MQA: A Review of controversies, concerns, and cautions

[Sal1950]

QS never had the muscle of a CBS or EMI behind it, so at least over here it wasn't as prominent.

Here also, Marantz never did release a QS module for my 2440. Wish I had held on to that sucker, they're getting a fortune for survivors on ebay. But then they get a bundle for anything Marantz from that era.

 

[Julf]

Minor detail, but what does this have to do with MQA?

 

[Sal1950]

But that only works for my 2 CD-4 records.

Biggest issue with CD4s is if they're played too much or with a improper stylus it wipes out the high freq carrier and the de-modulator
won't lock.

Minor detail, but what does this have to do with MQA?

Not a thing. But for how many years can we beat this dead MQA horse, we've all typed the same shit over and over more times than I care to remember.
Sorry I'll shut up about something interesting like multich music. LOL

 

[rkbates]

Biggest issue with CD4s is if they're played too much or with a improper stylus it wipes out the high freq carrier and the de-modulator
won't lock.


Not a thing. But for how many years can we beat this dead MQA horse, we've all typed the same shit over and over more times than I care to remember.
Sorry I'll shut up about something interesting like multich music. LOL

More 4 channel stuff please - never knew 4 channel LPs existed and far more interesting than MQA

 

[watchnerd]

More 4 channel stuff please - never knew 4 channel LPs existed and far more interesting than MQA

Some of the most famous albums of the 70s were released in some form of quadraphonic, although for some the mix is pretty bad.

 

[DonH56]

Always this:

 

[Sal1950]

Always this:

There were tons of quad eight track cartridges, I even forgot there was this many.
And dedicated players for them too. LOL

https://8trackheaven.com/collecting/quadraphonic-8-track-tape-players/complete-list-of-quad-tapes/

 

[Julf]

But for how many years can we beat this dead MQA horse, we've all typed the same shit over and over more times than I care to remember.

You have a point...

 

[Julf]

More 4 channel stuff please - never knew 4 channel LPs existed and far more interesting than MQA

Lucky you.... I lived through it. At least 3 incompatible systems, all kind of at the limits of what the technology at the time could do...

 

[Sal1950]

Lucky you.... I lived through it.

Me too

At least 3 incompatible systems, all kind of at the limits of what the technology at the time could do...

All very true. But you should see how much fun the quad guys are having with it over on,
https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/
Vinyl heads are all the same, they love to play with their antiques.

 

[insoc]

Now that I've been using the QOBUZ app (I only used Tidal HI RES before) I've seen that the same albums that Tidal has on their MQA Masters catalogue, QOBUZ has them on their HI RES catologue and HDTRACKS sell them as HI RES audio files. Do we have to assume then that the music labels send QOBUZ, TIDAL and HDTRACKS the same album information, in this case the REMASTERED HI RES version and then each app and store market them as they please?

 

[Chrispy]

Now that I've been using the QOBUZ app (I only used Tidal HI RES before) I've seen that the same albums that Tidal has on their MQA Masters catalogue, QOBUZ has them on their HI RES catologue and HDTRACKS sell them as HI RES audio files. Do we have to assume then that the music labels send QOBUZ, TIDAL and HDTRACKS the same album information, in this case the REMASTERED HI RES version and then each app and store market them as they please?

What about if it might just be cd content at 24/96? Does it make sense for all owners to customize the tracks they rent to the streaming services individually or just provide content generally?

 

[firedog]

Now that I've been using the QOBUZ app (I only used Tidal HI RES before) I've seen that the same albums that Tidal has on their MQA Masters catalogue, QOBUZ has them on their HI RES catologue and HDTRACKS sell them as HI RES audio files. Do we have to assume then that the music labels send QOBUZ, TIDAL and HDTRACKS the same album information, in this case the REMASTERED HI RES version and then each app and store market them as they please?

In most cases the MQA version will be an MQA processed version of the album, Qobuz and HDT are getting a non-MQA processed version of a hi-res master. All three places sell/stream what they are sent. Are they the same master - one processed for MQA at Tidal and the others not?
You can't know for sure. Sometimes they will be, sometimes a different master might be chosen for MQA processing than the ones sent as "regular" hi-res to Qobuz and download sites like HDT.

One thing to look at is the length of tracks and of the album as a whole. If they aren't the same, the two types probably aren't based on the same master. If you see a release date, that could also clue you in.

 

[amirm]

Now that I've been using the QOBUZ app (I only used Tidal HI RES before) I've seen that the same albums that Tidal has on their MQA Masters catalogue, QOBUZ has them on their HI RES catologue and HDTRACKS sell them as HI RES audio files. Do we have to assume then that the music labels send QOBUZ, TIDAL and HDTRACKS the same album information, in this case the REMASTERED HI RES version and then each app and store market them as they please?

You are assuming the labels are less screwed up organizations than they are. No, you can't rely on the masters being the same at all. Even the mastering engineer for some of these tracks (a friend) would often find what they published is not what he sent them!

 

[Martin_320]

In most cases the MQA version will be an MQA processed version of the album, Qobuz and HDT are getting a non-MQA processed version of a hi-res master. All three places sell/stream what they are sent. Are they the same master - one processed for MQA at Tidal and the others not?
You can't know for sure...

I know there are cases where the record label / distributor sends to all the streaming services the same Trojan MQA-infected flac file. Such a file outwardly masquerades as a 24bit 44.1kHz flac. But beware: internally, once the data is extracted, the last few bits are actually used for the proprietary and lossy MQA noise-shaping algorithms and DRM handshaking etc. Moreover, it means the product is being sold to the streaming service providers -- and to you the consumer -- as something that it is not. Furthermore, I feel that this requires legal intervention in order to put a stop to it.
Ps. If you see a **96kHz** sample rate flac song being streamed, then I think you can be confident that it's not an MQA Trojan.

 

[Wombat]

In most cases the MQA version will be an MQA processed version of the album, Qobuz and HDT are getting a non-MQA processed version of a hi-res master. All three places sell/stream what they are sent. Are they the same master - one processed for MQA at Tidal and the others not?
You can't know for sure. Sometimes they will be, sometimes a different master might be chosen for MQA processing than the ones sent as "regular" hi-res to Qobuz and download sites like HDT.

One thing to look at is the length of tracks and of the album as a whole. If they aren't the same, the two types probably aren't based on the same master. If you see a release date, that could also clue you in.

Or they are based on the same master and are edited/remastered versions for identification/discrimination purposes.

Those substandard versions on many cheap releases and compilations could only sound so poor if deliberate.

 

[scherbakov_al]

I have been using Qobuz for a while. A few days ago I decided to try the Tidal service. I tried listening to some of Pat Metheny's albums. I love this artist. Especially early albums. On Tidal, many of these albums are encoded in the MQA. Some albums on Tidal MQA have a green circle. The listening sound had a clear degradation at high frequencies. For listening I use a MacBook from Audirvana, as well as SMSL m500 and Beyerdynamic DT-990Pro. Conclusion - MQA with a green circle is not suitable for listening. One of Metheny's latest albums was encoded in the MQA with a blue circle. I compared this to an uncompressed Qobuz broadcast. I found differences in the sound of jumping hairs from the bow when playing the double bass. Although the difference is not obvious and very weak. On Qobuz, the sound was natural and spatial; when the MQA was compressed, this sound lost its spatial dimension and became lifeless. When I heard this, the question of what to use to play the sound immediately disappeared. My obvious choice is Qobuz broadcast without any compression or any changes in sound material. I will spend my money on this service. For me, the choice is certain. I am disappointed that some of Pat Metheny’s albums have died when using MQA compression.
(Sorry for the double post)

 

[dmac6419]

I have been using Qobuz for a while. A few days ago I decided to try the Tidal service. I tried listening to some of Pat Metheny's albums. I love this artist. Especially early albums. On Tidal, many of these albums are encoded in the MQA. Some albums on Tidal MQA have a green circle. The listening sound had a clear degradation at high frequencies. For listening I use a MacBook from Audirvana, as well as SMSL m500 and Beyerdynamic DT-990Pro. Conclusion - MQA with a green circle is not suitable for listening. One of Metheny's latest albums was encoded in the MQA with a blue circle. I compared this to an uncompressed Qobuz broadcast. I found differences in the sound of jumping hairs from the bow when playing the double bass. Although the difference is not obvious and very weak. On Qobuz, the sound was natural and spatial; when the MQA was compressed, this sound lost its spatial dimension and became lifeless. When I heard this, the question of what to use to play the sound immediately disappeared. My obvious choice is Qobuz broadcast without any compression or any changes in sound material. I will spend my money on this service. For me, the choice is certain. I am disappointed that some of Pat Metheny’s albums have died when using MQA compression.
(Sorry for the double post)

I'm gonna go listen to Tidal right now,sounds good on my system,oh I could never get Qobuz to work the software was just too buggy

 

[Jimbob54]

I have been using Qobuz for a while. A few days ago I decided to try the Tidal service. I tried listening to some of Pat Metheny's albums. I love this artist. Especially early albums. On Tidal, many of these albums are encoded in the MQA. Some albums on Tidal MQA have a green circle. The listening sound had a clear degradation at high frequencies. For listening I use a MacBook from Audirvana, as well as SMSL m500 and Beyerdynamic DT-990Pro. Conclusion - MQA with a green circle is not suitable for listening. One of Metheny's latest albums was encoded in the MQA with a blue circle. I compared this to an uncompressed Qobuz broadcast. I found differences in the sound of jumping hairs from the bow when playing the double bass. Although the difference is not obvious and very weak. On Qobuz, the sound was natural and spatial; when the MQA was compressed, this sound lost its spatial dimension and became lifeless. When I heard this, the question of what to use to play the sound immediately disappeared. My obvious choice is Qobuz broadcast without any compression or any changes in sound material. I will spend my money on this service. For me, the choice is certain. I am disappointed that some of Pat Metheny’s albums have died when using MQA compression.
(Sorry for the double post)

I've got some bad news for you. The mqa colours have nothing to do with measurable quality and everything to do with licensing fees/ who is prepared to sign off on the mqa version.

Blue does not mean sonically better or the coding /decoding is any different. Don't take my word for it, look it up.

 

[awdeeoh]

a lot of cd quality albums on tidal lately have been encoded with mqa - 16/44.1 to 24/44.1 approximately same file size, no upsampling involved.

check the pink floyd pulse album