Will MQA drive hdtracks, acoustic sounds, and other hirez sites out of business?
- Thread starter caesar
- Start date
Tidal streaming already better-than-cd quality, so many occasions it beats a Hi Rez equivalent
Upscaling Tidal to 512 dsd w HQP truly a revelation in almost every case (Adele '25' being a marked exception)
Hi def downloads' (*APOSTROPHE ALERT!*) time surely is limited
Unless there REALLY is a market for arid, bloodless hi definition just for it's own sake
Ymmv, imho, don't want to irritate fans of these presentations
Upscaling Tidal to 512 dsd w HQP truly a revelation in almost every case (Adele '25' being a marked exception)
Hi def downloads' (*APOSTROPHE ALERT!*) time surely is limited
Unless there REALLY is a market for arid, bloodless hi definition just for it's own sake
Ymmv, imho, don't want to irritate fans of these presentations
I think that it is a bit early with this new technology to contemplate what it will put out of business or not. There is alot of ground to cover before MQA, a great new technology goes from 'maturity index' of about 0 or 1 to such a concern.
CD, streamed music, most DSD, most hi rez downloads. The best MQA is the best digital.
You can always find excellent examples of each format.
Since I started to listen to Tidal about 18 months ago I have not once for myself personally put on vinyl, tape, cd or a DSD file to listen to during my personal listening sessions. I have lot's of records, cds', native dsd files, R2R tapes and high res pcm files. I use them for demos if someone wants to hear vinyl or tape or dsd or cd's but I've gone Tidal 100% for my listening pleasure. Not necessarily MQA but regular Tidal streaming.
I can honestly say that in the last 50 years of listening I have never enjoyed my listening experience as much as I do with Tidal. I get to listen to the exact music that I want to listen to and sonically it is every bit as good as I need it to be which allows me to reach the magic level. This allows me to become completely involved and connected with the music that I am listening to. I am much more into listening to music that "gets me there" vs listening to music that "sonically sounds good", but is not the specific tracks that I want to be listening to.
MQA both SW and HW encoded sonically sounds great, but for the moment MQA is like vinyl, tape and DSD for me. They all sound great and sonically sound better than normal Tidal streaming BUT, BUT, BUT the kicker is that Tidal streaming with its 30M titles, sounds so good to me that I could care less if another format is sonically better, when I have to listen to music that I have in those formats vs the constant unfolding of different music that is presented to me via the Tidal library, literally on a daily basis.
When I was in my teens in the late 60's I was CRAZY about new music that "showed up" and it showed up regularly, literally on a daily basis. I could not keep track of how many good albums and tracks I wanted to listen to. I have not been as excited about continually discovering new and forgotten old music since the 60's as I am now with Tidal....it was a game changer for me.
I could care less what other people's personal listening preferences are, but I do care about my own preferences and optimizing my systems(s) to accentuate those preferences. Tidal has satisfied those preferences 100%.
I totally understand people that want to own their music collection and don't trust or embrace streaming. It's just choices. No different than people that like to drive sports cars, SUV's or motor cycles. Or some people like to lease and some like to buy and own their vehicle....different strokes for different folks, makes the world go round. Just so you find what works for you, and I am grateful that I have found Tidal as it works so well for me. My two cents from the peanut gallery.
I can honestly say that in the last 50 years of listening I have never enjoyed my listening experience as much as I do with Tidal. I get to listen to the exact music that I want to listen to and sonically it is every bit as good as I need it to be which allows me to reach the magic level. This allows me to become completely involved and connected with the music that I am listening to. I am much more into listening to music that "gets me there" vs listening to music that "sonically sounds good", but is not the specific tracks that I want to be listening to.
MQA both SW and HW encoded sonically sounds great, but for the moment MQA is like vinyl, tape and DSD for me. They all sound great and sonically sound better than normal Tidal streaming BUT, BUT, BUT the kicker is that Tidal streaming with its 30M titles, sounds so good to me that I could care less if another format is sonically better, when I have to listen to music that I have in those formats vs the constant unfolding of different music that is presented to me via the Tidal library, literally on a daily basis.
When I was in my teens in the late 60's I was CRAZY about new music that "showed up" and it showed up regularly, literally on a daily basis. I could not keep track of how many good albums and tracks I wanted to listen to. I have not been as excited about continually discovering new and forgotten old music since the 60's as I am now with Tidal....it was a game changer for me.
I could care less what other people's personal listening preferences are, but I do care about my own preferences and optimizing my systems(s) to accentuate those preferences. Tidal has satisfied those preferences 100%.
I totally understand people that want to own their music collection and don't trust or embrace streaming. It's just choices. No different than people that like to drive sports cars, SUV's or motor cycles. Or some people like to lease and some like to buy and own their vehicle....different strokes for different folks, makes the world go round. Just so you find what works for you, and I am grateful that I have found Tidal as it works so well for me. My two cents from the peanut gallery.
While I have no direct knowledge of their business motives I understand the natural suspicion regarding MQA. However, I do think there may be some misperception of the primary technical objectives behind MQA. The main technical objective is, as I see it, the establishment of a time-domain optimized recording/mastering anti-alias through playback interpolation filter coherent standard, something also easily done (more so, actually) via DVD audio, for example, except that there isn't any industry requirement for it. MQA appears to provide such a requirement. I've before written my outsider's perception of MQA's technical objectives over at diyAudio, so I won't waste space repeating that here. However, here's a link for anyone who may be interested in reading it.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/295397-mqa-5.html#post4970237
Last edited:
Norman (Hi
.....have you heard an optimized system with HW decoded VG MQA recording? My experience is that vinyl, R2R and native DSD ALL sound great when the original recording is great. Same goes for MQA. If you play an MQA HW decoded file of a VG recording, again just in my experience, it matches the quality of R2R, Vinyl, CD's or DSD. All of these formats sound a bit different to me or should I say have their own sonic characteristics, as does MQA, but in my set up(s), the MQA with a good recording sounds every bit as good as any of the other formats.
Norman (Hi
that's a big claim.
MQA's street cred is not helped by such high flying comments. I'm neutral on MQA until I get a chance to personally investigate it. but setting it at the same level as vinyl or RTR tape speaks more to one's standards for those formats than any objective view.
and I view you as a credible person who knows stuff.
I have lots of Quad dsd and dxd and I love it. and maybe MQA gets in that neighborhood plus or minus a little. but that's not anywhere close to the best of vinyl or tape.
I guess we just have to allow things to play out and let the dust settle. I applaud the promise of MQA and as music lovers it can be good for all of us. so I'm no negative Nellie on it.
that's a big claim.
MQA's street cred is not helped by such high flying comments. I'm neutral on MQA until I get a chance to personally investigate it. but setting it at the same level as vinyl or RTR tape speaks more to one's standards for those formats than any objective view.
and I view you as a credible person who knows stuff.
I have lots of Quad dsd and dxd and I love it. and maybe MQA gets in that neighborhood plus or minus a little. but that's not anywhere close to the best of vinyl or tape.
I guess we just have to allow things to play out and let the dust settle. I applaud the promise of MQA and as music lovers it can be good for all of us. so I'm no negative Nellie on it.
Not everyone agrees that tape and vinyl are the standard bearers.
You can say that again
. I hear so many distortions in Vinyl that it is hard for me to get past its limitations in many pieces of music. Tape is better but there are still flaws there.It is a huge insult for me to hear people say digital approaching Vinyl!
You spoke my mind word for word. I was tracking to spend probably $10,000 on music last year until I subscribed to Tidal. Then all of my purchases dried up: CD, tape or high-res digital. I am too busy discovering and hearing new music with Tidal.
I am not sure anyone can say they are music lovers and yet not subscribe to Tidal and spend a lot of their time there. Now, there are some people who are stuck in the groove and listen to the same classics over and over again. That is not me. There is so much incredible music created every day that I like to hear and experience those.
Yes. On the couple I tried Tidal wins. I am sure there are some that the hi Rez might come out ahead.
Ah, NO. I am not hiding behind anything. And I have heard MQA. My point is that MQA is a backdoor to DRM.
As has been said by some others, both in this forum and on other ones, a very good music file IS going to sound very good. MQA, PCM, DSD, DXD. Though I hate to give MQA the same standing along side those others.
And this talk about time domain and anti-blurring, etc, is fine except you do not need MQA to do this. You can do this and do it better then MQA with HQ Player and do it with ALL the files you already own and will own.
To some other posters.
I LIKE Tidal and use it. I sometimes find new music with Tidal, some of which I buy by download. And yes Tidal sounds great, at least the CD quality version. And it sounds even better when up-sampled with HQP. But I have to disagree that Tidal sounds as good as the better HiRz PCM and DSD files with or without using HQP.
If I find something new on Tidal and can buy it in a HiRz format of good quality then I buy it. Because if done right it will sound better then the Tidal version.
Back to MQA. How does it sound? To my ears with an apple to apple, though that can NEVER be 100%, using the best available I find it falls short of the competition overall.
So at least for me, at this time, I get better sound over all using HQ Player.
What I did was compare a normal rip i had on file to the same tidal 2448 file..there was a difference - IMO the mqa undecoded file sounded better than the 1644 rip ..nothing really night and day
I then compared the 2448 mqa to the tidal ap unfolding the mqa to 2496 and adding some secret sauce ( by using the mqa passthru in the tidal ap.. you can turn unfolding on or off)..huge difference.
Try it..tidal has a free trial
I then compared the 2448 mqa to the tidal ap unfolding the mqa to 2496 and adding some secret sauce ( by using the mqa passthru in the tidal ap.. you can turn unfolding on or off)..huge difference.
Try it..tidal has a free trial
A high percentage (40%, 50%?) of the music I listen to is not on Tidal, and a lot of the music I have heard about but not yet heard is also not on Tidal. So I would say this statement is not true
You can say that again
It is a huge insult for me to hear people say digital approaching Vinyl!
Hi Amir,
I am with you - I don't understand the need to compare digital to vinyl, as they are different. From my perspective, and I am with Rvisinta, when I get in the flow, it's all great.
Question for you: can you tell apart PCM from DSD?
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |