advertisement


MQA arrives on Tidal

Status
Not open for further replies.
Listening to Blue by Joni Mitchell, an album I've played a heck of a lot over the years. I don't think I've ever heard it sound this good. Maybe I'm imagining it, but it sounds so 'right', with beautiful vocal quality.

If the version of 'Blue' you mean is the one that has been on Audio CD note that it may well be an HDCD. One of the discs I have where - when played as LPCM - the audio is peak compressed in the absence of HDCD decoding.
 
There's definitely a bug in the Tidal Windows app. I can reproduce it on two different PCs on three different DACs in two different locations. Sometimes the selection of my DAC/Exclusive Mode under "Streaming" flips back to "System Default". When this happens, Exclusive Mode is cancelled and my MDAC displays 16/44.1 and MQA stops. If I can get Tidal back to Exclusive Mode, then MDAC displays 24/96 or 24/88.2 again.

I reckon this bug may be why some people cannot hear a difference. If their DAC didn't show them their bitrate, they would probably never discover that "System Default" had been selected.

This is interesting - I'm surprised some people are getting 88.2/96/192kHz with their non-MQA DACs!

When I play MQA content* to my non-MQA DAC it shows up as 24bit (always) and sometimes as 44.1kHz and 48kHz, which I thought was to be expected in such a setup? I wasn't aware that (at least some) non-MQA DACs can also do the unfolding WRT sampling rate?

*separately verified in the Tidal desktop app to make sure it really *is* MQA
 
I notice that Joni Mitchell is one of the more "different" sounding examples. Many JM Cds are encoded HDCD, which means that without a HDCD player, they are compressed, so the MQA version SHOULD sound better

For me, there is a certain historic irony that people may be using Joni Mitchell recordings in this context. It brings out the possibly worrying parallels between HDCD and MQA.

If you go back and examine Joni Mitchell 'CDs' (sic) with care you find some are HDCDs and others are not. And - as with some other 'CDs' you may not notice any label saying so.

Over the years I found CDs that showed characteristic level compression, but not marked as an HDCD. Sometimes they also have no HDCD marker codes in the bitstreams. Sometimes if look hard enough you'll find a mention of 'Pacific' which is a clue, but no HDCD logo.

Early JM CDs transfers weren't HDCD but used poorer ADCs, etc. Later ones tended to be HDCD, but not all. Some were futzed up in various ways. But in general, the later ones sound a *lot* better with HDCD decoding because it unsquashes the peaks.

So using these as a comparison with MQA versions may simply fall into a snag which mimics the one people have been talking about. That switching off MQA decoding may give you the results of playing MQA-altered data *without* it being decoded. i.e. *not* was fed into the MQA encoding, or indeed, 'Authenticated'.
 
If the version of 'Blue' you mean is the one that has been on Audio CD note that it may well be an HDCD. One of the discs I have where - when played as LPCM - the audio is peak compressed in the absence of HDCD decoding.

That's possible as I don't have HDCD anywhere in the replay chain - either for replay of the CD or ripping (I ripped with iTunes).

Like an idiot I've just remembered that I also have a 24/96 version downloaded from Qobuz. I'll have a listen to that when I get a chance.
 
That switching off MQA decoding may give you the results of playing MQA-altered data *without* it being decoded. i.e. *not* was fed into the MQA encoding, or indeed, 'Authenticated'.

Indeed. That is one of my major concerns with the "the difference is clearly audible if you switch the MQA on or off" comparisons. We need do compare using exactly the same source material MQA encoded and decoded on one hand, and completely untouched by MQA on the other hand - and even then we have to check for level differences, EQ etc.
 
Encoding a digital master that has been produced at digital fullscale, with MQA folding most likely adjust gain a little to avoid clipping once folded or on unfolding, as the process is not 100% reversible.
MQA state that the authentication verifies that the distribution is bit perfect, but carefully don't mention what the decoder does.
This gain change will be subtle but might be audible
 
This is interesting - I'm surprised some people are getting 88.2/96/192kHz with their non-MQA DACs!

When I play MQA content* to my non-MQA DAC it shows up as 24bit (always) and sometimes as 44.1kHz and 48kHz, which I thought was to be expected in such a setup? I wasn't aware that (at least some) non-MQA DACs can also do the unfolding WRT sampling rate?

*separately verified in the Tidal desktop app to make sure it really *is* MQA
"it shows up as 24bit (always) and sometimes as 44.1kHz and 48kHz" - then you are not hearing any MQA vln. Sounds as though your system has not been set up correctly from the start, or that you are seeing the same bug as I report.

Software decoding in the Tidal program only decodes to 24/88.2 or to 24/96. Not any higher. To decode MQA to a higher sample rate requires an MQA DAC.

+++++++++++++++

To permit software decoding (max 96kHz) in the Windows Tidal program requires:

- not have the Tidal bug
- set Windows's "Speaker Properties/Advanced" to "Allow applications to take exclusive control..." ticked
- you may need to experiment with the bit depth/rate drop-down. Although if your system is correctly configured, Tidal will override whatever you have set here.
- In the Tidal program, under "Settings/Streaming" choose your DAC.
- Hover with your mouse until the secret "cog" icon becomes visible.
- Click the secret cog and select "Use Exclusive Mode"
- Choose a track for which the "Master" flag is indicated
- Your DAC should now read 24/88.2 or 24/96 and the job is done.

- After a few tracks or tens of minutes, go back and see if Tidal has flipped your "Streaming" choice back from your DAC to "System Default". If so, then Exclusive Mode will have been disengaged and your DAC will be displaying whatever bit depth/rate you have had set in your Windows control panel. And you will not at this point be hearing any MQA software decoding.
 
Indeed. That is one of my major concerns with the "the difference is clearly audible if you switch the MQA on or off" comparisons. We need do compare using exactly the same source material MQA encoded and decoded on one hand, and completely untouched by MQA on the other hand - and even then we have to check for level differences, EQ etc.

It's free to try it, so let us know what you think.
 
Mark , its only on certain master albums that is does that. it ALWAYS does that on those albums ..
You need to close and restart tidal ap if that happens , on restart it goes back to mqa decoding ...but if you hit on of those albums , you back to system default
Im pretty sure its got to do with the unfolding...
jim and Julf..what is your axe to grind here? People are enjoying the different presentation... no one really cares , barring you folk , to analyse it to death.
the differnce tween undecoded and decoded is huge..no abx tests needed
 
jim and Julf..what is your axe to grind here? People are enjoying the different presentation... no one really cares , barring you folk , to analyse it to death.
the differnce tween undecoded and decoded is huge..no abx tests needed

Well, it's certainly not only Jim and Julf who're interested in understanding why MQA might sound different.

Anyway, no-one is stopping you playing with your new toy. If you don't care about how it works, why not just ignore Jim's and Julf's attempts to understand it?
 
Mark , its only on certain master albums that is does that. it ALWAYS does that on those albums ..
You need to close and restart tidal ap if that happens , on restart it goes back to mqa decoding ...but if you hit on of those albums , you back to system default
Im pretty sure its got to do with the unfolding...
Thanks Rodney. I find that restarting Tidal sometimes doesn't work. Bizarrely, sleeping/resuming my PCs always works. Any other workarounds anyone?

As I said, I am surprised more people not reporting this. (Happens on two different PCs with three different DACs.)

I believe that it is not due to the unfolding, 'cos I have had this bug (flipping out of Exclusive mode) for months, long before MQA. (And received a refund from Tidal.)
 
We need do compare using exactly the same source material MQA encoded and decoded on one hand, and completely untouched by MQA on the other hand - and even then we have to check for level differences, EQ etc.

Julf, you use the word "we" twice here.

There are a number of folk on this and other websites actively trying MQA with a variety of software and hardware architectures. Between them thay are getting closer to deducing what is happening where, what the limitations are, and what they hear. They are then generously taking the time to share their experiences both good and bad. This has helped other folk to correctly configure their devices so spreading the experience and understanding.

It would be nice if you too were actively engaging in this.

If you are researching MQA in the wild, please share your set-up, your musical test pieces and your findings both technical and SQ-wise.
 
Well, it's certainly not only Jim and Julf who're interested in understanding why MQA might sound different.

Anyway, no-one is stopping you playing with your new toy. If you don't care about how it works, why not just ignore Jim's and Julf's attempts to understand it?

I understand that, but it is annoying that they keep making the same points over and over again in this thread about are you comparing like with like etc.

The point is that no ABX is required - the difference is enormous and it doesn't matter which alternative master to go back to. Original CD, High Resolution download, LP... anything. No matter what version I've got of some of those albums, no matter what time I've spent curating the very best audio version (Japanese versions, 180g pressings - you name it), MQA bests it each and every time.

So I don't need to be reminded, like a child, that other versions might have been degraded by MQA, Tidal or the record companies. It doesn't matter to us who want to listen it to the very best version and we get what Jim and Julf are saying. They just don't need to keep saying the same thing over and over again.

Chris
 
jim and Julf..what is your axe to grind here? People are enjoying the different presentation... no one really cares , barring you folk , to analyse it to death.
the differnce tween undecoded and decoded is huge..no abx tests needed

I don't see an axe here Rodney, I see people politely seeking to understand how much of this is good source file provenance and understand whether MQA is solely the mechanism for delivery, or if it plays a role in the sonics.

I've seen much enthusiastic heat which is nice, but some light as to 'what is being compared to what' would be instructive.
 
Thanks Rodney. I find that restarting Tidal sometimes doesn't work. Bizarrely, sleeping/resuming my PCs always works. Any other workarounds anyone?

As I said, I am surprised more people not reporting this. (Happens on two different PCs with three different DACs.)

I believe that it is not due to the unfolding, 'cos I have had this bug (flipping out of Exclusive mode) for months, long before MQA. (And received a refund from Tidal.)
I think there may be different bugs at work. On my win 10 laptop it wont engage exclusive mode with my mdac for any masters afaict. On my win 8 desktop it wont recognise my cambridge audio xs dac full stop. Weirdly on the former it seems to output 24/96 whatever settings I put in the control panel settings; in the latter case it outputs to whatever I set in control panel.
 
the difference is enormous and it doesn't matter which alternative master to go back to. Original CD, High Resolution download, LP... anything. No matter what version I've got of some of those albums, no matter what time I've spent curating the very best audio version (Japanese versions, 180g pressings - you name it), MQA bests it each and every time.

Can you point to where this has been established Chris? I have tried this with different results - the MQA versions sounded very well, but on direct comparison with some albums, not always better.
 
Are there any analogue specialists on here who can provide a comparison with top end vinyl reproduction? I would find that very interesting.
 
Well, it's certainly not only Jim and Julf who're interested in understanding why MQA might sound different.

Anyway, no-one is stopping you playing with your new toy. If you don't care about how it works, why not just ignore Jim's and Julf's attempts to understand it?
Quite so.
Incidentally I would point out that my query here
http://www.stereophile.com/content/mqa-filter-mytek-brooklyn

about the strange measurements from the mytek brooklyn's mqa filter has still never been answered.

measurements can be found at figure 6 here
http://www.stereophile.com/content/...ne-amplifier-measurements#UcEWZV0UVppWvr11.97
 
jim and Julf..what is your axe to grind here?

No axe to grind - just a dose of curiosity and healthy scepticism.

People are enjoying the different presentation... no one really cares , barring you folk , to analyse it to death.

So for all the people you pretend to speak for, why can't they just go on enjoying it then? Why does it bother them that someone is trying to understand what is going on behind the curtain?

the differnce tween undecoded and decoded is huge..no abx tests needed

And a number of possible reasons for that has been suggested. We still don't know which ones are valid and which ones aren't. Feel free to jump to conclusions if that makes you happy, but don't expect (or demand) that everybody else does the same.
 
Can you point to where this has been established Chris? I have tried this with different results - the MQA versions sounded very well, but on direct comparison with some albums, not always better.

SteveS1,

Sorry, that probably shouldn't have read as if the world had agreed that to be the case.

In my experience, I've yet to be able to find an audiophile version/pressing/download that hasn't been improved upon by MQA.

Apologies for the bad writing!

Chris
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top