Schiit Yggdrasil DAC and MQA
- Thread starter Al M.
- Start date
No, I haven't. While optimal MQA may be stellar, I am not sure if what you heard is representative of the average result from the format. Reviews seem to be mixed.
I do not plan to bother with MQA as long as it remains a fringe format -- which it will. I also didn't bother with SACD because I predicted that it would remain a fringe format, which it did. I am glad I didn't put time, money and effort into the format. And in the meantime, plain CD has become so much better than it was at the introduction of SACD that I am seriously wondering how much, from a pure sound quality standpoint, involvement with SACD would have been worth it.
As for being interested in MQA because it brings you much closer to analog: the Yggy also brings me astonishingly close to the life-like realism of analog -- on Redbook CD. While you may reply, "wait until you have heard MQA so that you know what I am talking about", I'd say in return, "wait until you have heard the Yggdrasil DAC so that you know what I am talking about". Unfortunately, we cannot instantly swap each other's experiences.
Precisely my point.
Francisco,
I understand dCS is beta-testing firmware for their DACs with MQA compatibility. You might be able to experience it with a product you're entirely familiar with.
Me, I'm not going into the political or even the technical merits of MQA, but I respect those that want to go there. I just like what I heard, and most importantly, the results are fairly consistent, with digital and analog recordings alike.
BTW I feel I must emphasize this is not like PCM x DSD, where you could make the case for preferring one over the other, as each has their merits/drawbacks. This is a clear cut improvement.
I'm not talking about modifying the DAC, but re-formatting the files using a music server in order to feed the DAC with whatever format it sounds best with. For example lots of people resample PCM to DSD in the server then feed DSD to the DAC.
Currently I have no opinion of MQA, I haven't heard it and opinions seem mixed.
I was very skeptical about MQA for a long time......I have to admit mostly it was my viewpoint toward Bob Stewart and his previous MLP idea. and I have not been a Meridian fan for a long, long time (although I do like his dacs).
but more recently I've changed my mind up to a point. first; I heard the Wilson-Meridian-MQA demo with Peter McGrath at the L.A. Show. then I heard a similarly, if not more, compelling case made at the L.A. Show in the MSB-YG room with the MSB Select II. and now I'm hearing those Tidal MQA files in my own system daily with the MSB Select II dac. so at this point I'd have to say it's got me believing.
but......I've not done any actual A-B direct comparisons with my own files or analog versions. so until I get around to that step my positive view is provisional.
and at this point if MSB has decided MQA is worthy of the effort to include it in the Select II feature set then that speaks very loudly to me that it is legit. my ears tell me that they know their stuff.
and as far as how significant MQA might be in any dac, my perspective would be that it depends on whether your a streamer, a server/file guy, or love silver discs. if you are a streamer (or might become one) then you got to have MQA would be my advice.
but more recently I've changed my mind up to a point. first; I heard the Wilson-Meridian-MQA demo with Peter McGrath at the L.A. Show. then I heard a similarly, if not more, compelling case made at the L.A. Show in the MSB-YG room with the MSB Select II. and now I'm hearing those Tidal MQA files in my own system daily with the MSB Select II dac. so at this point I'd have to say it's got me believing.
but......I've not done any actual A-B direct comparisons with my own files or analog versions. so until I get around to that step my positive view is provisional.
and at this point if MSB has decided MQA is worthy of the effort to include it in the Select II feature set then that speaks very loudly to me that it is legit. my ears tell me that they know their stuff.
and as far as how significant MQA might be in any dac, my perspective would be that it depends on whether your a streamer, a server/file guy, or love silver discs. if you are a streamer (or might become one) then you got to have MQA would be my advice.
I am not trying to convert anyone into becoming a MQA acolyte. It is understandble that individuals would like as close to apples to apples A/B comparisons of MQA versus other versions of the same releases. Those comparisons can and have been done yet some individuals challenge the provenance of any files included.
I have made the following comparisons in my set-up.
Tidal MQA version versus the actual CD.
Tidal MQA version versus a CD version that has been stored in Sooloos format.
Tidal MQA version versus a CD version stored on a server I use for Roon content.
Tidal MQA version versus Hi-Rez version stored on both Sooloos and Roon servers.
Purchased MQA version versus Hi-Rez version stored on both Sooloos and Roon servers.
Results:
-I have never heard the streamed or purchased Tidal MQA version sound worse than the CD, Sooloos, or Roon content.
-There are some where the MQA and other 16/44 are too similar to worry about.
-I only have a handful of purchased MQA titles but they compete in the same sandbox as the hi-rez versions I own. Some are better, some the same and some not as good.
Thoughts
-I am looking forward to the promised content from Universal and hopefully Sony, even if it is just comes from streaming.
-Just like my other content there are titles I wish to own. I would like a lot more MQA offerings available for purchase.
-I am considering options for a new DAC. I will only consider those that are MQA capable.
-I wouldn't suggest anyone else go and swap out their current DAC for a MQA capable unit unless more content (new releases and old stuff) is released. If you "need" a new DAC that is a different story.
-If streaming(at least CD quality) isn't something you are considering, don't worry about MQA.
I have made the following comparisons in my set-up.
Tidal MQA version versus the actual CD.
Tidal MQA version versus a CD version that has been stored in Sooloos format.
Tidal MQA version versus a CD version stored on a server I use for Roon content.
Tidal MQA version versus Hi-Rez version stored on both Sooloos and Roon servers.
Purchased MQA version versus Hi-Rez version stored on both Sooloos and Roon servers.
Results:
-I have never heard the streamed or purchased Tidal MQA version sound worse than the CD, Sooloos, or Roon content.
-There are some where the MQA and other 16/44 are too similar to worry about.
-I only have a handful of purchased MQA titles but they compete in the same sandbox as the hi-rez versions I own. Some are better, some the same and some not as good.
Thoughts
-I am looking forward to the promised content from Universal and hopefully Sony, even if it is just comes from streaming.
-Just like my other content there are titles I wish to own. I would like a lot more MQA offerings available for purchase.
-I am considering options for a new DAC. I will only consider those that are MQA capable.
-I wouldn't suggest anyone else go and swap out their current DAC for a MQA capable unit unless more content (new releases and old stuff) is released. If you "need" a new DAC that is a different story.
-If streaming(at least CD quality) isn't something you are considering, don't worry about MQA.
MQA has even been a part of the entry-level, Analog Dac USB module upgrade for almost a year.
Surely Peter recordings are the optimal scenario for MQA as the recording process is fully known for MQA encoding
JA had trouble picking the difference on some MQA recordings when he blind tested himself
It would seem to me that it is nice to have as an added extra, but you wouldn't discount a dac that didn't have it
The Ygg seems to be optimised for redbook given its dac architecture and all feedback seems to agree with this
I cannot see what great advantage the Ygg would have from MQA as it truncates the last 4 lsb from 24 bit files, and produces artifacts
This seems to be the case, yes.
John Atkinson (Stereophile) seems to be wrong on this. Here is Mike Moffat (Baldr):
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/sch...multibit-is-here.782824/page-33#post-11988106
MQA may 'only' have a resolution of 17 bits:
HighResAudio to stop offering MQA
"From the HighResAudio Press Release:
HIGHRESAUDIO has stopped offering MQA. MQA is NOT lossless, the original signal is never recovered, estimate to recover at most 17bits (reduces the sampling rate), reduces the frequency range, SNR reduced by 3bit, aliasing with artifacts at 18kHz. MQA encoding filters manipulates drastically the original source. No analysis tools are available to verify the encoded MQA content. Therefore no quality control is possible. highresaudio.com stands for offering purity, original mastering source, none manipulated, tweaked or up-sampled content and codecs that are widely supported and offer use of freedom."
Yes, the official words are:
dCS FAQ: Are you planning to support MQA?
dCS is currently working to add MQA support to Rossini, Vivaldi, Network Bridge and future dCS products. This is scheduled for late summer 2017. This is planned to be a software-only solution, which will be offered free to original registered owners.
David Wilson owns a dCS Vivaldi stack - perhaps he has been listening to Peter McGrath MQA tapes in the Wamm's using the beta version!
Interesting post Al. I've only heard a MQA comparison once at a friends house. I think there was a difference but it was a small one. The DAC was just a low end Meridian though. MQA is not a high priority for me at the moment.
Not a big fan of most DSD files either. The only DSD files I have liked were ones I knew the provenance of. If actually recorded originally by a good DSD ADC then they are great. If not then they usually suck. Problem is most DSD files are the latter type.
And to be true DSD, they need to not just be recorded by a good DSD ADC, but also there must be no DXD step (PCM) that is required for usual mixing/mastering. Yet PCM mixing is done for most DSD releases, causing there to be very few pure DSD recordings, see:
https://www.grimmaudio.com/site/assets/files/1088/dsd_myth.pdf
http://www.mojo-audio.com/blog/dsd-vs-pcm-myth-vs-truth/
Or one can follow this best practice (quoted from the first link by Grimm Audio):
"Mix everything on an analogue desk, record the result digitally using a native 64 fs DSD converter (like Grimm Audio’s AD1). Don’t change any levels or other properties of the audio, except some crossfades where necessary, using special software that leaves the rest of the audio untouched (see above). The end result will be 99% pure DSD. Almost no one does that, Channel Classics may well be the only one in the trade. We should admire them for this and encourage them to issue their beautiful recordings in 64 fs for many years to come. And believe it or not, if they were to convert these recordings to 128 fs this would deteriorate the audio quality." (End quote.)
All I can say that utilizing the MDB DAC that the MQA files were a very easily heard upgrade over the standard file of the same music. One thing that is possibly a factor is that as the DAC increases in resolution then MQA increases the difference even more.
The demo that Peter put on was clearly heard and by the whole audience. It certainly was something that I believe even a neophyte listener could easily pick up on....it made that much of a difference!
BTW, my current old DAC has the ability to decode HDCD, which I always feel sounds better than the standard red book.
The demo that Peter put on was clearly heard and by the whole audience. It certainly was something that I believe even a neophyte listener could easily pick up on....it made that much of a difference!
BTW, my current old DAC has the ability to decode HDCD, which I always feel sounds better than the standard red book.
I strongly suspect that the "obvious reasons" won't be so obvious in the very near future!
As soon as my Aesthetix Io Signature needs to decode MQA vinyl I'll give it serious consideration. So far RIAA has been working for 90% of my listening.
You mean if there will be much more titles? Ain't gonna happen. They said the same thing about SACD too, and it didn't happen. And unlike MQA, SACD had a behemoth marketing machinery in the form of Sony Corporation behind it, which also had put multiple millions into the development of the format and was highly interested in its success.
MQA will go the usual path of fringe formats: nowhere.
Just like HDCD went nowhere either. There were never more than a few thousand titles available:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Definition_Compatible_Digital
If that is the case, I believe that would be a shame. SACD was good sounding and deserved to be more exposed, IMHO. Same is true with MQA, problem is that all of these formats do appeal to a small segment...the a'phile listener. Wide spread appeal to the masses is NOT where any high end product is at right now...or probably ever!
Just because SACD was a bust, doesn't mean MQA will be. You have to understand distribution has changed in 2017. The ask isn't buying all your favorite music on pricey physical media anymore (which originally couldn't be played on a normal CDP). It's clicking a button on my phone that's included with my streaming package. Apple, Spotify, etc. are all trying to do this as well.
Tidal + Roon is the most transformative digital experience on the planet. You just have no idea because you are clinging to old distribution. Do you realize people in their 20s have *zero* digital physical media? The #1 exciting thing about MQA is being able to stream hi rez music at some point. You are missing the big picture.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Staff online
-
treitz3Super Moderator
Members online
- lunego
- christensenleif@msn.com
- Horidori
- analogsa
- aLLeARS
- rad
- Salectric
- DarrellC
- Dave Raven
- Nataraja
- nonesup
- Oortje
- Odd Harry
- MikMirMil
- lucia1506
- SOS
- sapirg
- Elliot G.
- Kjetil
- tommy54
- Scott W
- bonzo75
- cs3255
- leyenda
- Adcc
- Carlosoptico
- wbfhet
- MarcelNL
- orrman
- morricab
- wbass
- Kingsrule
- mtemur
- rsorren1
- TLi
- andromedaaudio
- Bonesy Jonesy
- moby2004
- Gamlas
- hornfly
- brad225
- MOTU
- Sharok
- GroovySauce
- Antonio66
- jazzdude99
- Thorens 2018
- hopkins
- baocrazy78
- treitz3
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |