Thinking about purchasing an MQA capable DAC to go with my Bluesound/Tidal source. I've read loads of info, some for, much against. Anybody here actually try this type of setup ? thanks Tim
Lots of controversy, lots of passion both for and against. Are you running your Bluesound to your amp via RCA cables? If so, purchasing another DAC might be an incremental upgrade at best. If your amp has optical or coax connections you can also connect the Bluesound that way in order to do an A/B comparison with and without the MQA unfold.
A very reasonably priced option ($499) to try and see if MQA does anything for you is the Project Pre Box S2 Digital. This a Stereophile Class A DAC that natively decodes MQA and also does all sampling rates up to DSD512. I owned one for about six months and it was very good as a DAC. The reason I bought the Project was to try MQA and see if I like it. However, I did not noticed anything special with MQA. It sounded like any other digital file and sometimes even worse. Since then I have moved on to Qobuz and to real hi res digital.
In both systems I run the Vault-2 and Node-2 to DAC's, Audio Research DAC8 and Cambridge Audio DAC Magic. Both were an upgrade, bigger improvement with the DAC8. I use balanced cables from DAC's to amps and have tried both optical and RCA interconnects from Bluesound to DAC's, slightly preferring the RCA connection. All high quality cables.
For the cost of the DAC8 I’d hope you’d see some improvement! The DAC Magic is an ingenious piece of equipment. I purchased the smaller DAC Magic 100 for a second system to function as a go between from a Sonos connect to my amp and, for $200, it made a world of difference on files of all types. It really cleaned up the sound limitations of the Sonos internal DAC.
Yea the DAC 8 produces a less digital sound, I won't say quite analog like. I didn't purchase it for this setup, it was sitting around for a couple years left over from a previous system.
I stream MQA via Tidal now and then. On a pure sound basis I find it a mixed bag. Ive not been blown away by it at all. Sometimes I can tell no difference to non MQA version. Other times I find that it sounds sharper / clearer - hi-res. Conversely, Ive also had a few niggles with drums & cymbals on MQA tracks in that they have sounded a bit flat / dull now and then.
MQA is lossy compressed. It is not true High Resolution. It benefits nobody but MQA, Ltd. FLAC superior and plays on a wide range of platforms, can be converted to .wav.
I currently own two MQA-compatible DACs - a Lumin T2 and a Meridian 218 that I've used with Tidal MQA files. The Lumin has the built-in streamer and the Meridian (not currently in use and is for sale) was being run through a C4 streamer/server unit. I'm currently a Qobuz subscriber, but when I was using Tidal I usually noticed a positive difference in listening to the MQA files versus the non-MQA versions. I didn't notice a substantial difference when comparing Qobuz tracks to the same Tidal MQA tracks in my limited comparisons, for what it's worth. (I don't want to get into the debate over MQA in general. You can let your ears be the judge.) In terms of MQA DACs, it really depends on what your budget is.
I'm using a Topping D90 DAC that does a really good job handling MQA files. I have read all the objections to MQA, and I'm not saying they're not valid, all I'm saying is that all of the MQA files I've listened to so far have sounded at least really good, and some have been amazingly good. I find that the most impressive qualities are in the soundstage, the way that instruments are so solidly and precisely located, it really is mind blowing when done well. The Trees off of Rush's Hemispheres album is a good example...
I have to agree. The world now has more than enough bandwidth and storage space to handle lossless files.
Well you guys will find it easy to avoid MQA, I’m gonna just go ahead and have fun listening to them. And we can all get along fine.
How is it a waste of money if it's included with a Tidal subscription? What do you propose as an alternative that wouldn't be a waste of money?
Opening an MQA thread can give off the vibes of stepping into a cable thread. I wonder how long before they descend into the levels of anarchy reserved for audiophile fuse discussions.
I managed to get an afternoon off Friday and go to my local dealer to audition a handful of MQA DAC's. First we heard the inexpensive Project DAC, I could hear a difference but not what I would call an improvement. Then we moved up to three better DAC's, all did make a nice improvement. The most expensive made a profound improvement but was way out of my price range. Another thing the consultant explained, the MQA albums were sourced to the original recording when possible and re-encoded making the needed corrections. If the master had sonic problems there was little that MQA could do to correct it. It was clear after listening that some MQA recording made no difference, some were marginally better, and a few were just down right awesome, the best I've heard in 50 years of playing around with this stuff. In the end what it meant to me was I would first need to purchase a great and pricy DAC, understand that only some recording would be an improvement and that MQA remasters/encodes were growing in numbers but currently limited. At this point I'm going to put off a purchase and wait and see if new technology brings forth newer and less expensive MQA DAC's and if the available library keeps growing.
Not forget the ChiFi folks, they are making amazing products that are really reasonably priced. No, they're actually steals! I'm using a Topping D90 that is amazing, and it would be considered amazing at a much dearer price, but it's available in MQA trim for $800! It has balanced outputs and sounds amazing. Another great option that was just announced and will be available shortly for only $499 is the Gustard X16 Balanced USB DAC.
Boils down the how the file was originally mixed. I would not base a DAC/Steamer purchase solely on if the unit is MQA capable. If there are a few units you are interested in and you like their sound equally then MQA could factor in as a plus for that unit. I have two DACs capable of MQA and I am happy they have this ability. When I have played standard FLAC files against the MQA file most times I prefer the MQA but not always. One issue that is always on my mind when this happens is that I wonder was the MQA file taken from a different version / mix of the same album? I wish this type of information was available but it isn't or if it is I have not figured out how to determine what mix the MQA file is taken from.
Can you please point a link to a site or article where these listening tests have been described and discussed? I have done listening tests, and I like listening to these files. Are the listening tests you mention more involved than that?