• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

MQA: A Review of controversies, concerns, and cautions

Status
Not open for further replies.

EchoChamber

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 22, 2020
Messages
673
Likes
925
It was actually true at the beginning despite being (successfully) attacked by wealthy companies who had inferior products to shift and no technology to make CD players.
You guys are funny... Enjoy your CDs!! :)
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,445
Likes
15,780
Location
Oxfordshire
You guys are funny... Enjoy your CDs!! :)
I have been doing, for decades thanks.
The thing is why wouldn't they be?
They are capable of recording up to 22.05kHz which is beyond human hearing and with a dynamic range of 96dB which is (way) beyond any music recording I have ever checked so there is nothing audible in a music recording that can not be perfectly stored and replayed from a CD.
Higher bandwidth or dynamic range is demonstrably unnecessary..
After all some LPs sound pretty good and they are nowhere near as good as CD in dynamic range or distortion and whilst they theoretically able to go over 22.05kHz there aren't many cartridges that can track that high even if anybody could hear it and the distortion is massive above 10kHz anyway.
 

Thunder240

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2020
Messages
58
Likes
21
Location
NorCal
I find Tidal MQA tracks played through my D90 MQA to sound different than the same track from a ripped CD. It sounds bigger, with more presence, and a larger, deeper soundstage. Also timbre more “analog like”. I like them better.

Between the proprietary ADC, the proprietary digital filter, and the oragami (compression?) isnt this effectively DSP that happens to be euphonic?

No sarcasm at all here (sorry if it comes off that way).
 

RichB

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
1,946
Likes
2,611
Location
Massachusetts
Between the proprietary ADC, the proprietary digital filter, and the oragami (compression?) isnt this effectively DSP that happens to be euphonic?

No sarcasm at all here (sorry if it comes off that way).

Since the audible range is 20hz to 20kHz is audible, then any verifiable audible must result in changes within this range. Digital filters, DSP manipulations, or modulation are possible sources.

No rational conclusion can be made compare MQA to another source without assuring a common master and mastering levels.

- Rich
 

EchoChamber

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 22, 2020
Messages
673
Likes
925
Between the proprietary ADC, the proprietary digital filter, and the oragami (compression?) isnt this effectively DSP that happens to be euphonic?

No sarcasm at all here (sorry if it comes off that way).
Possibly. My understanding is that MQA is a lossy format. If I can also hear differences between all 3 major HD streaming services and also against ripped CDs, I’d conclude no format is perfect, and all are lossy somehow. And carry their sonic signature in the process. Tidal and MQA sounds fine to me, I don’t understand why there’s so much frustration around it.

And why wouldn’t we not want the highest possible resolution in a format. What’s the point of having gear with a high SINAD value?

(for those that think it’s all placebo)
One can accuse me of suffering from placebo, and that’s one’s right to free speech, but it doesn’t mean it is true. It is just a simplistic and dismissive opinion.
 
Last edited:

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,066
Likes
14,697
Amazon HD only makes sense from a cost perspective give if you already have an Amazon-approved streaming device in your signal path. If you don’t, you are going to have to add one, which at a minimum will involve subbing equipment (perhaps sonically inferior) and could necessitate buying new equipment such as a Denon HEOS Link, which drives up cost. Or you could stream it from a device such as a computer/iOS/Android via Airplay, but then you are back to CD quality. Until Amazon opens up their API, I’m sticking with Qobuz.

USB from pc to dac using amazon app is hi res, no?
 

SIY

Grand Contributor
Technical Expert
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
10,383
Likes
24,749
Location
Alfred, NY
Between the proprietary ADC, the proprietary digital filter, and the oragami (compression?) isnt this effectively DSP that happens to be euphonic?

No sarcasm at all here (sorry if it comes off that way).
No one has even demonstrated that it’s audible, much less euphonic.
 

Thunder240

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2020
Messages
58
Likes
21
Location
NorCal
One can accuse me of suffering from placebo, and that’s one’s right to free speech, but it doesn’t mean it is true. It is just a simplistic and dismissive opinion.

I take your report of perceived sonic differences at face value, no acusation of placebo affect. It it comes back to @RichB ’s point above — without assurance of a common master, all we know is that something is going on, and we don’t know what.

My suspicion is that they are doing something in their ADC that introduces these audible effects. And assuming that’s true, my preference would be to instead have the “clean” version that sounds as close to the original analog as possible, and to instead generate the same effects through user-controllable (and defeatable) DSP.

I dont always to my music bit perfect. Right now in my main stereo rig I’m running a digital crossover to my sub, and it sounds pretty good to my ears, so I’m definitely open to the idea that my musical experience can be enhanced through DSP. I just like to be the one in control, instead of letting some company decide for me what effects sound best. But as long as they are doing it, at least it sounds good
 

RichB

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
1,946
Likes
2,611
Location
Massachusetts
Possibly. My understanding is that MQA is a lossy format. If I can also hear differences between all 3 major HD streaming services and also against ripped CDs, I’d conclude no format is perfect, and all are lossy somehow. And carry their sonic signature in the process. Tidal and MQA sounds fine to me, I don’t understand why there’s so much frustration around it. And why wouldn’t we not want the highest possible format. What’s the point of having gear with a high SINAD value?

One can accuse me of suffering from placebo, and that’s one’s right to free speech, but it doesn’t mean it is true. It is just a simplistic and dismissive opinion.

All streaming services are opaque. There is no visibility into volume leveling and other processing that may occur. It's fine to prefer one song from a streaming service but there is not enough data for rational conclusions. Add 2 dB to MQA recorded tracks and veils will be lifted. ;)

MQA extends frequency response into the ultrasonic, inaudible range by consuming dynamic range for lossy encoding.
Maximizing SINAD is achieved by eliminating MQA so there is consistency to this position.

- Rich
 

dmac6419

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 16, 2019
Messages
1,246
Likes
770
Location
USofA
Possibly. My understanding is that MQA is a lossy format. If I can also hear differences between all 3 major HD streaming services and also against ripped CDs, I’d conclude no format is perfect, and all are lossy somehow. And carry their sonic signature in the process. Tidal and MQA sounds fine to me, I don’t understand why there’s so much frustration around it. And why wouldn’t we not want the highest possible format. What’s the point of having gear with a high SINAD value?

One can accuse me of suffering from placebo, and that’s one’s right to free speech, but it doesn’t mean it is true. It is just a simplistic and dismissive opinion.
Some lossy sounds better lossless,enjoy the music.
 

RichB

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
1,946
Likes
2,611
Location
Massachusetts
I take your report of perceived sonic differences at face value, no acusation of placebo affect. It it comes back to @RichB ’s point above — without assurance of a common master, all we know is that something is going on, and we don’t know what.

My suspicion is that they are doing something in their ADC that introduces these audible effects. And assuming that’s true, my preference would be to instead have the “clean” version that sounds as close to the original analog as possible, and to instead generate the same effects through user-controllable (and defeatable) DSP.

I dont always to my music bit perfect. Right now in my main stereo rig I’m running a digital crossover to my sub, and it sounds pretty good to my ears, so I’m definitely open to the idea that my musical experience can be enhanced through DSP. I just like to be the one in control, instead of letting some company decide for me what effects sound best. But as long as they are doing it, at least it sounds good

Give the user the best possible source without poorly implemented reconstruction filters and lossy encoding. Then we are free to DSP it for bass management, room correction, house curves, etc.
Then we are all free to "improve" it as desired.

- Rich
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,066
Likes
14,697
Yes, this is true. If you use the Amazon app and run a USB cable to your DAC, you get HD. My previous statement assumed networked streaming (such as Roon, BlueOS, HEOS, or UPnP).
Big pain it doesn't integrate with roon for me too.
 

RichB

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
1,946
Likes
2,611
Location
Massachusetts
Big pain it doesn't integrate with Roon for me too.
My household is a total mess. Kids use Spotify, wife uses Apple music, I use QOBUZ.

Amazon with Roon would be ideal because I'd have a better shot at consolidation (though still low probability).

- Rich
 

danadam

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 20, 2017
Messages
956
Likes
1,496
It's certainly not a big deal, as modern sample-rate converters do an excellent job of it.

But if you run a null test on a 96k original and a downsampled 44.1k version of that original, the difference file does not sound like random noise, and it's not usually way down at -90dB or something - it typically sounds exactly like music, and its peaks can be as high as approx. -50dB.

Now, I've rarely if ever been able to discern which was which in a direct A/B comparison - and even when I've heard (or thought I heard) a slight difference, I've never had a strong feeling about which was better. But since the two versions are demonstrably different - since you can generate a difference file that is clearly audible in and of itself even if that difference is 99-100% masked in an A/B comparison
Are you talking about some specific cases or do you mean in general? Because in my experience a simple:
Code:
sox input_file -b16 output_file rate 44100
creates inaudible nulls. For example, a 20 sec excerpt from 02. Mosaic (album "Guitar Noir"):
01. 20sec.png
converted to 16/44:
02. 16-44.png
and back to 24/96:
03. 24-96.png
gives null:
04. null.png
Yes, the null waveform peaks go even up to -20 dB:
Code:
             Overall     Left      Right
Pk lev dB     -21.72    -21.72    -24.07
RMS lev dB    -60.56    -62.71    -59.14
but it's all above 20 kHz.
 

Julf

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
3,004
Likes
3,998
Location
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
One can accuse me of suffering from placebo, and that’s one’s right to free speech, but it doesn’t mean it is true.

Indeed. It is up to you to prove it is not true.

It is just a simplistic and dismissive opinion.

Not simplistic, just simple. Not dismissive either, just factual.
 

tmtomh

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
2,636
Likes
7,487
Between the proprietary ADC, the proprietary digital filter, and the oragami (compression?) isnt this effectively DSP that happens to be euphonic?

Yes - but I would suggest rephrasing the end part as something like, "isn't this effectively DSP that is claimed to improve the sound in ways that, if audible, would in actuality be euphonic?"

Not trying to nitpick what you said - I agree with you strongly here. I'm suggesting that rephrasing only because some folks have responded to your comment by saying it's not necessarily euphonic because there's no evidence its effects are even audible. (I know that's beside the point of what you were trying to say.)
 

tmtomh

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
2,636
Likes
7,487
Are you talking about some specific cases or do you mean in general? Because in my experience a simple:
Code:
sox input_file -b16 output_file rate 44100
creates inaudible nulls. For example, a 20 sec excerpt from 02. Mosaic (album "Guitar Noir"):
View attachment 73302
converted to 16/44:
View attachment 73303
and back to 24/96:
View attachment 73304
gives null:
View attachment 73305
Yes, the null waveform peaks go even up to -20 dB:
Code:
             Overall     Left      Right
Pk lev dB     -21.72    -21.72    -24.07
RMS lev dB    -60.56    -62.71    -59.14
but it's all above 20 kHz.

Wow, fascinating - thank you!

I've done this myself in two ways:
  1. Commercial 24/96 file resampled and dithered by me in Audacity, then null-tested in Audacity; and
  2. Commercial 24/96 file and commercial CD rip of known-identical mastering (e.g. 2014/15 Led Zeppelin reissues), null-tested in Audacity.
My results typically have the difference RMS low, around -80dB, but with higher peaks, and with plenty of the difference in the 20Hz-20kHz region.

Based on what you've shown here, however, I would hypothesize that I could be trying this the wrong way, by directly comparing the 96k and 44.1k versions, where it is impossible to know exactly what the exact, proper alignment of the waveforms is in order to do the null test properly or fully. By converting a file from 96k to 44.1k and back again, one creates two 96k versions that can then be "perfectly" compared in a null test.

I'm going to try that now. Thanks!

EDIT: Holy moly - I did it with Audacity and got the same results as you - difference file shows information there, but inaudible because ultrasonic. Very cool. I don't buy much high-res material, but still, this is going to save me some money and storage space moving forward!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom