How to demonstrate MQA's leaky filter

[PeterSt]

OK, what do I miss ... ?

 

You play a track that is supposed to be 88.2 after unfolding and you show context above 22.05 ?

Nothing wrong with that.

 

So I must have missed some data point here.

Thanks.

[PeterSt]

2 hours ago, GoldenOne said:

(Roon will tell you the original master of an MQA file or track on Tidal so you can check if it was ever really high-res or not, most MQA releases came from 44.1khz).

 

No, it will not (correctly). And today this is more difficult than you think (a couple of months ago it was more easy).

Best would be if you give me a track (with Tidal) ID that does not come from a 44.1 "master" but higher (88.2 at least). You will see it shows the same, but I will also show you from my own software how reality is. You will see ...

 

Your assumption that this is a leaky filter is (IMO) not right, already because it does not look like it. The filter will be leaky all right, but you can't show that by means of a file which is (was !) natively 88.2 or more.

I will show you myself later. But first I need a Tidal Album ID from you, where Tidal tells it is 88.2 or higher. OK ?

Note please : If Tidal tells it is 44.1, there is not even a need to show anything, because Roon upsamples 2x by default. This is quite crucial, especially if you don't know that. :-)

[PeterSt]

8 hours ago, manisandher said:

MQA rendering is where the leaky filters come into play.

 

Correct. And that happens only in an MQA DAC, unless someone deliberately mimics such a filter in software (like XXHighEnd can do as well - software can do anything). So this always invalidates this topic/thread;

 

A file which is 88.2 or higher, has been folded into 24/44.1 or 24/48 and after unfolding (what e.g. the Tidal player can do, or Audirvana or XXHighEnd or in the end Roon too for that matter), the energy between 22.05 and 44.1 (or 24 and 48) is real unless coincidentally MQA was given an upsampled file to begin with. I still never saw one, although they may exist.

 

So really, this topic is moot. Still the MQA naysayers (like Frederick and even me) can jump in and claim the sh*ttiness of MQA, but they do that everywhere. In this thread it is not related ...

 

PS: But watch out for the 16/44.1 MQA's these days. They are a whole different bunch with their own anomalies and pestering and faking and taking (Tidal) out the original albums and what not.

So yeh, yuk.