What are peoples' options of MQA??

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by KG123, Oct 1, 2018.

  1. KG123

    KG123 Well-Known Member Thread Starter

    Hello,

    What are peoples' options of MQA??

    You need new hardware for as low as $190 that a Headphone amp. They can go much higher.

    Are the higher priced ones worth it?

    What Rock and Pop ones are exception great?

    HELP!!

    Thanks!
    KennyG
     
    toilet_doctor and angelo73 like this.
  2. MondoFanM

    MondoFanM Member from ATX

    Location:
    Austin
    It’s universally loved by the entire forum! Never have i seen the forum in such agreement.
     
  3. Time Is On My Side

    Time Is On My Side Forum Resident

    Location:
    Madison, WI
    I don't see the point of it. There is nothing wrong with FLAC or AAC, why introduce yet another format?
     
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2018
  4. Stereosound

    Stereosound Forum Resident

    Location:
    USA
    :thumbsdow:realmad:SCREW MQA!!!:realmad::thumbsdow
     
  5. DBMethos

    DBMethos Forum Resident

    Lossy hi-res... A most peculiar development.
     
  6. brimuchmuze

    brimuchmuze Forum Resident

    Follow the money.
     
  7. Which option are you interested in?
     
    Soundslave likes this.
  8. brimuchmuze

    brimuchmuze Forum Resident

    Heated seats.
     
  9. Much better if you get heated AND air conditioned seats!
     
  10. McLover

    McLover Forum Resident

    Location:
    East TN
    Lossy compressed. Does nothing useful. There to line the pockets of MQA, Ltd. Stick to conventional FLAC, a better open format.
     
  11. Michael

    Michael I LOVE WIDE S-T-E-R-E-O!

    no interest whatsoever... I have enough to play with.
     
  12. aphexj

    aphexj Sound mind & body

    Location:
    Toronto
    Thing is, it is backwards compatible (and in the case of Tidal, uses a FLAC container)... so what's the problem? Guaranteed not to have low-res compression in the chain. It works fine and sounds good on all the devices I have... waiting for the downside besides 'waaaaaahhh lossy sucks'
     
    mikedifr0923 and angelo73 like this.
  13. Time Is On My Side

    Time Is On My Side Forum Resident

    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Nothing wrong with FLAC/ALAC or AAC.
     
    Musical Maxis likes this.
  14. aphexj

    aphexj Sound mind & body

    Location:
    Toronto
    I agree, very efficient containers whether they contain MQA encoding or not
     
    Musical Maxis likes this.
  15. detroit muscle

    detroit muscle Forum Resident

    I will become a vegetarian before I use MQA
     
  16. angelo73

    angelo73 ⬚⿻⬚⿻⬚⿻⬚

    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Have you had an opportunity to compare a high quality remaster FLAC or redbook CD of any particular artist/title with its MQA counterpart? .. and if so, how does the MQA rate in comparison ~ better, about the same, or worse ?
     
  17. aphexj

    aphexj Sound mind & body

    Location:
    Toronto
    Many of them, yes, with Tidal the MQA sounds better... more breath and clarity in the vocal, smoother top in cymbals and percussion. Hi-res download FLAC is better still; but they are usually priced too expensive for me to 'try out' so MQA is my preferred route
     
    mikedifr0923 and angelo73 like this.
  18. angelo73

    angelo73 ⬚⿻⬚⿻⬚⿻⬚

    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Thank you. :thumbsup:
     
  19. kevin5brown

    kevin5brown Forum Resident

  20. @toilet_doctor is the forum expert on the format. Search for his informative threads.
     
    PhantomStranger likes this.
  21. toilet_doctor

    toilet_doctor Well-Known Member

    Location:
    USA
    I'm not the expert, but rather an "expert".

    There is a thread that does not relate directly to MQA or about downloading MQA files, but about MQA-CD.
    More precisely, we are talking about Japanese UHQCD (Ultimate High Quality CDs). Universal, Japan used them as a carrier for the MQA files they call them Hi-Res CDs or MQA UHQCDs. That's how MQA got into the thread.

    I knew that the industry would adapt MQA, since MQA offers some advantages for them. For example, you can put entire SACD content on the regular CD. At the same time to produce SACD you have to cut a deal with one of the three SACD printing plants in the world (in Austria, Germany or Japan). Just the cost of shipping them to the label leads to an increase in the cost of production, that some small labels, who would like to produce SACDs, cannot afford such a thing.
    MQA was always on my radar in terms of what it can offer to us, and how to deal with it.

    Although the thread is about CDs, there are some posts that can be very helpful to you.
    In my opinion, to settle MQA playback in a computer based system, you should consider spend more than $190. Please read Post #1060, Page 43, which will guide you a little through the thread and lead you to posts of the new inexpensive MQA/DSD512 DAC solution and to the Audiogon forum on this issue.

    There is also a post in which one Japanese guy shared his experience on how to rip the MQA UHQCDs using a MAC and 24 bit WAV format. He began like this: "I think that the feature of these MQA UHQCDs is the MQA files." That way, you can have both MQA files and MQA CDs (Post #1022; Page 41).

    Any advanced hi-res tech like MQA or DSD will sound good only if recording and mastering were done right. The better it was done, the more they will shine.
    That's why we concentrate on the quality of the new transfer first of all. Please read two comparison tests (Post #1074, Page 43 and Post #1092, Page 44).
     
  22. toilet_doctor

    toilet_doctor Well-Known Member

    Location:
    USA
    aphexj likes this.
  23. aphexj

    aphexj Sound mind & body

    Location:
    Toronto
    I don't think I'll invest in these CDs as a format yet but the MQA offerings on Tidal more than justify the format's existence. Was tired of poor fidelity tracks on streaming services disguised as "high quality" / HD resolution but little better than iTunes or sometimes even worse... the MQA tag is a breathrough (and yes, I'm familiar with the arguments about proprietary content, the hardware being a pain, etc. none of that is applicable for my case)
     
    mikedifr0923 likes this.
  24. Stone Turntable

    Stone Turntable Dedicated Listener

    Location:
    New Mexico USA
    The fact that there is no simple non-hairball-of-complication answer to the OP's simple query is a fatal summary of the MQA state of play.

    You can't get there from here, and there is no there there, is the normal innocent person's map to MQA.
     
  25. aphexj

    aphexj Sound mind & body

    Location:
    Toronto
    You don't need new hardware, any sound card that runs at 96kHz will be recognized by the Tidal app as such and it will do the software decoding for you if you want (or you can listen to the non-unfolded version by selecting MQA passthru)

    Get a free trial of Tidal HiFi and decide for yourself if it's worthwhile
     

Share This Page