+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: Hi-Res/MQA debate

  1. #1
    Join Date: Nov 2010

    Location: Sheffield/Peak District. UK

    Posts: 574
    I'm Richard.

    Default Hi-Res/MQA debate

    Please see this:

    http://secure.campaigner.com/csb/Pub...qlimx-dwat4ud0

    Anther article on our inability - apparently - to distinguish the difference between RedBook and Hi(gher) -Res Music. ("it's all in the mastering").

    What are your thoughts on MQA? So many people -including Linn I believe - have dismissed it as a hoax.

    Best wishes to you all. How are the hangovers?

    Bonky

  2. #2
    Join Date: Jun 2020

    Location: Rotorua NZ

    Posts: 358
    I'm Peter.

    Default

    MQA is the wrong direction to go; it has been in development for years and people want their development investment money back. So to license it will cost everybody, there are already alternatives.
    Is Cd Redbook worse than High-Res; a really good/made/produced etc is of a very high quality sound, a poor one is always a poor one and once the master tape is made shurly there is only so much you can do to improve it.
    Logic says that if you sample at two different rates the lower rate is going to have less information than the higher rate, and also at what point does the playback equipment fail to pick up the difference?
    It seems that most of the general public are happy with MP3 and phones to listen to music on, Higher resolution already costs more for the lower percentage of people that want it and MQA will cost even more with no proven benefit to the sound quality.
    Streaming services and the internet bandwidth can cope with high-res files so why is there a need to compress/code them and then have to decode/uncompress them, which will presumably reduce the sound quality.

    So basically I'm saying that someone has spent a lot of time/money solving a problem that doesn't exist and now wants their money back.

    No hangover here!

  3. #3
    Join Date: Nov 2010

    Location: Sheffield/Peak District. UK

    Posts: 574
    I'm Richard.

    Default

    Thanks Peter,

    I think I'd agree with all that.

    The only other issue I would have is whether one can perceive the differences between a well-mastered RedBook version and the same recording as a hi-res file.

    We need even more blind tests with all age-ranges on some excellent equipment.

    Not everyone's cup of tea I know.

    I'm 72 and think that a 24/48 file I downloaded was better than the CD equivalent - but there wasn't much in it! (A bit more 'space' around the instruments rather than an increase in frequency range).

    Thanks,

    R

  4. #4
    Join Date: Feb 2013

    Location: W Lothian

    Posts: 99,005
    I'm Grant.

    Default

    I dont know if its better in all cases, but can be(hi-rez) as for mqa, im overall not a big fan although it can sound good im pretty sure its not higher rez, and just an adjusted eq
    Regards,
    Grant .... ؠ ......Don't be such a big girl's blouse

    I've said it before and I'll say it again: democracy simply-doesn't-work
    .... ..... ...... ...... ................... ..... ..... ..... ..... .....
    FIIO K7 BT, M11 PLUS, BTR7, KA5 - OPPO BDP-103D - PANASONIC UB450 - PANASONIC 4K ULTRA HD TV - PIXEL 6 - AVANTREE LR BLUETOOTH - 2* X600 SOUNDCORE - HEADPHONES INCLUDE, FIIO, NURAPHONES', FOCAL, OPPO, BOSE, CAMBRIDGE, BOWER & WILKINS, DEVIALET, MARSHALL, SONY, MITCHELL & JOHNSTON - 2*ZBOOK'S- MERCURY BD ROM, ROON, QOBUZ, TIDAL, PLEX, CYBERLINK, JRIVER - MULTI HDD'S -

    Oh my god! There's nothing wrong with the bidet is there?

    “Nothing discloses real character like the use of power. It is easy for the weak to be gentle. Most people can bear adversity. But if you wish to know what a man really is, give him power. This is the supreme test. It is the glory of Lincoln that, having almost absolute power, he never abused it, except on the side of mercy".

    “You see these dictators on their pedestals, surrounded by the bayonets of their soldiers and the truncheons of their police ... yet in their hearts there is unspoken fear. They are afraid of words and thoughts: words spoken abroad, thoughts stirring at home -- all the more powerful because forbidden -- terrify them. A little mouse of thought appears in the room, and even the mightiest potentates are thrown into panic.”

    "You don't have free will. You have the appearance of free will.”

    “There's a war out there, old friend. A world war. And it's not about who's got the most bullets. It's about who controls the information. What we see and hear, how we work, what we think... it's all about the information!”


    ***SMILE, BE HAPPY***

  5. #5
    Join Date: May 2020

    Location: Suffolk

    Posts: 246
    I'm Ray.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bonky View Post
    Please see this:

    http://secure.campaigner.com/csb/Pub...qlimx-dwat4ud0

    Anther article on our inability - apparently - to distinguish the difference between RedBook and Hi(gher) -Res Music. ("it's all in the mastering").

    What are your thoughts on MQA? So many people -including Linn I believe - have dismissed it as a hoax.

    Best wishes to you all. How are the hangovers?

    Bonky
    I don't like MQA because many devices and DACs are not compatible. Why not just have HiRes, 24 bit. I agree the mastering makes the most difference. Hearing the difference between 24 bit and 16 bit is difficult, I thought I did hear some on Qobuz but could have been the mastering or my imagination. Tidal has MQA which is a negative for me, as my DAC is MQA compatible.

    Here is a link to the test:

    https://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=6713

    I'm not keen on the music he has used, 6 classical and 7 jazz out of 20. I would have expected a wider selection of genres. Classical and Jazz account for only about 2% of music sales.
    Last edited by StingRay; 06-07-2020 at 10:11.

  6. #6
    Join Date: May 2020

    Location: Suffolk

    Posts: 246
    I'm Ray.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by struth View Post
    I dont know if its better in all cases, but can be(hi-rez) as for mqa, im overall not a big fan although it can sound good im pretty sure its not higher rez, and just an adjusted eq
    MQA is 24 bit so it is HiRes.

  7. #7
    Join Date: Nov 2011

    Location: Seaton, Devon, UK

    Posts: 13,240
    I'm Adrian.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bonky View Post
    Please see this:

    http://secure.campaigner.com/csb/Pub...qlimx-dwat4ud0

    Anther article on our inability - apparently - to distinguish the difference between RedBook and Hi(gher) -Res Music. ("it's all in the mastering").

    What are your thoughts on MQA? So many people -including Linn I believe - have dismissed it as a hoax.

    Best wishes to you all. How are the hangovers?

    Bonky
    There have been several threads on the pros and cons of different resolutions of digital and what was good or bad and it is the proverbial can of worms in my opinion, and caused extensive debate and argument as to what is correct.

    If I recall correctly MQA is effectively an encoding compression technique to get hi-res digital into a smaller packet (file) of data without loosing SQ. I can't quite remember but I think the controversial as it removes parts of the original data stream and encodes these in such a way that on replay they can be re-built and re-produce the origianal. I think Meridian were/are heavily involved in its development and I think some of the publicity for it even tried to say that it improved on what the end user heard compared to the original data stream, irrespective of the quality or equipment used, a very big statement to make. Personally at the time having read many articles and technical stuff about it and hi-res digital music and how accurate the reproduction is in comparison to the master recording I think it is not worth worrying about. I personally am not that keen on MQA which I have listened to and IMHO to my ears it changes the end result subtly, is it true to the original I doubt it.

    I come from an IT background of over 40 years and got sucked into digital music on CD form as an early adopter, back in the 80's I gradually learnt it was rather hit and miss from a SQ point of view, the issue of the transfer from Analogue to Digital (AAD,ADD, DDD) and just how sympathetically and accurately this was done had major impacts. Also the sampling rates and digital equipment back then was no-where as good as it is today. Then good old MP3, AAC, and Ogg Vorbis files came along often erroneously spouted as lossless, in fact all Lossy, so data is removed when the file is created from a higher resolution audio file type and this saves space. There are many, many debates as to at what point you can and cannot hear any difference from the original, many argue that at the highest resolution of MP3 or AAC you cannot hear any difference to music at CD level of resolution. Personally I think this is rubbish, even I with my 60 year old ears can generally detect the difference on good equipment, it may take several blind listens but usually I can. Having said that if the original master is poor then the ability to detect any difference can become very difficult, if not impossible.

    You quote "it's all in the mastering" this also has a great deal of truth in it IMO, I would offer the old adage "put crap in, get crap out", or putting it another way, basically the better the starting point the more likely the end result will be good. I have also listened to several recordings of the same material taken from the same original master, and in some cases the SQ on some is noticeably poorer than on others, this goes for digital and analogue black vinyl, obviously when it is not good something is not right in the transfer or production process.

    I have come to the conclusion rightly or wrongly that it is best to aim for the better end of the resolution spectrum as much as possible and hopefully this will result in a good end listening experience if your equipment is reasonably good and set up properly. I do not limit this to digital, analog or vinyl can and does suffer from the same issues, on several occasions I have purchased several copies of the same album from different pressing runs until I found the one that I think sounds best. Even vinyl re-masters from the original master tapes, be them analogue or digital can be not that great, although there are some very good ones as well. So as I said earlier a can of worms.
    Listening is the act of aural discrimination and dissemination of sound, and accepting you get it wrong sometimes.

    Analog Inputs: Pro-Ject Signature 10 TT & arm, Benz Micro LP-S, Michel Cusis MC, Goldring 2500 and Ortofon Rondo Blue cartridges, Hitachi FT5500 mk2 Tuner

    Digital:- Marantz SA-KI Pearl CD player, RaspberryPi/HifiBerry Digi+ Pro, Buffalo NAS Drive

    Amplification:- AudioValve Sunilda phono stage, Krell KSP-7B pre-amp, Krell KSA-80 power amp

    Output: Wilson Benesch Vector speakers, KLH Ultimate One Headphones

    Cables: Tellurium Q Ultra Black II RCA & Chord Epic 2 RCA, various speaker leads, & links


    I think I am nearing audio nirvana, but don’t tell anyone.

  8. #8
    Join Date: Jul 2013

    Location: Kingsbury, NW London

    Posts: 1,232
    I'm Clive.

    Default

    I gave up on Tidal and MQA files quite a while ago and stick to Qobuz for my streaming. I agree with the general consensus here that MQA is a failure as 24 bit files end up as 17/18 bit files which makes the whole issue complete nonsense. I suspect that Tidal get MQA rights free or at a very low rate so that it would gain some momentum. I think that is backfiring on the the original licensee, as there are more and more negative reviews.
    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

  9. #9
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,779
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJSki2fly View Post
    I come from an IT background of over 40 years and got sucked into digital music on CD form as an early adopter, back in the 80's I gradually learnt it was rather hit and miss from a SQ point of view, the issue of the transfer from Analogue to Digital (AAD,ADD, DDD) and just how sympathetically and accurately this was done had major impacts. Also the sampling rates and digital equipment back then was no-where as good as it is today.

    .
    Agree with the rest of your post but not this part. Even the early 3M and Sony digital recorders were transparent to the source, and lots of great sounding albums were recorded on them. Higher sampling rates and dynamic range on modern recording equipment do make life easier in the studio but make no difference to replay.

    As for transferring analogue master tape to digital how hard can it be? Cue up your tape and press play. How many non-professionals have recorded their vinyl to digital? Must be tens of thousands of people if not hundreds of thousands, never seen anyone complain that it was complex to do, or that they didn't get good results. The idea that an experienced studio engineer would have problems with it just doesn't make sense.

    It's often stated that some early transfers were no good but I've yet to find one and I generally seek out the early cd releases over the more recent masters. I've never seen anyone who worked in studios back then say there were problems recording analogue tapes to digital either. I don't know for sure but I strongly suspect that it's just another 'audiophile myth'.
    Current Lash Up:

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

  10. #10
    Join Date: Nov 2011

    Location: Seaton, Devon, UK

    Posts: 13,240
    I'm Adrian.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Macca View Post
    Agree with the rest of your post but not this part. Even the early 3M and Sony digital recorders were transparent to the source, and lots of great sounding albums were recorded on them. Higher sampling rates and dynamic range on modern recording equipment do make life easier in the studio but make no difference to replay.
    Hi Martin, how you doing, nice to hear from you.

    Well I will have to bow to you as I have not personally experienced the results of either a £M or Sony digital recorder, not knowingly anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Macca
    As for transferring analogue master tape to digital how hard can it be? Cue up your tape and press play. How many non-professionals have recorded their vinyl to digital? Must be tens of thousands of people if not hundreds of thousands, never seen anyone complain that it was complex to do, or that they didn't get good results. The idea that an experienced studio engineer would have problems with it just doesn't make sense.
    Yes I tend to agree, one would certainly think that as you describe it then it should be relatively simples. However as I have said before I have had various CD's which have be transferred from analogue tape to digital onto CD and they just do not sound right, just as if something/somebody has ad a bit of a remix along the way. Yes I agree that it does not make sense but that is what I have experienced.

    Quote Originally Posted by Macca
    It's often stated that some early transfers were no good but I've yet to find one and I generally seek out the early cd releases over the more recent masters. I've never seen anyone who worked in studios back then say there were problems recording analogue tapes to digital either. I don't know for sure but I strongly suspect that it's just another 'audiophile myth'.
    Not so sure as I said above and on the other very long thread on this topic I did several comparisons of versions of CD's and Vinyl supposedly from the same master of several alums, very difficult to get a concise picture of that in most cases, maybe they were supposed to be the same master but were copies of the original, I never really go to the bottom of that chestnut. If the mixing and wall of sound crap that goes on today is any indication of what engineers think is right, I would not be at all surprised of similar lack of care happening back in the 80's.
    Listening is the act of aural discrimination and dissemination of sound, and accepting you get it wrong sometimes.

    Analog Inputs: Pro-Ject Signature 10 TT & arm, Benz Micro LP-S, Michel Cusis MC, Goldring 2500 and Ortofon Rondo Blue cartridges, Hitachi FT5500 mk2 Tuner

    Digital:- Marantz SA-KI Pearl CD player, RaspberryPi/HifiBerry Digi+ Pro, Buffalo NAS Drive

    Amplification:- AudioValve Sunilda phono stage, Krell KSP-7B pre-amp, Krell KSA-80 power amp

    Output: Wilson Benesch Vector speakers, KLH Ultimate One Headphones

    Cables: Tellurium Q Ultra Black II RCA & Chord Epic 2 RCA, various speaker leads, & links


    I think I am nearing audio nirvana, but don’t tell anyone.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •