Popular Post lucretius Posted April 7, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted April 7, 2021 On 4/5/2021 at 11:52 AM, botrytis said: One MQA comparison, I was at at a dealer, Wilson Speakers was doing the comparison and found many CD-quality tracks WERE better than 96K MQA of the same track. That does not bode well. Sometimes CD quality tracks sound better than the 24bit/96KHz (or 24/192) track from HDtracks -- different masters. And sometimes they sound the same. Many times, the hi-res files contain only noise in the upper frequencies -- perhaps it's inaudible or perhaps it has an adverse effect on the electronics, resulting in audible distortion. When it comes to MQA, clearly there is added noise (inaudible or not) and peaks are always near 0 dbfs. Anonamemouse and MikeyFresh 2 mQa is dead! Link to comment
Popular Post lucretius Posted April 7, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted April 7, 2021 On 4/2/2021 at 8:59 AM, firedog said: Not necessarily. Those 2L files were appparently made using an MQA "white glove" treatment - that's nothing like the batch MQA processing that is used for 99.9% of the cases. I never found the MQA files to sound better than any of the other formats in the 2L benchmark files. I think at best, one can argue that the MQA track sounds the same as some of the other formats. And where the MQA version sounds the same as a hi-res format, it is likely that the Redbook version also sounds the same as that hi-res format. Where that is the case, then why choose the MQA version over the Redbook version? Avoid the MQA tax and keep PCM alive. MikeyFresh and Teresa 1 1 mQa is dead! Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now