MQA Users & Discussion Thread

[Ittaku]

7 minutes ago, LHC said:

Let say that I was intrigued to learn that 80% of PS Audio customers asked for MQA even though their company position is negative towards it. I won't go as far as what you've stated, but nevertheless that is an interesting bit of stats.

I would say that the vast majority of customers are influenced very heavily by what they read in reviews. Given the first year of MQA was accompanied by massive amounts of glowing mental masturbation by the review articles from stereophile et. al. , I expect that this 80% reflects that first year. I doubt this will continue given the change in attitude by the reviewers (after the public kept bashing them with cluebat after cluebat.)

[sir sanders zingmore]

80% of ps audio customers asked for MQA?

fur realz?

linky ??

[eltech]

2 minutes ago, Sir Sanders Zingmore said:

linky

It was said by the owner of PS audio in the video posted earlier in this thread. You have to watch the video

[LHC]

2 hours ago, Sir Sanders Zingmore said:

80% of ps audio customers asked for MQA?

fur realz?

linky ??

 

At the 8:35 to 8:50 mark of this video (posted in the other thread also)

 

 

Edited April 5, 2018 by LHC

[sir sanders zingmore]

3 minutes ago, eltech said:

It was said by the owner of PS audio in the video posted earlier in this thread. You have to watch the video

Sounds like bollox to me. 

80% of PS Audio customers were bothered to get off their listening chairs and ask for MQA? Really ? Actively ask?

 

Edited April 5, 2018 by Sir Sanders Zingmore

[eltech]

12 hours ago, Sir Sanders Zingmore said:

Here's a very long and very repetitive article.

If you can bear to wade through it (I couldn't), I think it says that unless you use a very wide antialiasing / reconstruction filter, you are not doing it properly. 

And MQA doesn't. 

 

http://www.iar-80.com/page170.html

 

 I heard the same things with the high frequencies with MQA that was reported in the article linked above.

A quote from the article above "soft, defocused, diffused, phasey, and fuzzy smeared trebles"

 

If you want to hear what mqa does, play your system in mono, or disconnect one input. Play the mqa track, then play the PCM. It should be obvious how much attack mqa loses over PCM. I think you will also hear the dulling of high frequencies and smearing in the midrange. Try it then let me know what you hear.

 

I reported what i heard in my earlier comments in one of these threads.

 

i think mono is easier to hear the effect.

 

 

Edited April 6, 2018 by eltech

[sir sanders zingmore]

On 05/04/2018 at 11:11 PM, eltech said:

It was said by the owner of PS audio in the video posted earlier in this thread. You have to watch the video

So I found the bit that I think might be what you are referring to. He says nothing of the sort though, so I'm still baffled. 

[frankn]

On 05/04/2018 at 10:41 PM, eltech said:

It was said by the owner of PS audio in the video posted earlier in this thread. You have to watch the video

 

1 hour ago, Sir Sanders Zingmore said:

So I found the bit that I think might be what you are referring to. He says nothing of the sort though, so I'm still baffled. 

Almost at the end of the video Paul says that PS Audio include MQA in their streamer card (not DAC) because although he personally isn’t a fan of MQA in discussions with customers about 70-80% said they wanted MQA. Being a smallish company and Paul does connect directly with a lot of customers he realised PS Audio would potentially lose a lot of new customers if they didn’t include the technology. This was around the same time as the Stellar series was making its debut and trying to widen the customer base. 

Hard to know if the customers reached out or whether PS Audio was polling. 

[sir sanders zingmore]

33 minutes ago, frankn said:

in discussions with customers about 70-80% said they wanted MQA.

Completely different to say "he estimates something like 70-80% of people he talks to...". 

That imho is completely different to the assesrtion that 80% of customers have asked for it. 

So I stand by my claim of "bollox"

[Assisi]

1 hour ago, Sir Sanders Zingmore said:

Completely different to say "he estimates something like 70-80% of people he talks to...". 

That imho is completely different to the assesrtion that 80% of customers have asked for it. 

So I stand by my claim of "bollox"

Trevor I agree with your interpretation of what he said

John

[eltech]

7 hours ago, Sir Sanders Zingmore said:

Completely different

I only intended to assist locate the source of the assertion (the video) I didn't mean to imply it was a direct quote, or was correct.

I should have stayed out of it.

Edited April 7, 2018 by eltech

[sir sanders zingmore]

27 minutes ago, eltech said:

I only intended to assist locate the source of the assertion (the video) I didn't mean to imply it was a direct quote, or was correct.

I should have stayed out of it.

All good mate, appreciate your help and I didn't think you were implying it was correct ?

Edited April 7, 2018 by Sir Sanders Zingmore

[legend]

Yesterday I eventually managed to get my non-DEQX passive system up & running again – partly problems with a new 4-channel 500W/C Hypex Ncore I had built to bi-amp Kantu 10 prototype loudspeakers; partly in connecting a Sony P9000ES preamp with unbalanced outs to the balanced ins of the Ncore amps; and partly instability of a new Pro-ject S2 DAC that was fixed by downloading their latest firmware.  Audio life was not meant to be easy!

 

Anyway it allowed me to compare again in a very high resolution/low distortion system Mozart’s Violin Concerto 4 from 2L in both MQA and non-MQA format (I had done so some time ago but with a lower resolution system that included a Dragonfly Red DAC).  The MQA version was from Tidal; the non-MQA version was the hires 176-24 from their website.  I assume that they are from the same 2016 remix since it seems unlikely 2L would make a 3rd version just for Tidal.

 

The differences were again quite obvious to me.  The violins (both orchestral & solo) were less strident without any apparent loss of detail; and there was a more natural sense of space around the orchestra without any change in the stereo imaging (either laterally or depth).  With the MQA version there was also a greater sense of PRAT – pace, rhythm & timing – something in which I was well schooled when working for Linn!

 

The provenance (remixing/remastering) of other Tidal tracks is more difficult to verify but from Norah Jones to Jackson Brown they consistently seemed to me to have the same attributes – greater sense of ease without loss of detail (the Valhalla of audio design!) and more PRAT.

 

So a statistical sample of one but at least may counterbalance Archimego’s sample of one.  I have no skin in the MQA game but do spend my working days listening to changes in SQ of components on which I have to make commercial decisions. However I guess we will have to wait for the McGill Uni analysis to get a full independent study that people might accept – hopefully including any effects of things such as reproduction system (its resolution/distortion etc), the type of music played and background of listeners etc.

 

BTW it is hard to see the MQA blue light on the tiny Pro-ject DAC screen (bottom RHS) at my listening position so unfortunately did not experience any Pavlovian response!

[eltech]

53 minutes ago, legend said:

greater sense of ease without loss of detail (the Valhalla of audio design!) and more PRAT

This unfortunately makes no sense. Because PCM recording doest have any timing problems. Never did. Never will.

The only thing mqa claims to improve is a timing problem. Since there is no such problem in the fist place all it can do is mangle the audio by causing a delay in the high and mid frequencies. All anyone has to do to prove to themselves that there is no timing problem with digital recording is to record an LP or cassette and play it back. It's so simple. 

 

Yesterday I did some comparisons with CD and LPs which have the same mastering.

I simultaneously played the record and CD and switched back and forth in real time.

 

Heart - Little queen

Tim Finn - Escapade

Nick Kershaw - Human racing

All have the same mastering on CD and LP. It's an easy and trivial test. They sound virtually identical irrespective of format.

 

There is zero timing problems with CD audio.

I also invited my wife to listen as I switched back and forth. She remarked that they sound identical, the only difference she remarked was that CD doesn't have the crackles of vinyl.

The thing is I have a very good R2R DAC. They don't have the issues that delta sigma DACs have. An R2R DAC outputs each bit that was input to it, a delta sigma DAC does not, it uses noise shaping to approximate the output, and due to this they don't sound transparent.

 

I know 100% that if you tried the transparency test with MQA in the signal chain it would not sound transparent. If you could in real time run an analogue signal into an ad converter covert it to mqa, then output it, it will not sound like what went in.

 

The first affordable ad coverter, the Sony PCM-F1 and it's accompanying DAC were R2R. They were transparent.

 

[legend]

PRAT is probably a personal thing. I know when it occurs with me not just through foot-tapping but also wanting to sway to the music - which annoys the hell out of my wife when I start doing it during a classical concert eg at the Opera House.  I think it probably occurs when a whole lot of timing events come together as a whole.

[Guest Sime]

I’ve been listening to Beyoncé’s latest album Lemonade on tidal masters (never been a fan but this album is alright) and being that she is in cohorts with the owners (or she is also?) of tidal, she may very well have a deep understanding of what MQA is trying to achieve. And the follow on to that is that this latest album of hers has some of the best production I’ve heard on recent pop albums, and doesn’t seem to suffer from the loudness Wars. So even if MQA helps artists and engineers to lift their game, win win. 

[eltech]

1 minute ago, legend said:

PRAT is probably a personal thing. I know when it occurs with me not just through foot-tapping but also wanting to sway to the music - which annoys the hell out of my wife when I start doing it during a classical concert eg at the Opera House.  I think it probably occurs when a whole lot of timing events come together as a whole.

Get yourself a good R2R DAC if you really care about sound quality. Then you will get natural sound that is like analogue, and it will sound exactly like the master tape. Exactly!

[eltech]

1 minute ago, Sime said:

some of the best production

That happens in the studio. Nothing to do with mqa.

[Guest Sime]

@eltech ahh, you didn’t get my point, but anyway. 

[Guest Sime]

@eltech

 

Mqa is about preserving the masters. 

Maybe if an artist is aware of this, they may decide in the studio to make it better from the get go. 

MQA wants people to hear approved mastering, it might help with a mindset change. 

[eltech]

15 minutes ago, Sime said:

@eltech

 

Mqa is about preserving the masters. 

Maybe if an artist is aware of this, they may decide in the studio to make it better from the get go. 

MQA wants people to hear approved mastering, it might help with a mindset change. 

No, that's you believing the marketing. A musician can record using whichever techniques they want, and have it mastered however they want.

The industry people who decided to highly compress the final product are anti-quality ratbags, who have treated the public with contempt.  If Beyonce wants a dynamic or compressed master that's what the public get, unless an industry ratbag gets in the way.

Mindset, no, those ratbags knew what they were doing. They have ears like everyone else.

All they ever had to do is relax the compressor. That's it! 

If some boffin has decided to relax the compressor, it's due to the boffin, not mqa. So theoretically, Beyonce's new album should sound the same on CD, right?

[LHC]

29 minutes ago, Sime said:

So even if MQA helps artists and engineers to lift their game, win win.

This is what I meant when I said that MQA could put a 'spot light' on the production side and influence their quality in a positive way.

 

29 minutes ago, eltech said:

That happens in the studio. Nothing to do with mqa.

Indirectly it can. Wishful thinking I know.

[Guest Sime]

@LHC thankyou for getting my point. 

[LHC]

6 minutes ago, eltech said:

If some boffin has decided to relax the compressor, it's due to the boffin, not mqa.

Are you able to name one of those 'boffin'? If you can't, then that means the spot light is not on them. There are no incentives to change behaviour unless one is called to account. 

[eltech]

4 minutes ago, LHC said:

Are you able to name one of those 'boffin'? If you can't, then that means the spot light is not on them. There are no incentives to change behaviour unless one is called to account. 

If not a boffin then who is "causing" the behaviour? 

You tell me.