Eye-opening analysis on Tidal MQA

doctor speakers
  • Post hidden due to user being banned.
Lighten up Francis.
 
doctor speakers
  • Post hidden due to user being banned.
Sure Peter Veth, sure
 
doctor speakers said:
he dumps on not being able to encode MQA. Did I miss something here?
Click to expand...
Yes. You didn't watch video and you've already given the game away with the "we" comments. The MQA sham has been exposed, along with all the "new member" shills the suddenly emerge whenever there is MQA thread on forums.
Peter Veth is usually at least 3 of them :)
 
doctor speakers said:
you need to REALLY point the finger on the biggest lie
Click to expand...
Ok simmer down Donnie, your rants aren't helping the tale. Everyone here already knows Redbook is provably just fine and there is zero scientific evidence against, including Bob's own AES papers, which were a complete bust. ;)
 
Last edited:
doctor speakers said:
Now for the million dollar question, is DSD the new betamax? I see all these DAC's that charge a premium fee for being DSD compatible, but where is the content? The choice is abysmal compared to MQA
Click to expand...

I am not a fan of MQA or DSD... If I want to fold, spindle and mutilate my music I can add one of a million signal processing kits and/or roll my own... Which I do... At least I know exactly what is being done to the signal...
 
Tidal does not supply Redbook CD quality audio they supply "Hi-Res" whatever that is, at CD bitrate.
Tidal does not supply Hi-Res audio quality it supplies something called "Master" presumably MQA.
There is no Hi-Res logo on the Tidal site.

Tidal has begun supplying 44.1/16 bit MQA encoded downloads.
The files are about 13.5 bits of dynamic range when not decoded by MQA and it is unclear if the encoding includes ultrasonics. MQA has, quite cleverly, traded dynamic range that we can hear for ultrasonic that we cannot hear.

MQA does forces a reconstruction filter and limits EQ on some devices. Roon got dispensation to turn the blue light back on for "Authenticated". The reconstruction filter is slow and so can alias. Computer audio has provided a wide variety of reconstruction filters that cannot be applied to unfolded MQA.

At this point, size does not matter, they do not provide a single source (most services support MP3). It requires royalties from content producers and from hardware/software vendors. There is no bandwidth advantage that could not also be supplied by a 96 kHz/18 bit file (MQA tops out at 17 bits).

The euphonic sound quality supplied by their reconstruction filter is supported by testimony from the audiophile press and community. I an aware of no blind test with results showing a preference.

IMO, MQA began with the goal of extracting royalties and the features flow from there. It provides no proven benefits but several sites have shown clear degradation in downloaded content with some anomalies.

It is a shame the Hi-Res audio include no quality guidelines nor does it support quality metrics.
If only the industry would embrace a model similar to video. SDR, standard dynamic range, and HDR, high dynamic range.
Download sites could easily support both formats.
HDR-Audio can be supplied in a standard 44.1/16 format, equivalent to the smallest sized MQA file.
Premium subscriptions could include access to the HDR-Master.
I don't see this happening when re-mastered often include additional compression.

- Rich
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Popular tags

20th century fox 4k blu-ray 4k uhd 4k ultrahd action adventure animated animation bass blu-ray calibration comedy comics denon dirac dirac live disney dolby atmos drama fantasy hdmi 2.1 home theater horror kaleidescape klipsch lionsgate marantz movies onkyo paramount pioneer rew romance sci-fi scream factory shout factory sony stormaudio subwoofer svs terror thriller uhd ultrahd ultrahd 4k universal value electronics warner warner brothers well go usa
Back
Top