter.

[manisandher]

Over the years I've learnt there's so much more to digital audio than meets the eye (ear). I miss the old-timers like @ar-t and @JR_Audiowho had some really interesting things to say...

 

Mani.

[Spacehound]

8 minutes ago, manisandher said:

Over the years I've learnt there's so much more to digital audio than meets the eye (ear). I miss the old-timers like @ar-t and @JR_Audiowho had some really interesting things to say...

 

Mani.

While I agree, let's drop it. It's not going to be resolved either way.

[Confused]

4 hours ago, Dr Tone said:

Some type of reference list of equivalent masters would be beneficial to anyone doing the MQA comparison.

 

Indeed it would.  I have been thinking about this myself, whenever I read about comparisons there always appears to be some doubt as to if the files are from identical masters.  

 

Can anyone offer any any examples of known equivalents to MQA files?