• 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!

Roon support of MQA

March Audio

Master Contributor
Audio Company
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
6,378
Likes
9,317
Location
Albany Western Australia
Just to continue the MQA contentious debate, I observed some comments on another forum from a DAC designer who had recently visited MQA. Others had been challenging him to describe just what "de-blurring" is actually doing. no response forthcoming but I was intrigued by this comment

Originally Posted by JohnW

I'm in no position to speak for MQA, but I believe MQA's stance is something like this:-

Well for many, Turntable and Master Tape sounds sonically superior to the human auditory system then PCM 192KHz so MQA has concentrated on the Time Domain. There are "hidden" methods that can be applied that can help mitigate inherent TD limitations due to a systems bandwidth restrictions etc.

The MQA rendering operates at least x8 (352.8KHz / 384KHz) and the faster the better. You DONT get the full effectiveness of MQA without the MQA render block

To which I replied:

The premis of your statement here is that a turntable has superior time domain properties than 192 pcm. Can you elaborate and explain this assertion?

What does an analogue recorded (tape) impulse response look like by the time it has been cut on to vinyl and replayed by the turntable?

No response from JohnW, but I am curious to hear what others views on this might be?


We all know that analogue recording has infinite bandwidth and no limitations in the time domain ....heheheheo_O
 
Last edited:

March Audio

Master Contributor
Audio Company
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
6,378
Likes
9,317
Location
Albany Western Australia
Elsewhere someone has performed some analysis of MQA track volume levels compared to the standard Tidal HiFi version.

Here are a few more randomly selected Tidal HiFi vs MQA 30 second statistical comparisons:

Fleetwood Mac "Landslide:"
Statistics for: Landslide_HiFi
Number of samples: 1323000
Duration: 0:30


Left Right
Peak Value: -15.61 dB --- -15.47 dB
Avg RMS: -30.69 dB --- -29.19 dB
DR channel: 9.43 dB --- 9.79 dB


Statistics for: Landslide_MQA
Number of samples: 1323000
Duration: 0:30


Left Right
Peak Value: -15.45 dB --- -13.55 dB
Avg RMS: -29.55 dB --- -27.53 dB
DR channel: 10.05 dB --- 10.55 dB


"Landslide" HiFi and MQA are different masterings. Apples to apples MQA listening comparisons are not possible.

Blur "Parklife:"
Statistics for: Parklife_HiFi
Number of samples: 1323000
Duration: 0:30


Left Right
Peak Value: -6.30 dB --- -6.29 dB
Avg RMS: -18.34 dB --- -18.16 dB
DR channel: 10.05 dB --- 9.73 dB


Statistics for: Parklife_MQA
Number of samples: 1323000
Duration: 0:30


Left Right
Peak Value: -6.10 dB --- -6.10 dB
Avg RMS: -18.15 dB --- -17.96 dB
DR channel: 10.05 dB --- 9.73 dB


"Parklife" HiFi and MQA are the same mastering. However, MQA has been level adjusted +0.20 dB. Apples to apples MQA listening comparisons are possible with level normalization.

The Doors "People Are Strange:"
Statistics for: PeopleAreStrange_HiFi
Number of samples: 1323000
Duration: 0:30


Left Right
Peak Value: -6.52 dB --- -6.12 dB
Avg RMS: -21.72 dB --- -21.87 dB
DR channel: 11.54 dB --- 12.36 dB


Statistics for: PeopleAreStrange_MQA
Number of samples: 1323000
Duration: 0:30


Left Right
Peak Value: -10.09 dB --- -10.74 dB
Avg RMS: -23.97 dB --- -25.22 dB
DR channel: 10.34 dB --- 11.45 dB


"People Are Strange" HiFi and MQA are different masterings. Apples to apples MQA listening comparisons are not possible.

David Bowie "Young Americans:"
Statistics for: YoungAmericans_HiFi
Number of samples: 1323000
Duration: 0:30


Left Right
Peak Value: -6.32 dB --- -6.30 dB
Avg RMS: -19.52 dB --- -19.44 dB
DR channel: 11.69 dB --- 11.62 dB


Statistics for: YoungAmericans_MQA
Number of samples: 1323000
Duration: 0:30


Left Right
Peak Value: -6.04 dB --- -6.01 dB
Avg RMS: -19.25 dB --- -19.17 dB
DR channel: 11.70 dB --- 11.62 dB


"Young Americans" HiFi and MQA are the same mastering. However, MQA has been level adjusted +0.27 dB. Apples to apples MQA listening comparisons are possible with level normalization.

In summary, the above statistics show that legitimate listening comparisons between Tidal HiFi and MQA may be difficult to achieve. Perceived differences may be attributable to different masterings or different recorded levels, not necessarily to MQA enhancements.

AJ
 

Purité Audio

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Barrowmaster
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
9,051
Likes
12,150
Location
London
I still believe that the whole project is no more than a giant ponzu scheme, the inclusion of MQA is just another delaying tactic.
Westlake was dead set against MQA before his meeting with Bob Stewart.
I sincerely hope that he delivers something .
Keith
 

Purité Audio

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Barrowmaster
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
9,051
Likes
12,150
Location
London
He is extremely 'special' he can hear the differences in capacitors, pick the sonic differences between black and silver 'Mdacs' hear incredibly low amounts of jitter etc etc etc.
Keith
 

Werner

Active Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
109
Likes
135
Location
Europe
What does an analogue recorded (tape) impulse response look like by the time it has been cut on to vinyl and replayed by the turntable?

Like anything but an impulse!
 

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,409
Location
Seattle Area, USA
giant ponzu scheme

Ponzu?

ponzu.jpg
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,376
Likes
234,546
Location
Seattle Area

svart-hvitt

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 31, 2017
Messages
2,375
Likes
1,253
IS MQA ALMOST ALWAYS LOWER RESOLUTION THAN CD?

This is a question to the many more knowledgeable here than me.

Most of the MQA albums come from older records, not new ones. So my reasoning is this:

=> Most older records don’t use all the resolution (equivalent of bits, sampling rate) that the CD format 1644 has to offer. Many if not most of the hi-res albums are scams, where the extra bits and sampling rates are wasted; takes more space without more content. So if you MQA a typical hi-res album, you will throw away some of the information content that would have been there on a CD release of the same album. In other words, the MQA version of a typical hi-res album may have less information content than the CD version of the same album.

Does this reasoning make sense?

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 

Grave

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2018
Messages
382
Likes
204
I am tired of joke formats which cannot possibly matter.
 
Top Bottom