MQA discussion

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
MQA is still PCM. Basically, once all the MQA "magic" is applied, you're left with a hi-res PCM stream, that can, then, be DSPed to your desire.

What is the bit rate of this PCM stream?
 

still-one

VIP/Donor
Aug 6, 2012
1,632
150
1,220
Milford, Michigan
Lets see.
-Sales of CD's have been plunging.
-Sales of Digital files are plunging.
-Sales of Streamed material is skyrocketing.
-No one (Apple, Spotify, Amazon, Tidal.......) yet has a viable long term streaming business model that isn't supported by their other businesses.

Audiophiles have always propped up niche markets by paying exorbitant prices for vinyl, tape, and high Rez (PCM or DSD) material because they "believe" those sources sound better than CD's or take your pick. Most individuals who have compared MQA (either partially or fully unfolded) to their CD's or streamed material also believe that MQA sounds better. That is all that matter to them just as that is all that matters to the vinyl, tape and hi-rez crowd.
 

still-one

VIP/Donor
Aug 6, 2012
1,632
150
1,220
Milford, Michigan
What is the bit rate of this PCM stream?


I have seen where the original was anywhere from 24/44.1, 88, 96, 192 and 384. The digital output can different from what the analog output of the original file was depending on the DAC as I understand.
 

asiufy

Industry Expert/VIP Donor
Jul 8, 2011
3,711
723
1,200
San Diego, CA
almaaudio.com
What is the bit rate of this PCM stream?

It'll be the same as the original source file. If you MQA-encode a 24/88 file, you'll end up with a 24/88 file :)
At least with the MSB DACs, it'll show you that bit rate on the display, along with the "MQA" flag, when appropriate.
 

asiufy

Industry Expert/VIP Donor
Jul 8, 2011
3,711
723
1,200
San Diego, CA
almaaudio.com
Lets see.
-Sales of CD's have been plunging.
-Sales of Digital files are plunging.
-Sales of Streamed material is skyrocketing.
-No one (Apple, Spotify, Amazon, Tidal.......) yet has a viable long term streaming business model that isn't supported by their other businesses.

Audiophiles have always propped up niche markets by paying exorbitant prices for vinyl, tape, and high Rez (PCM or DSD) material because they "believe" those sources sound better than CD's or take your pick. Most individuals who have compared MQA (either partially or fully unfolded) to their CD's or streamed material also believe that MQA sounds better. That is all that matter to them just as that is all that matters to the vinyl, tape and hi-rez crowd.

Good points. Add to that Neil Young's Pono thing, that started as a hi-res download site, and is now pivoting to a streaming service.
 

KeithR

VIP/Donor
May 7, 2010
5,144
2,812
1,898
Encino, CA
-No one (Apple, Spotify, Amazon, Tidal.......) yet has a viable long term streaming business model that isn't supported by their other businesses.

This is my biggest concern. And if Tidal folds or is folded into someone (only 3M subs I believe, although half pay up for Hifi) we all suffer again. Ultimately if Apple and Spotify come out with Hifi (as has been rumored and/or beta'd) then MQA would have a chance with them as well.
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
It'll be the same as the original source file. If you MQA-encode a 24/88 file, you'll end up with a 24/88 file :)
At least with the MSB DACs, it'll show you that bit rate on the display, along with the "MQA" flag, when appropriate.

So, what happened to the compression? :confused: Why being lossy to have the same bit rate? Perhaps the MSB is just showing the original bit rate?
 

asiufy

Industry Expert/VIP Donor
Jul 8, 2011
3,711
723
1,200
San Diego, CA
almaaudio.com
The compression is applied to everything above 44khz (the hi-res content). Everything below 44khz is lossless.

And AFAIK if you play a 16/44 MP3, the DAC will "see" 16/44 content, and you'll only know it's an MP3 if you look at the transport (or more likely by the artifacts.)
 

DaveyF

Well-Known Member
Jul 31, 2010
6,129
181
458
La Jolla, Calif USA
Lets see.
-Sales of CD's have been plunging.
-Sales of Digital files are plunging.
-Sales of Streamed material is skyrocketing.
-No one (Apple, Spotify, Amazon, Tidal.......) yet has a viable long term streaming business model that isn't supported by their other businesses.

Audiophiles have always propped up niche markets by paying exorbitant prices for vinyl, tape, and high Rez (PCM or DSD) material because they "believe" those sources sound better than CD's or take your pick. Most individuals who have compared MQA (either partially or fully unfolded) to their CD's or streamed material also believe that MQA sounds better. That is all that matter to them just as that is all that matters to the vinyl, tape and hi-rez crowd.

To my ears and on that particular day with the specific pieces that Peter McGraph played, the MQA files were easily ( meaning even the most neophyte listener) discernible as superior sounding. Not one person in the sizable audience felt any different. No naysayers, no non-believers at all!
So that I am clear, when I talk about the 'naysayers' here, I am not just referring to one particular member, but all members who are 'skeptical' and 'negative' about this technology and who have NEVER even heard it! I say, go out and listen for yourselves and then get back to us with a more educated
opinion. Before that, all else is posturing/trolling and postulating, IMHO.
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
The compression is applied to everything above 44khz (the hi-res content). Everything below 44khz is lossless.

And AFAIK if you play a 16/44 MP3, the DAC will "see" 16/44 content, and you'll only know it's an MP3 if you look at the transport (or more likely by the artifacts.)

It is why I asked for bit rate. When we have MP3 we have 96 to 320 kilobytes per second (Kbps). What happens with MQA?
 

asiufy

Industry Expert/VIP Donor
Jul 8, 2011
3,711
723
1,200
San Diego, CA
almaaudio.com
Alex, I'd love some feedback on Rush/Moving Pictures MQA
It's always been album that is super dense and textured in the mids/upper bass, but harsh at freq extremes
Does the treble really lilt now, and the bass truly breathe?

Marc,

AxBing this against the MFSL CD... MQA much better, more transparent/defined. No contest here.
Now against the 24/48 hi-res (which the MQA seems to be derived from, given that the MQA version shows as 24/48)... Hmm... Similar, lots of extension and ambience, longer decays, but the MQA seems to be more laid back, with more depth, instruments further down into the room vs a more frontal presentation on the straight 24/48 PCM.
 

asiufy

Industry Expert/VIP Donor
Jul 8, 2011
3,711
723
1,200
San Diego, CA
almaaudio.com
It is why I asked for bit rate. When we have MP3 we have 96 to 320 kilobytes per second (Kbps). What happens with MQA?

You'll have to ask them :) I only see the bit depth and frequency, which is what the DAC/transport shows me.
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
You'll have to ask them :) I only see the bit depth and frequency, which is what the DAC/transport shows me.

You see my point - how can we debate a format if we do not have answers even for the very basics?
But I hope that our WBF experts can help us!
 

spiritofmusic

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2013
14,601
5,411
1,278
E. England
Interesting Alex.
Is it a case of FINALLY saying Rush doesn't suck in digital?
 

asiufy

Industry Expert/VIP Donor
Jul 8, 2011
3,711
723
1,200
San Diego, CA
almaaudio.com
You see my point - how can we debate a format if we do not have answers even for the very basics?
But I hope that our WBF experts can help us!

Well, we can debate subjective impressions. I, for one, don't need to know the bitrate in order to appreciate how much better some of those MQA albums sound...
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
Well, we can debate subjective impressions. I, for one, don't need to know the bitrate in order to appreciate how much better some of those MQA albums sound...

Surely - I do exactly the same comparing redbook and DSD layers in SACD, most of the time DSD is a winner by a good margin.

My point is that unless we know the exact technical details we risk comparing apples with oranges. For a long time we criticized redbook mostly because of the poor quality of the CD mastering.

Back to thread - as far as I am understanding (please correct me if I am wrong) you can either listen to MQA using Tidal to decode or using the MSB Sellect II decoder. Did you compare both modes?
 

still-one

VIP/Donor
Aug 6, 2012
1,632
150
1,220
Milford, Michigan
Surely - I do exactly the same comparing redbook and DSD layers in SACD, most of the time DSD is a winner by a good margin.

My point is that unless we know the exact technical details we risk comparing apples with oranges. For a long time we criticized redbook mostly because of the poor quality of the CD mastering.

Back to thread - as far as I am understanding (please correct me if I am wrong) you can either listen to MQA using Tidal to decode or using the MSB Sellect II decoder. Did you compare both modes?

I disagree. You.do not need top know the provenance when comparing music. You either like A or B or there is not enough of a difference to worry about.
 

rbbert

Well-Known Member
Dec 12, 2010
3,820
239
1,000
Reno, NV
MQA is still PCM. Basically, once all the MQA "magic" is applied, you're left with a hi-res PCM stream, that can, then, be DSPed to your desire.
This can only be true if the MQA is completely decoded by software, which is not how I understand MQA works. The MQA patent states that the final filtering takes place in the MQA-certified DAC, and exactly how the filtering is implemented applies only to that specific DAC, and only recovers the "MQA" audio as analog after the D>A performed by that particular DAC. This is the whole point of MQA certification, otherwise there would be no need, one could use any DAC.

As far as the bit rate, it will be the same as any PCM stream of that specific bit depth and sampling rate. So 16x2x44,100 or 24x2x96,000, 24x2x192,000, 24x2x88,2000 or whatever.
 

still-one

VIP/Donor
Aug 6, 2012
1,632
150
1,220
Milford, Michigan
Real world example:

1. The studio creates a track at 24 bit / 352.8 kHz DXD.
2. The studio uses the MQA process on the track, packaging it as 24 bit / 44.1 kHz.
3. The consumer purchases or streams the 24 bit / 44.1 kHz track.
4. The consumer's playback system decodes and renders the track at 24 bit / 352.8 kHz DXD.


Using the real world example above, the Tidal desktop application, Audirvana, and soon Roon would decode the MQA 24/44.1 distribution file and unpack it to 24/88.2. This file is output from a computer via USB or S/PDIF or even a phone via Lightning or USB on-the-go, to the hardware renderer. For this example, we'll output via USB to an AudioQuest DragonFly. The core decoded file enters the DragonFly at 24/88.2, then expands to the full 24/352.8 kHz resolution of the original studio master file.
 

asiufy

Industry Expert/VIP Donor
Jul 8, 2011
3,711
723
1,200
San Diego, CA
almaaudio.com
Surely - I do exactly the same comparing redbook and DSD layers in SACD, most of the time DSD is a winner by a good margin.

My point is that unless we know the exact technical details we risk comparing apples with oranges. For a long time we criticized redbook mostly because of the poor quality of the CD mastering.

Back to thread - as far as I am understanding (please correct me if I am wrong) you can either listen to MQA using Tidal to decode or using the MSB Sellect II decoder. Did you compare both modes?

Francisco,

I agree with still-one, when you're comparing versions of the same album subjectively, all it matters is whether it sounds better or not. That's why I compare 16/44 versions to MQA, DSD, etc, as I don't judge them on their technical merits, but whether they sound good or not.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing