+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: Is it time-up for MQA

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date: Jul 2013

    Location: Kingsbury, NW London

    Posts: 1,232
    I'm Clive.

    Default Is it time-up for MQA

    It's been reported on a HiFi+ Blog that MQA is badly flawed and is not a lossless format at all. Tests have been done by HiRez Audio that is said to prove that MQA is only 17bit and not 24bit. That puts the cat amongst the pigeons.
    SOURCE:OPPO UDP-205 BluRay, SkyQ, Technics SL1210M5G/HexMat Eclipse/MN Bearing/Origin Live Gravity One puck/Isonoes with Boots/Jelco TK-850S Tonearm/Hana Umami Blue, PS Audio Stellar Phonostage. I also have an AT-OC9XSH as a spare cartridge.
    AMPLIFIER: Bryston BR-20 Pre/DAC/Streamer & Bryston 4B3 Power Amplifier
    SPEAKERS: Spendor D7 on Iso-Acoustics Gaia III’s
    HEADPHONES: OPPO PM-1 with Atlas Zeno cable, B&W Pi7 S2 and B&W C5 v2.
    CABLES: Analogue: Speaker Atlas Mavros Grun. Interconnect - Atlas Mavros XLR x3, MCRU Silver Tonearm cable
    Digital:Audioquest Carbon Ethernet x 4, Audioquest Carbon digital, English Electric 8Switch, Chord Optichord, Atlas Optical.
    Mains: PS Audio Perfectwave AC-05 x 5, Isol-8 Powerline Extreme with Quantum Science yellow fuse on input cable, Sounds Fantastic 6way Mains Blocks.
    STORAGE: Synology DS216J NAS with 2 x 3Tb WD Red hard-drives. Samsung 500Gb SSD.
    TV LG55B7 OLED

  2. #2
    Join Date: Apr 2012

    Location: N E Kent

    Posts: 51,624
    I'm Geoff.

    Default

    I wondered where MQA was going. Things seem to have been a bit quiet. Mind you, I've not been actively chasing info.
    It is impossible for anything digital to sound analogue, because it isn't analogue!

  3. #3
    Join Date: Nov 2013

    Location: N London

    Posts: 566
    I'm Steven.

    Default

    I've just read the blog.

    http://www.hifiplus.com/articles/hig...-offering-mqa/

    The bloody details are here
    https://www.xivero.com/downloads/MQA...eses-Paper.pdf

    Xivero are the designers of leading music analysis software such as Musicscope, they know what they are talking about.

    It's actually from the Managing Director of Highresaudio. HRA are a superb business and I buy their downloads - the best quality music I own and they really do check everything. I once complained about a recording of Shostakovich Sy. 2, there was actually nothing wrong other than a greater dynamic range than I had ever had on a recording.

    So MQA may be emperor's new clothes after all. What a surprise.
    Wilson, Devialet, Innuos, Puritan, Claro

  4. #4
    Join Date: Nov 2013

    Location: N London

    Posts: 566
    I'm Steven.

    Default

    Apparently Universal and Warner signed up recently. But then Universal specialise in low-res music, so they would probably be delighted with this HiFi+ Blog report.
    Wilson, Devialet, Innuos, Puritan, Claro

  5. #5
    Join Date: Sep 2012

    Location: East Anglia UK

    Posts: 1,219
    I'm Marc.

    Default

    MQA was never pitched as lossless, was it?

    My understanding is that it uses lossy data compression on the pointless* part of the spectrum in a hi-rez recording (ie the bit much above 20kHz). It's kind of like FLAC for 20Hz to 20kHz and MP3 for 20kHz to 48kHz (or whereever it goes up to).

    Not that I care one jot, nasty proprietary junk (with a closed specification) for the benefit of commercial streamers and the like. Not created in the interest of music fans and too far behind the curve to hit home; bandwidth and storage just get cheaper, so the requirement to 'save' them reduces at the same rate. Expecting and using open formats will do us all favours in the long run.



    *subject to endless circular argument on the internet

  6. #6
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,774
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    What's you opinion on the claim that MQA also fixes 'timing errors'? I mean you can guess mine, but you know more about it than I do.

    If it does do something like this then that does give it a USP ordinary 'hi res' doesn't have.
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  7. #7
    Join Date: Feb 2017

    Location: Essex-Herts border

    Posts: 141
    I'm Matt.

    Default

    I've played with MQA vs cd rips a fair bit.
    Using Tidal, Bluesound etc.
    On some tracks, I hear very little difference. On other tracks I get more of a step up. On others, I hear a difference without being able to decide whether it's better, or merely different.
    I'm still a bit unsure as to whether it's just a re-mastering effect on some older material that was recorded all analogue anyway, & my tech knowledge is nowhere near deep enough to truly understand what's genuinely going on.
    However, if you already subscribe to Tidals Hifi level, it's a no cost option, so have a play with it.....what's to lose?

  8. #8
    Join Date: Oct 2013

    Location: istanbul

    Posts: 29
    I'm yigit.

    Default

    First MQA encoded CD , details are here : http://www.stereophile.com/content/m...vEvTeZUTmb3.97

  9. #9
    Join Date: Feb 2008

    Location: http://www.homehifi.co.uk

    Posts: 6,288

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coolblue View Post
    First MQA encoded CD , details are here : http://www.stereophile.com/content/m...vEvTeZUTmb3.97
    If MQA is supposed to be for streaming, what is its purpose as far CD reproduction is concerned?

  10. #10
    Join Date: Aug 2011

    Location: Coventry, England UK

    Posts: 534
    I'm Simon.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StanleyB View Post
    If MQA is supposed to be for streaming, what is its purpose as far CD reproduction is concerned?
    Sounds like they're trying to do some sort of newer 'sacd' format whereas it will play in all CD players as standard redbook, but then hook it up to an MQA capable DAC and you'll get a higher resolution and all other gobbledygook.

    Really hope this doesn't become the standard. We already have 16/44 redbook which is perfectly fine and for lossless & higher-res we already have Flac which has been around for many years and is fine. This all just smells of a money grab to me, they'd make a killing just on licensing costs around the world. Can never trust the big labels to give a damn other than to line their own pockets.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •