Does anyone have any real world experience in comparing these formats? At a distance, MQA makes sense from a logistical standpoint, but what about SQ?
MQA vs DSD vs DXD/Hi rez PCM
- Thread starter Geardaddy
- Start date
As far as I can see with MQA, is it allows lossless compression of high res formats for low bandwidth streaming. They make it sound way better than it is with their marketing, to get the layman all excited. If you were to compare the same track with the high res source it came from, it would probably sound identical. Perhaps even worse due to the extra process of on the fly decoding. They make it sound like it will sound even better than regular high res formats with complicated ways of explaining how it works.
However, it is pretty cool that the compression will allow high res quality over streaming services like Tidal. So it's something I'm looking forward to.
But they aren't the only ones with this technology. I have a new neighbour who's company is working on a similar system he claims is better. He's coming over soon to demo it to me with my system. Very little public info on what they are up to though. I'm talking them into making a DSD version. He says he's unfamiliar with the merits of DSD, so my plan is to blow him away with a DSD demo that really opens his eyes. Here's a bit of info on the company.
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...-general-harmonics-corporation-263963501.html
Last edited:
It definitely seems like a step forward in terms of lossless hi rez streaming. Whether its better than Redbook or anything else via a good dac is another matter. The easiest solution (and its not easy given the poor Redbook repro through most dacs) is a dac that does Redbook justice....
It definitely seems like a step forward in terms of lossless hi rez streaming. Whether its better than Redbook or anything else via a good dac is another matter. The easiest solution (and its not easy given the poor Redbook repro through most dacs) is a dac that does Redbook justice....
Hqplayer is bar none the best way to do redbook justice. No matter which DAC you are using. If it's DSD compatible, even better. Redbook from Tidal sounds unreal via Roon/HQplayer/Superstream/My chipless DSD only DAC.
Well they claim it is in this article:
http://audioxpress.com/article/Meridian-Master-Quality-Authenticated-MQA-Technology-Makes-Lossless-Hi-Res-Audio-Streaming-Practical.html
The description of MQA given by Bob Stuart illustrates the way information is thrown out (particularly low level bits associated with higher frequencies that are deemed to be marginal or "inaudible"). This is not the same lossy compression as MP3, but it is none the less lossy.
In my view it is a technology to capture royalties by fooling people licensing unnecessary complexity. No need in terms of bandwidth saving. It does not support DSD.
Blizz, on the best way bar none. Is this a subjective or objective best.
If subjective, then this is just about your preference. I tried HQ player and on red book still found Audirvana to suit better.
Best is in reality a bit of a myth in this game and it would be great to hear how you feel it is better and in what context but also let's get a bit more real about absolute bests... they are as illusive as most visits to the state of Nirvana.
Subjective, likely objective as well (with optically isolated server/streamer config), but I haven't taken measurements. You are the first person I've heard say that. But it's extremely easy to setup HQ player poorly. So it's understandable if you experienced this. HQ player is also much more CPU demanding, so isn't very good with low powered computers. The Audirvana I have installed on my 3 mac's doesn't come close. Can't do server/streamer isolation either which takes things to another plateau. How about native DSD 256? Can't do that on Audirvana either. And now with the ability to use Roon with Tidal integration for the front end HQ player GUI, it's a no brainer. The list goes on....
Last edited:
Blizz,
You said redbook!
I have never heard anyone say HQP is best for RBCD playback. At best people say its equal to the other popular ones. HQP distinguishes on UPconversion to high rate DSD with the best convolution engine. That is the raison d'etre that people ascribe to it.
I fail to see why you would say that HQP is an exceptional RBCD playback option for someone with a PCM only Dac.
You said redbook!
I have never heard anyone say HQP is best for RBCD playback. At best people say its equal to the other popular ones. HQP distinguishes on UPconversion to high rate DSD with the best convolution engine. That is the raison d'etre that people ascribe to it.
I fail to see why you would say that HQP is an exceptional RBCD playback option for someone with a PCM only Dac.
That I preferred Audirvana on red book over Hq player isn't a big deal, that's what subjective assessment is all about. This is what makes the notion of absolute bests in subjective assessment a bit of a trap. It is just accepting the latitude of personal preferences and allowing for the context of our circumstances.
I understand this. But I also understand that many people don't set HQplayer up to get the best out of it. It's because, it's far more complicated to setup right out of the box. This is why I made this post:
http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?19287-Superstream-setup-guide&p=362462#post362462
and this streamer:
http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?19221-Streamer-to-kill-the-big-boys-for-under-250
Listen setup like that, and with that streamer, then share opinion once again.
This is what 90% of HQplayer users rave about with HQplayer. Where are you getting your information?
Resampling redbook to DSD is where HQplayer shines the most. And for PCM only DAC's, upsampling redbook to the highest resolution their DAC can handle, has been praised as a very effective way to get the best sound out of their DAC.
Maybe read the HQplayer thread on CA over again about 20 times. What you are saying couldn't be further from the truth.
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/hq-player-20293/
Perfect example yesterday on the thread among the dozens of positive impression from guys with PCM only DAC's. And he wasn't even using the NAA system with optical isolation!!
"I only have a 96/24 DAC and HQPlayer has improved the sound quality of my system vs Roon alone. Biggest improvement is the separation and precision placement of all the instruments. Whether it's worth it just depends on your own listening experience. I'm sure there are bigger improvements moving to DSD DACs but I thought it was worth it in my current setup and can always upgrade later."
The redbook Tidal I'm listening now through Roon/HQplayer in all DSD formats DSD 64 to 256 is stunning! Also upsampling redbook to everything from 24/96 to 24/384 PCM is also awesome, but not as good as the DSD.
And the convolution engine is only for things like room correction and multichannel DSP xovers. Maybe about 2% of HQplayer users, use this feature. You are completely confused.
Last edited:
Yes I kind of got the impression about the money grab. But if Roon can decode it, and Tidal streams it, I'll happily listen to it
DSD and HiRez PCM easily outperformed MQA encoded and decoded material from a sound quality perspective during the MQA demo session I attended.
Not surprising given the need to reduce the size of the DSD and 24/96 files to 16/44 PCM via the MQA encoding which includes lossless and lossy compression.
But MQA may still have a role in the world of 16/44 and lower streaming services when you can't have/enjoy the higher resolution music files.
I don't know where you heard your demo but "some" of the MQA tracks i heard were the best sound I have experienced. So I disagree with your statement that DSD ad HiRez easily outperform MQA. My demo was on a far from ideal set-up so I am expecting it to sound even better on a familiar system.
I heard MQA on several systems at a Merdian sponsored demo in Silicon Valley including an $80,000 Meridian system.
To my ears, the MQA editions were inferior sounding to the FLAC and DSD download versions I have at home. On a much less expensive audio system, of course.
I heard MQA on several systems at a Merdian sponsored demo in Silicon Valley including an $80,000 Meridian system.
To my ears, the MQA editions were inferior sounding to the FLAC and DSD download versions I have at home. On a much less expensive audio system, of course.
Could it of been the system? I wonder how an A/B on the same system would be. Anyways, if Tidal streams MQA compressed high res files without charging extra, and Roon can decode, perfect! Not really much to lose. Then I can A/B against high res files in my own collection.
It was actually via several systems.
In addition to the $80k MQA state of the art system in the main listening room, they also had headphone equipped systems in another room.
The results in the headphone room were the same. The MQA encoded and decoded files were not in the same league as their unencoded FLAC and DSD counterparts in my listening.
Last edited:
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |