MQA

[chris719]

You mean audible superiority to CD? I have no doubt about it, but I can tell most of the MQA mastering is different process from their 44.1 mastering, so my impression is based on my averaged experience of MQA vs 44.1 uncompressed...

Forgive me if I don’t believe you 🙂.

They will make it difficult to compare correctly because it might not be from the same source exactly or might be processed differently, like the thousands of “remastered” CDs.

 

[TNT]

You mean audible superiority to CD? I have no doubt about it, but I can tell most of the MQA mastering is different process from their 44.1 mastering, so my impression is based on my averaged experience of MQA vs 44.1 uncompressed...

I rather hear you say that you might hear the *mastering* process as in re-mastered. Many MQA releases seem to be "fixed-up" (in the mastering process) before MQA *coding*

//

 

[plasnu]

I rather hear you say that you might hear the *mastering* process as in re-mastered. Many MQA releases seem to be "fixed-up" (in the mastering process) before MQA *coding*

//

Right. That's why I want to compare MQA vs uncompressed file. 🙂

 

[plasnu]

Forgive me if I don’t believe you 🙂.
.

No problem at all. That's what I said. 🙂

 

[63127]

There is NO known power supply noise that can resolve even the LSB of 20 bit let alone 24 bit recording, I'm talking from from source to speaker, less than 1uv is need from start to finish.

As far a MQA, there is no credibility as long as there are no measurements to show their level of noise vs Dac and preamp.

Is storage so expensive now days that compression is a necessity?

 

[chris719]

There is NO known power supply noise that can resolve even the LSB of 20 bit let alone 24 bit recording, I'm talking from from source to speaker, less than 1uv is need from start to finish.

As far a MQA, there is no credibility as long as there are no measurements to show their level of noise vs Dac and preamp.

Is storage so expensive now days that compression is a necessity?

They seem to be targeting streaming and IMO it’s too big for streaming anywhere but on a non-metered connection.

 

[Charles Darwin]

I’d ask, why is it suddenly okay to have lossy compression? I seem to remember that MP3 would get you run out of town on most “high-end” audio forums. I guess when it’s supported by Meridian and coated in enough snake oil it goes down easier.

I am sure it sounds wonderful. Doubt it’s better than the original in a fair comparison.

At least on the "high-end" audio forum I frequent at times MQA gets you run out of town too.

As far as I can tell it is dead in the water.

 

[63127]

Makes sense. I don't like being on a "cloud".

 

[63127]

They seem to be targeting streaming and IMO it’s too big for streaming anywhere but on a non-metered connection.

Makes sense. I don't like being on a "cloud". I'm off the grid😉

 

[plasnu]

They seem to be targeting streaming and IMO it’s too big for streaming anywhere but on a non-metered connection.

Someone wrote that the size of MQA file is not too different from FLAC. If it's true, no logical reason to push MQA other than marketing reasons.

 

[TNT]

Right. That's why I want to compare MQA vs uncompressed file. 🙂

Cant compute... 😉

//

 

[plasnu]

Cant compute... 😉

//

What do you mean?

 

[TNT]

Okay - I get it. But it will never happen cuz we dont have the coder at hand.

//

 

[plasnu]

Okay - I get it. But it will never happen cuz we dont have the coder at hand.

//

Yep, that's what I said. Meridian should publish those files.

 

[bwaslo]

I like to think CD still lives on as long as you can purchase uncompressed or losslessly compressed PCM versions of albums, even though there is no disc. 🙂

And for that matter you can definitely still buy discs. I probably bought a few dozen or so just in the past year.

 

[bwaslo]

I wonder why uncompressed is so important. "Uncompressed" is a magic word, but in reality, MQA clearly sound better than uncompressed CD quality audio to my ears. It's all psychological, maybe.

Are there recordings that were for sure made from the same mix and mastering for both CD and MQA? Without that there is no valid way to compare.

 

[DPH]

Someone wrote that the size of MQA file is not too different from FLAC. If it's true, no logical reason to push MQA other than marketing reasons.

Exactly. The technical merit of MQA is in baking in DRM on the distribution side. FLAC and ALAC don't have to do that song and dance about lossy compression.

 

[Charles Darwin]

That was my impression too about MQA: DRM through the backdoor disguised by snake oil.

 

[plasnu]

Are there recordings that were for sure made from the same mix and mastering for both CD and MQA? Without that there is no valid way to compare.

The current pop releases seem to be from the same masters usually, but who knows?

Funny thing is, most Blue Note MQA releases are much less dynamically "compressed" compared to the 44.1K releases (or analog releases) despite of the "compressed" format. 😱 RMS is about 3-6dB lower, I guess. It's fun to listen to those releases. My familiar songs sound so different that makes me feel I'm listening to different songs sometimes. If you a fan of Blue Note, I would recommend MQA version, although Van Gelder 44.1 releases are very tastefully compressed in general.

PS I think it's true that the goal of MQA is the sound of master tape (less processing at mastering stage).

 

[plasnu]

Exactly. The technical merit of MQA is in baking in DRM on the distribution side. FLAC and ALAC don't have to do that song and dance about lossy compression.

If this DRM is really protecting copyright, and there is no audible difference as Meridian claims, we should support MQA. Well, music industry is scammy, but that is a different problem should be solved in a different way.