MQA Sounds Really Good!

[Sal1950]

All I need is what I cherish the most: my hearing and long-term listening experience.

Using only those tools you will fail miserably to ever advance the SOTA in music reproduction or even just improve your home rig. All you'll ever accomplish is to assemble a system that pleases you, and spend unnecessarily large amounts of money doing so.

 

[LuckyLuke575]

(my bold)

That's a pretty bold claim, and one that's impossible for the general public to prove.

I really like this Studio quality sound certification aspect of MQA

 

[LuckyLuke575]

So will that mean if I get an MQA Beatles remaster it is signed off for the Michael Jackson estate? Oh wait, the estate sold the rights to Sony. McCartney sued over it, but an out of court private settlement was reached. So I don't know if a Sony exec will sign off on the MQA version or Paul or who exactly? In any case it seems likely such a sign off is well removed from how it sounds or sounded.

That's probably a bad example, because Giles Martin has been overseeing the remixing of Beatles albums at Abbey Road for the past few years, so it doesn't seem like a bunch of empty suits are using MQA to ruin the music

 

[LuckyLuke575]

Learned something new about MQA. As I continue to evaluate MQA I noticed one of the albums on my play list is labeled MQA Studio. Most I come across are listed as MQA. Fyi, here is the said distinction along with a link. I'm interested if this adds anything to the discussion.

Provenance
Provenance and technical standards are completely different things. A music file can be altered after artist release, irrespective of the technology used. Provenance is indicated when MQA is played back.

• The MQA ‘Studio’ (blue light) gives confirmation directly from mastering engineers, producers or artists to their listeners. MQA Studio authenticates that the sound you are hearing is exactly as played in the studio when the music was completed and, by implication, that this is also the definitive version of the recording at that point in time.
• A second level, ‘MQA’ (green light) is available to indicate that although the stream is genuine, provenance may be uncertain or that it is not yet the final release.

http://bobtalks.co.uk/blog/mqa-philosophy/mqa-authentication-and-quality/#

This is excellent. I'd like to have a DAC in future that has these lights instead of the DSD indicator light that's on my DAC (which I'll never use, at least not at work).

 

[Thomas savage]

I wish that was true.. The controversy around cable influences and tweaks like audiophile network switches is sometimes very fierce and many times end up with the same arguments: cannot measure, did you perform DBT etc. All I need is what I cherish the most: my hearing and long-term listening experience.

I don't think this is the forum for you.

 

[LuckyLuke575]

I wish that was true.. The controversy around cable influences and tweaks like audiophile network switches is sometimes very fierce and many times end up with the same arguments: cannot measure, did you perform DBT etc. All I need is what I cherish the most: my hearing and long-term listening experience.

I'll tell you directly bud; we're hearing ghosts and phantoms contrived by our minds. But I'd rather listen to audio equipment that's technically excellent, and then believe the phantoms I'm hearing.

 

[amirm]

So will that mean if I get an MQA Beatles remaster it is signed off for the Michael Jackson estate? Oh wait, the estate sold the rights to Sony. McCartney sued over it, but an out of court private settlement was reached. So I don't know if a Sony exec will sign off on the MQA version or Paul or who exactly? In any case it seems likely such a sign off is well removed from how it sounds or sounded.

I am more familiar with the process for video/film content. And there, the artistic intentions are definitely involved in the sign off. Such people can defer however to others if the work product is of little interest to them. But functionally they still have to sign off.

 

[BDWoody]

I don't think this is the forum for you.

I wonder what a troll laughing sounds like...

 

[strangeskies]

I wonder what a troll laughing sounds like...

Depends on the cabling...

 

[digicidal]

MQA and their proponents are telling everyone "trust us, there is a difference, which we can't show you or prove to you in any way, but it's absolutely there". When people say things like that, any rational person should immediately become deeply suspicious of their intentions.

So MQA could also be summarized as a homeopathic format?

 

[Blumlein 88]

So MQA could also be summarized as a homeopathic format?

Is that because it uses homeopathic aliasing filters? Lets just a little very low level ultrasonic frequencies get aliased into the audio band. But at levels too low to possibly hear while at the same time causing huge increases in perceived sound quality. The source of the mythical deblurring.

 

[digicidal]

Is that because it uses homeopathic aliasing filters? Lets just a little very low level ultrasonic frequencies get aliased into the audio band. But at levels too low to possibly hear while at the same time causing huge increases in perceived sound quality. The source of the mythical deblurring.

Exactly, if you fold it enough times it creates significant perceived effect while being audibly indistinguishable from a sugar pill.

 

[BDWoody]

Is that because it uses homeopathic aliasing filters? Lets just a little very low level ultrasonic frequencies get aliased into the audio band. But at levels too low to possibly hear while at the same time causing huge increases in perceived sound quality. The source of the mythical deblurring.

The sad thing is that makes as much sense as most of the 'actual' explanations.

 

[scott wurcer]

Is that because it uses homeopathic aliasing filters?

You need to trademark that. After all there are homomorphic filters so why not homeopathic filters?

 

[LTig]

You need to trademark that. After all there are homomorphic filters so why not homeopathic filters?

I fear it's too late due to prior usage. There are already some Superaudiophile DACs in the market which use such homeopathic reconstruction filters.

 

[solderdude]

I suspect MQA is audibly transparent. It has enough bandwidth and bit depth.

That leaves different masters being responsible for a different 'sound'.

Bob finally found something that will provide a constant stream of cash flowing his way.
The more parties he gets on board and the more consumers want MQA the better his pension will be.
That is the essence of MQA, skimming small amounts of money from as much as possible music aficionados.
One thing is sure ... Bob is a smart guy.
If not for the codec then for the money earning model.

So one knows: I do not have MQA equipment nor recordings but occasionally heard it here and there.
Nothing audible wrong with the sound to me but can say exactly the same about everything well recorded on any format.

 

[KozmoNaut]

So one knows: I do not have MQA equipment nor recordings but occasionally heard it here and there.
Nothing audible wrong with the sound to me but can the say exactly the same about everything well recorded on any format.

Exactly this. MQA provides no benefit at all, thus it has no purpose.

Well, except for lining Bob's pocket, of course. And possibly to introduce "soft" DRM at some point.

 

[digicidal]

Exactly this. MQA provides no benefit at all, thus it has no purpose.
Well, except for lining Bob's pocket, of course. And possibly to introduce "soft" DRM at some point.

That's one of the reasons I strongly disagree with @amirm often bringing DVD and BR into that discussion... with DVD we moved from analog to digital with higher resolution, with BR we moved to uncompressed audio and much higher resolutions. So that's about as far from an apples-to-apples comparison with MQA vs FLAC, etc. as one can get. The only real advantage to MQA is access to masters that are artificially inaccessible. There's no technological reason we couldn't have them with an open standard other than money... plain and simple.

Does it do harm (audibly)? Seems not. Does it help in any way? Same answer - no it doesn't. So it's yet another case of increasing the apparent number of "options" or "selections" while delivering nothing new. This seems to be the new paradigm in business these days however, so it makes sense. It's like Nabisco releasing yet another cracker with a very slightly different combination of flavors in a new box. They would call it innovation, but really it's just repackaging the same old crap in an attempt to capture a nominal increase in share of a largely stagnant market.

 

[Eirikur]

That's one of the reasons I strongly disagree with @amirm often bringing DVD and BR into that discussion... with DVD we moved from analog to digital with higher resolution, with BR we moved to uncompressed audio and much higher resolutions.

BR is relevant in my opinion, as max. resolution is stifled on purpose and restricted to 48/16 through S/PDIF (higher is only possible via HDMI with HDCP).
After ripping you can access the actual hires content of course, but that doesn't serve the average consumer very well does it?

[edit] This particular restriction may even go unnoticed to "us" tech-savvy rippers - it does not affect me since the first activity is always to rip an album!

 

[digicidal]

BR is relevant in my opinion, as max. resolution is stifled on purpose and restricted to 48/16 through S/PDIF (higher is only possible via HDMI with HDCP).
After ripping you can access the actual hires content of course, but that doesn't serve the average consumer very well does it?

Agreed. The "much higher resolutions" I was referring to in that post was actually the video content. In both DVD/BR I found the DRM mechanisms invasive - but they are (IMO at least) more palatable in a case where there are increases in several other areas... with audio alone - the format delivers little of this.

Although I would still have some ideological reservations, if MQA included full high resolution album artwork, mastering notes, more channels, secondary mixes, etc. then I could somewhat more easily forgive it doing nothing new in the audio realm.

Technically speaking, Roon (at least as I currently have it implemented) doesn't deliver anything audible over just playing files through foobar... but I still find it worth the somewhat exorbitant price because of the convenience and immersion it provides. I don't feel the same way about an MQA file vs. a FLAC/WAV file however.