it's at -50 dB at the inaudible band so no.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.
MQA Deep Dive - I published music on tidal to test MQA
- Thread starter GoldenOne
- Start date
- Status
it's at -50 dB at the inaudible band so no.
Those blind tests included audiophiles, who didn’t fare any better than the “average person”. We like to think we have golden ears, but objective tests have proven otherwise over and over again.
so you think MQA is free?
Just have a look at the Topping D90 with and without MQA prices and tell me whether the customer pays for decoding or not.
guenthi_r
Member
-43.5 dB
Inaudible for tweeter and amps?
My AMT´s go easy over 30khz, and i am often playing very(!) loud music, so that seems dangerous for my equipment.
these formats serve a valuable function or they provide advantages otherwise they wouldn't be widely adopted.
MQA has no real valuable advatnage to the user and has barely any adoption.
Qobuz offers 0.04$ per stream to the artist, Tidal offers 0.01$. You're paying for MQA, whether you like it or not.
Roon is paying MQA for their service. So you are actually paying MQA with a Roon subscription.
https://community.roonlabs.com/t/why-do-manufacturers-support-mqa/155965/21
DDF
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2018
- Messages
- 565
- Likes
- 1,062
So, we have fake hi res MQA, >20kHz high frequencies synthesized from the <20Khz in band audio.
They then started changing "lossless" files by stealing the 3 bottom bits to fill with aliasing noise of these fake high frequencies.
Given how good the AAC coder is, it's possible Tidal's Premium tier 320 AAC may now be perceptibly as good or better than Tidal's "lossless" for files with a "Master" version.
But perhaps even that is naïve. Is their next step to build the 320 AAC files from the 13 bit + alias noise "lossless master"? It's seems the logical thing to do from their position. How far down the rabbit hole will this contagion go?
The record labels are investing in MQA. If anyone thinks this demolition of the audio isn't to just add watermarking, swampland in Florida awaits your signature on the deed.
They then started changing "lossless" files by stealing the 3 bottom bits to fill with aliasing noise of these fake high frequencies.
Given how good the AAC coder is, it's possible Tidal's Premium tier 320 AAC may now be perceptibly as good or better than Tidal's "lossless" for files with a "Master" version.
But perhaps even that is naïve. Is their next step to build the 320 AAC files from the 13 bit + alias noise "lossless master"? It's seems the logical thing to do from their position. How far down the rabbit hole will this contagion go?
The record labels are investing in MQA. If anyone thinks this demolition of the audio isn't to just add watermarking, swampland in Florida awaits your signature on the deed.
Last edited:
What does MQA add? How does that improve anything?
"adding in things" actually made me laugh. Maybe first time I laughed on an MQA thread. [And I haven't had a smoke break.]How much further does it go, all this? MQA claims lossy-compression "masters", now someone claims their encoding adds things in - is that something to do with "what the artist intended."
I dunno about Roon paying for MQA, but Tidal - no way, they are in partnership...Corporate gangsters, probably somehow investing in each other's companies.
At least Pablo Escobar and the cartels are more honest, and they provide a real product. Even a means for poor people to support themselves.
At least Pablo Escobar and the cartels are more honest, and they provide a real product. Even a means for poor people to support themselves.
So Tidal costs more than QOBUZ, good to know.
I actually think that a format that was truly lossless that added Dolby Atmos is intriguing if people could get it stuffed up the DACs snoot.
Dolby has the technology to offer lossless base with lossy surround metadata, this format is actually interesting.
Folks with multi-channel Atmos decoding in the AVR/AVP get more use out of their systems.
- Rich
BlackTalon
Member
Pricing data point: I just got Tidal for a year in March. Paid for one year through BestBuy, and was closer to $15/ month with that deal.
You still haven't responded to the question:
Which of MQA claims do you support and do you have evidence supporting them?
A list of MQA albums can be found here: https://www.meridianunplugged.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=268318
About 78000 of 104000 plus albums are the 16-bit MQACD variety. If MQA gains acceptance, it seems that we are going to have to live with the inferior 16-bit type.
About 78000 of 104000 plus albums are the 16-bit MQACD variety. If MQA gains acceptance, it seems that we are going to have to live with the inferior 16-bit type.
For folks not following the link, here is the Roon COO:
The audiophile press forced this issue with their fawning coverage.
For the record, Roon pricing did increase last year so new subscribers get to pay for the old ones (like me
).- Rich
I don't know the provenance of this file but some systems could modulate this information into the audible band.
It's better not have the 21.5 to 30kHz distortion added during playback.
- Rich
"Learn more about MQA's ground-breaking audio technology"
Seems like What-HiFi never heard about any kind of press "neutrality"...
SKBubba
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2018
- Messages
- 214
- Likes
- 411
Somebody has to pay. Roon COO says it's them: 'We pay MQA to let you “Core Decode” in Roon. We don’t make money directly on MQA, we lose it!'
So they see it as a cost of doing business to attract customers. You wonder, though, how much it affects their profitability and whether the money could be better spent on developing other features. It also means that if you pay for roon you are paying MQA Ltd. indirectly, whether you use their technology or not.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
