MQA Deep Dive - I published music on tidal to test MQA

[PO3c]

So a German tone-arm manufacturer discovers digital audio in 2021 and this is your luminary.
The of course, the time-honored "every track I listened to sounded better" is presesnt.

I'll go out a limb here and this DAC will likely be bested by several DACs costing less than $500.

- Rich

Thats an interesting thought in light of critic amir are getting. How would anyone go about testing a produckt like that where some markeded functionality clearly are affiliated with MQA? Clearly the intended media has to be used when testing?

 

[Raindog123]

Whipping Post to tear down/apart one of our Own, simply because he holds a differing opinion about MQA. The conversation began to crucify Amir because he has his own opinion.

@AdamG247, For level-setting and terminology-defining... Can you please point me/us at any of this 'tearing down/apart one of our own", "crucifying"? For example, I was one of those replying to and disagreeing with some of @amirm statements in the past 48hrs. However, I never intended any disrespect or tearing-apart. More so, I posted >this<, a week ago...

I assume, I am out-of-sync, or missed some offensive posts, so would appreciate your guidance on what is considered wrong-doing? You can use me as an example, I am a big boy.

 

[mkawa]

with the thread closing i can make a prediction and have it recorded for the ages. 18 months. mqa ltd has 18 months left. i expect a sell-off of IP for pennies after that. maybe tidal will buy them for a couple dollars, or their CEO will get warner to purchase the carcass, but specifically mqa ltd will stop existing as a separate concern in 18 months. PREDICTION MADE!

note: this prediction is based entirely on public records and is the result of and only of public domain information searches by me. i have no and would never use proprietary information to make such a wild and not-very-serious prediction about the trajectory of a firm.

also, these statements are mine and mine alone and do not reflect the beliefs or projections of anyone other than myself

 

[RichB]

The MQA CD schema is a sure money grab it can not remotely serve any purpose .
Likewise for the files where there are no ultrasonic content to fold (44.1k or 48k original masters ) but gets the treatment anyways.

An interesting DBT would be.

Original >24/96 master
MQA version
24/48 FLAC

Also all Bob's and Meridian rather weakly supported claims about apodizing filters ? Would need a good investigation , has any real third party research shoved any benefits of these class of filters . I blame Meridian to be instrumental in starting the last decades filter craze among audiophiles.
But is there really anything at all ? Why would leaky filters with aliasing be somehow more pleasing to the human ear and represent a better reconstruction subjectively (do not bring the pre ringing argument its severely misunderstood music don't do this only the used test signal )

Reading between the lines there are even claims that upsampling improves the sound a true audiophile trope ? I hoped not see in outside the usual flat earth society.

It would but I would add sourced from the same original file that must be 24/94 from above.
The Stereophile analysis of a DXD music file increased noise, for 10 to 20 dB but still, in all likelihood inaudible.
Examining the rest of the graph, MQA's only ability to generate a benefit would be in 'de-blurring".

Even if a DBT could produce a difference, that does not mean it is superior.
For example, a DBT using a file with more noise may be identifiable but not in a good way.

- Rich

 

[RichB]

@AdamG247, I think you are doing a good job.

Please do not shutdown this discussion.
A shutdown will be seen as censoring criticism and further convince many, that MQA is being protected from scrutiny.
I don't believe that is the case but, you see the point.

My vote: KEEP THIS THREAD OPEN.

If supporters don't want to engage on the technical points, stay away.
I don't think discussions of other formats and licensing was on-topic, but that's me.

Please keep MQA threads open. Warn those (including me) when we get out of line. !

- Rich

 

[RichB]

MQA goes green
Imagine the idea of all created music stored one place. Just one file each tune to save the earth. Everything MQA processed. (or on the fly MQA tagged that depends on what you are willing to pay or have of certified and licenced equipment). End to end encryption. Other metadata done by Roon.
"Just as the artist intended."

https://vilvit.io/

View attachment 126989

Have to admit, the idea is not bad at all.

The one-file talking point has never been backed up.
There is nothing about an MQA file with 24/48 MQA file makes it a single master more than a PCM file at 24/4.
For CD and MP3, it would have to be down-samples on the fly, or stored.

However, a 44.1/16 MQA file that drops 13 bits of DR and must drop potential DV when MQA decoded is a single master.
So in a way, this could be true but only when MQA is guaranteed to remove dynamic range.
A 44.1/16 MQA file is hard to defend because because the is a clear degradation of RedBook.
Any desktop DAC incapable of resolving CD/Redbook is not recommended on ASR.

I did not know that MQA files were appearing at 44.1/16. That was an eye opener.
I was against MQA before but now, I loath it.

- Rich

 

[GoldenOne]

So I really do not know what Tidal is doing at the moment.

After their recent announcement that they'd be moving MQA to a new tier, and offering an actual price tier for just hifi/lossless, I decided to check if the files being served had changed at all. Or if it was still just the same file with MQA flagging removed.

Firstly I checked Sam Smith's "Too Good at Goodbyes", and was pleasantly surprised to see that now there is no longer a bit-perfect match between the master and hifi tier. A 100dB null now.

However, the fact that even the very upper frequency parts are a VERY close match to the MQA version had me feeling suspicious.
I then compared the 'hifi' version of the track to the qobuz redbook version and....not a match. And in fact we see the same high frequency difference as we'd seen in previous comparisons of non-MQA vs MQA.

Ok, this doesn't make much sense. Let's pick something that there wasn't ever a hires master for, just to be sure it's not something to do with that.
Biffy Clyro - Many of Horror

This was only ever a 16 bit 44.1khz master, and the MQA file is as expected, sourced from 44.1khz.
So let's compare the "hifi" and "Master" versions

Absolutely bitperfect. Same file. Again, just the "Hifi" version has MQA flagging removed

So why don't we compare to the Qobuz version:

Nope, not the same.

I thought it'd be interesting to mention this. I don't know what on earth has happened to the Sam Smith release on Tidal, but it seems that it has been changed to no longer have a bitperfect match to the MQA file, but it is also not the same as the lossless version and remains INCREDIBLY similar to the MQA one.
I've not tested other tracks yet so I don't know if it was just that track/album, or if this is happening to other tracks, but regardless, it doesn't make much sense. I don't wish to come across as arrogant but it does seem odd that the specific album I'd used in my video has had a source-file change/alteration just a week or so after the video came out. And to one which does not match other services/sites.

 

[RichB]

Hold it! PCM files cannot store square waves! Square files have an infinite spectrum, so cannot be stored in a finite bandwidth signal. You can approximate them for sure, but not "losslessly" store them in an audio file.

Is it not possible to create and store 0 samples immediately followed by 1's at some amplitude?
I am not an expert but I thought this as possible.

I thought there were complaints about @GoldenOne doing this in his sample. How did he do that if it were not possible.
Am I missing something?

- Rich

 

[GoldenOne]

Is it not possible to create and store 0 samples immediately followed by 1's at some amplitude?
I am not an expert but I thought this as possible.

I thought there were complaints about @GoldenOne doing this in his sample. How did he do that if it were not possible.
Am I missing something?

- Rich

Technically no because it would require that two samples be at the same point in time.
A PCM version of a square wave has the transition period limited by the sample rate.

 

[RichB]

I just checked one of those L2 records that you can download: "Arnesen: MAGNIFICAT 4. Et misericordia". Checked the part where there were the most ultrasonics. Already at 15 kHz, they were down 96 dB, at 24 kHz 127 dB down. This with the 96 kHz version. So I thought, let's see the 352 kHz version.. surely there must be some left? Ah, look: We can see some noise shaping of the ADC, from about 50 kHz to the end we see a rising spectrum of noise going from -120 dB to about -72. between 28 and 52 kHz, there is simply nothing.

View attachment 127010

Well, another file then? Let's try "Finzi: Come Away, Death". They didn't even bother with the 44.1 kHz file here, so there must be something good? The quick view of the spectrum shown once again the same picture, ultrasonice way below 100 dB. So I specifically selected a part where I saw a clear line in the ultrasonics all the way up to 40 kHz. Guess what? It still showed a peak of- 90 dB and the rest below -100dB.

And this is classical music mind you, the purest of the purest recordings.

So I wonder, what does the equal loudness curve look like for ultrasonics?

Can anyone support the 44.1/16 MQA files that produce this result.
Anyone?

- Rich

 

[awdeeoh]

So I really do not know what Tidal is doing at the moment.

After their recent announcement that they'd be moving MQA to a new tier, and offering an actual price tier for just hifi/lossless, I decided to check if the files being served had changed at all. Or if it was still just the same file with MQA flagging removed.

Firstly I checked Sam Smith's "Too Good at Goodbyes", and was pleasantly surprised to see that now there is no longer a bit-perfect match between the master and hifi tier. A 100dB null now.

View attachment 127019

However, the fact that even the very upper frequency parts are a VERY close match to the MQA version had me feeling suspicious.
I then compared the 'hifi' version of the track to the qobuz redbook version and....not a match. And in fact we see the same high frequency difference as we'd seen in previous comparisons of non-MQA vs MQA.

View attachment 127020


Ok, this doesn't make much sense. Let's pick something that there wasn't ever a hires master for, just to be sure it's not something to do with that.
Biffy Clyro - Many of Horror
View attachment 127021
This was only ever a 16 bit 44.1khz master, and the MQA file is as expected, sourced from 44.1khz.
So let's compare the "hifi" and "Master" versions

View attachment 127023

Absolutely bitperfect. Same file. Again, just the "Hifi" version has MQA flagging removed

So why don't we compare to the Qobuz version:

Nope, not the same.

I thought it'd be interesting to mention this. I don't know what on earth has happened to the Sam Smith release on Tidal, but it seems that it has been changed to no longer have a bitperfect match to the MQA file, but it is also not the same as the lossless version and remains INCREDIBLY similar to the MQA one.
I've not tested other tracks yet so I don't know if it was just that track/album, or if this is happening to other tracks, but regardless, it doesn't make much sense. I don't wish to come across as arrogant but it does seem odd that the specific album I'd used in my video has had a source-file change/alteration just a week or so after the video came out. And to one which does not match other services/sites.

Apparently you didn't read posts.

Most of Warners 16/44.1 catalogue in Tidal are MQA encoded.

 

[GoldenOne]

Apparently you didn't read posts.

Most of Warners 16/44.1 catalogue in Tidal are MQA encoded.

I'm aware of that (I made the OP)
This isn't in regards to it being in MQA. That was discussed in the original post and video.

This is in regards to the fact that the source file for the "hifi" tier has changed since I made the post/video. Whilst other tracks have remained the same

 

[guenthi_r]

I'm aware of that (I made the OP)
This isn't in regards to it being in MQA. That was discussed in the original post and video.

This is in regards to the fact that the source file for the "hifi" tier has changed since I made the post/video. Whilst other tracks have remained the same

The MQA detection tool maybe helps for clarification of used file?
MQA Detector

 

[awdeeoh]

I'm aware of that (I made the OP)
This isn't in regards to it being in MQA. That was discussed in the original post and video.

This is in regards to the fact that the source file for the "hifi" tier has changed since I made the post/video. Whilst other tracks have remained the same

You should list those tracks and their IDs so that others can check it and confirm it.

 

[jensgk]

I don't wish to come across as arrogant but it does seem odd that the specific album I'd used in my video has had a source-file change/alteration just a week or so after the video came out. And to one which does not match other services/sites.

They are panicking and trying to alter evidence..

 

[RichB]

Technically no because it would require that two samples be at the same point in time.
A PCM version of a square wave has the transition period limited by the sample rate.

Yes, the transition between 0 and 1 when decoded must be not a square wave.
Therefore, you did not embed square waves in your file. Correct?

- Rich

 

[Music1969]

So a German tone-arm manufacturer discovers digital audio in 2021 and this is your luminary.
The of course, the time-honored "every track I listened to sounded better" is presesnt.

Just read the quote I shared. The rest is obviously non-sense. I don't care who he is or about the DAC...

I'll go out a limb here and this DAC will likely be bested by several DACs costing less than $500.

- Rich

You're focusing on something completely irrelevant.

The quote I shared about him talking to MQA guys gives a little insight... ignore the rest of the webpage. It was easy for me to.

 

[Raindog123]

@GoldenOne, all: For my benefit, what exactly does a single point (in dBFS) on the Delta Spectrogram mean? How exactly does it calculate values for different frequencies (from the original time-domain samples)? Are the timelines guaranteed to be aligned between the two files?

(If there a description somewhere online, just point me at it. )

 

[PO3c]

So I really do not know what Tidal is doing at the moment.
...

I wonder if this happens if you keep publishing examples not related to any of the three known record labels? If we see independent labels stay unchanged we learn if it is Tidal or the labels altering content.

 

[Raindog123]

They are panicking and trying to alter evidence..

Binary shredders are spinning like crazy, and suitcases full of bitcoin are tucked in limos' Teslas' Model X trunks. [Though personally, I would go for Dogcoin.]