MQA Fireside Chat at What Hi Fi 2021 With Bob Stuart

  • Post hidden due to user being banned.
  • Post hidden due to user being banned.
  • Post hidden due to user being banned.
https://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=19396

AES E-LIBRARY
A Comparison of Clarity in MQA Encoded Files vs. Their Unprocessed State as Performed by Three Groups — Expert Listeners

This paper aims to examine perceived clarity in MQA encoded audio files compared to their unprocessed state (96-kHz 24-bit). Utilizing a methodology initially proposed by the authors in a previous paper, this study aims to investigate any reported differences in clarity for three musical sources of varying genres. A double-blind (listening) test is conducted using three groups—expert listeners, musicians, and casual listeners—in a controlled environment using high-quality loudspeakers and headphones. The researchers were interested in comparing the responses of the three target groups and whether playback systems had any significant effect on listeners’ perception. Data shows that listeners were not able to significantly discriminate between MQA encoded files and the unprocessed original due to several interaction effects.

The authors would like to thank.....Bob Stuart and Meridian for providing the MQA-encoded versions of our audio source materials


1*jSByjK_Dqh5tKdoT2kFFgg.png
 
  • Post hidden due to user being banned.
You might try a tone control to give that mid range for voice a touch of boost... EQ can do that too... Or even try something like SOX to go with a linear phase or minimum phase resampling filter...

Here is a little something to think about when you do these kind of "tests" using a MQA capable device (read DAC) as you switch between MQA and non MQA source on the same device... These manufactures have sighed NonDisclosure Agreements with MQA... Ever wonder what those NDAs are about??? Do you think it is possible that there may be a little slight of hand going on inside the DAC that may make MQA sound better than nonMQA source??? Just some food for thought...
 
Last edited:
  • Post hidden due to user being banned.
Do you have an MQA capable device? The Bluesound Node is more of a streamer than a DAC. I also have an Onkyo DP-X1 which is the same, a streamer not a DAC. I currently don't own an MQA DAC.
I see we are mincing words now... So if your devices are streamers and not a DAC, even if they include a DAC, how are you decoding/unfolding/rendering your MQA sources?

I don't "own" an MQA DAC... Although, I have auditioned several in my system as well as in a other systems... And I think my Lumin Streamer supports MQA, but I would never use it... Like I had said in other threads, I am not a fan...
 
Last edited:
  • Post hidden due to user being banned.
This thread is essentially more testimonial, a simple repeated mantra of ' I subscribed, I like it, and we are right'. This tactic of starting another thread on essentially the same subject is disingenuous. doctor speakers, I have not invoked my responsibility here, but informally, doctor speakers, IMO this a second strike. You are proselytising vigorously, and insultingly to those who have done a lot of work on this. This smells of cancel Advertising to me.
 
Ultimately as a Mix and Master Engineer, I release product when I have listened to it extensively using standard impeccable DAC etc. etc. MQA is clearly applying a layer of further processing to compensate for a Lossy Broadcast. Afaik, most of us, and certainly with historic audio, do not listen through MQA when Mixing and Mastering. As such, the claim that the stream is the same as we approved, is absurd. We have seen a series of these 'Extra Hot Sauce' variants tried over the decades. They do not survive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QSound
 
Last edited:
  • Post hidden due to user being banned.
I must say that I find it interesting that @doctor speakers does not answer direct questions with somewhat direct answers... I understand that he may want to be or stay anonymous... However dodging questions and answering with someone else's youtube videos does seem pretty disingenuous...
 
Again, agree on what? I have listened to MQA, even on a quick scan it sounds different to my Masters. Does it sound good.? Sure, certainly better than Spotify regular for sure. Apple Music regular, not so sure, that system kinda jumps out of even poor systems to my ear. Hype things come and go, e.g. Q Sound..... I believe they are destructive. We will never know what those Historic records released during the Q Plague, really sound like. That is a pity.
Let me exemplify the absurdity of interfering with what we do in the studio. Madness manager use to take the Master mixes to another facility where he would make copies which were sped up and had treble added. So.... the Producer, Engineer, Band, used to run the Mix machine slightly fast, creating a slower master, which was also dulled. Zero sum. But all the Madness releases that went through the Managers hands are copies. That's a pity.
Madness.
 
Last edited:
As of April 2021 this is where streaming services stood with streaming quality and formats... This may help with understanding why some streaming services may sound better or worse than others...

STREAMING SERVICE - MAX STREAMING QUALITY - SUPPORTED FORMATS
Qobuz 24bit / 192kHz AIFF, ALAC, FLAC, WAV, WMA Lossless
Amazon Music HD 24bit / 192kHz FLAC
Tidal HiFi 24bit / 96kHz AAC, ALAC, FLAC
Deezer HiFi 16bit / 44.1kHz FLAC
Google Play Music 320kbps AAC, ALAC, FLAC, MP3, Ogg Vorbis, WMA
Deezer Premium 320kbps MP3
Spotify Premium 320kbps AAC, Ogg Vorbis
Apple Music 256kbps AAC
YouTube Music Premium 256kbps AAC
SoundCloud Go+ 256kbps AAC
Slacker Radio 320kbps MP3
Pandora 192kbps AAC
Spotify Free 160kbps AAC
Deezer Free 128kbps MP3

In the upcoming months there are several streaming services that will be increasing their streaming quality...
We live in interesting times...

Yuck, that did not format the same as in the editor...
 
Great post @ddude003. IMO, Spotify, Deezer, and Google Play are right in the sweet spot for not being able to hear a difference (at least for me)... I still prefer Qobuz and TIDAL, just because I like to know I'm feeding the beast with the highest octane fuel! ;-)
 
And from Feb 22 2021 Spotify... "Spotify HiFi will deliver music in CD-quality, lossless audio format to your device and Spotify Connect-enabled speakers, which means fans will be able to experience more depth and clarity while enjoying their favorite tracks."


It looks like the three biggest players (Apple, Amazon and Spotify) in this market space, streaming music, are lining up to kick some $$$ and take no prisoners... I wonder how Tidal, Qobuz and even Roon will fare? Does anyone see MQA use in the top three?
 
Last edited:
Happy Ending then..... Seems like Tidal's initiative has thrown petrol on a fire of increasing resolution. Excellent. Hopefully production values in the content will follow.
 
And from Feb 22 2021 Spotify... "Spotify HiFi will deliver music in CD-quality, lossless audio format to your device and Spotify Connect-enabled speakers, which means fans will be able to experience more depth and clarity while enjoying their favorite tracks."


It looks like the three biggest players (Apple, Amazon and Spotify) in this market space, streaming music, are lining up to kick some $$$ and take no prisoners... I wonder how Tidal, Qobuz and even Roon will fare? Does anyone see MQA use in the top three?

Hopefully, MQA will enter the dustbin soon.
IMO, Atmos is the next big thing in streaming audio.

- Rich
 
  • Post hidden due to user being banned.
You can do both Atmos and MQA. I like MQA for replicating what the engineer heard in the studio and Atmos when trying to replicate a live performance. Both have their appeal. If you like Atmos check out this upcoming workshop by Dolby on Mastering in Atmos:

Thankfully, Atmos can be kool-aid free.

- Rich
 
  • Post hidden due to user being banned.
I found these videos really revealing:


 
Back
Top