Purité Audio
Trade: Purite Audio
Borrow both the external PS and another Mini unit then you can swop between the two, it will make any comparison much more straightforward.
Keith
Keith
Auralic Aries Mini
- Thread starter tenpercenter
- Start date
beammeup
pfm Member
Sorry another question about MQA and the unfolding process:
There are how many unfolding processes? 1. for the streamer to unfold, then 2. for the MQA DAC to unfold? I'm just trying to get my head around this MQA origami.
Also, what aspect of MQA is unfolded on the first process, and the second process?
For me high-res is not as important as the so called benefits of the MQA encoding that deals with the digital blur / timing (as they say). So what unfolding process deals with the blur? The first or the second?
There are how many unfolding processes? 1. for the streamer to unfold, then 2. for the MQA DAC to unfold? I'm just trying to get my head around this MQA origami.
Also, what aspect of MQA is unfolded on the first process, and the second process?
For me high-res is not as important as the so called benefits of the MQA encoding that deals with the digital blur / timing (as they say). So what unfolding process deals with the blur? The first or the second?
Strictly Stereo
Trade: Strictly Stereo
I stand ready to be corrected by someone with more knowledge of MQA, but as far as I am aware there is only one unfolding process. Some products can unfold MQA encoded files/streams all the way to whatever the original content was sampled at, but others are limited by licensing agreements to 24 bit/96kHz.
pocketkitchen
Registered User
That's my understanding too.
beammeup
pfm Member
OK I ask these questions because I am trying to decide what to spend some pennies on in order to get the most benefit from MQA?
Do I invest in a fully supported streamer as a number one priority?
Or do I invest in an MQA DAC using a regular streamer?
And when I say streamer, I want to avoid using a laptop computer, but it would seem that you can only use the Tidal App on a computer for full MQA support.
I also want to avoid buying a DAC that's only going to connect to a computer, such as Meridian's Director. So a DAC that takes an SPDIF connection and still processes MQA for example, without needing a USB connection if that's possible.
Do I invest in a fully supported streamer as a number one priority?
Or do I invest in an MQA DAC using a regular streamer?
And when I say streamer, I want to avoid using a laptop computer, but it would seem that you can only use the Tidal App on a computer for full MQA support.
I also want to avoid buying a DAC that's only going to connect to a computer, such as Meridian's Director. So a DAC that takes an SPDIF connection and still processes MQA for example, without needing a USB connection if that's possible.
beammeup
pfm Member
Actually, looking again at my own question, I can of course avoid the need for a computer for connecting to an MQA DAC by buying an AURALiC mini - because the mini has USB out which, of course, will connect to a Meridian Director.
So, will a Mini feeding a Director using Tidal give me the 'full' MQA experience including all the decoding which is designed to deal with the digial blur / timing issues?
I am concerned that the Mini does not "officially" support MQA in order to pass through the improved timing aspects of the digital signal for the MQA DAC to decode (I'm less interested in the hi-res part of MQA).
So, will a Mini feeding a Director using Tidal give me the 'full' MQA experience including all the decoding which is designed to deal with the digial blur / timing issues?
I am concerned that the Mini does not "officially" support MQA in order to pass through the improved timing aspects of the digital signal for the MQA DAC to decode (I'm less interested in the hi-res part of MQA).
Strictly Stereo
Trade: Strictly Stereo
I believe that is exactly what does happen. If your streamer is not MQA certified then it does not unfold any of the extended frequency information. It just unpacks the FLAC, WAV or other file and sends a 24 bit/48kHz PCM stream out to the DAC. An MQA certified DAC will then unfold the extra information before converting it to analogue. A non-MQA DAC will just convert it as is.
I thought what happens is that if your streamer is not MQA certified then it doesn't do any unpacking whatsoever - they haven't bought a licence so are are not entitled to - and thus what gets passed to your DAC is purportedly 16/44.1 but actually nearer 13/44.1 because the MQA wondrousness is hidden in the least significant bits, so will get D to A'd as noise.
Strictly Stereo
Trade: Strictly Stereo
Yes
It does not matter that the Mini does not unfold MQA. It does not need to. You can still get the full MQA experience by connecting the Mini's digital output to the Director or another MQA certified DAC.
Strictly Stereo
Trade: Strictly Stereo
Let's distinguish between unpack and unfold. When I say "unpack" here, I am not referring to an MQA-specific process, such as unfolding a 24 bit/48kHz file to recover the extra high frequency content. I am purely talking about unwrapping the file (and decompressing it where necessary) into a PCM stream.
Julf
Facts are our friends
And that unwrapped file is still affected by the MQA "stealing bits" from the original source material.
beammeup
pfm Member
Reading further into the unfolding of MQA files, the mention of unfolding refers to the resolution part only.. see the explanation I copied below...
Nowhere in the explanation does it mention the unfolding, or decoding, of the improved timing information that MQA is touting as one of its major strengths. So - the big question is - reading from one of the four ways of dealing with MQA below: If you play back a 24-bit/192kHz MQA-encoded file using iTunes through a regular DAC (i.e. a non-MQA DAC), you will get a 24/48 file. - does this mean that you do get the timing benefits of MQA 'whatever' - it's just the resolution that progresses through steps 1 - 4?
An MQA encoded file can be played back in four ways; with no decoding, software decoding, hardware decoding, and a combined software/hardware decode.
If you play back a 24-bit/192kHz MQA-encoded file using iTunes through a regular DAC (i.e. a non-MQA DAC), you will get a 24/48 file.
If you play back a 24-bit/192kHz MQA-encoded file through an MQA software decoder like Tidal HiFi, Audirvana, or (soon) Roon, and you are using a regular DAC (i.e. a non-MQA DAC), you will get a 24/96 file. A software decoder does not offer the ability to 'unfold' the original file to resolutions higher than 24/96 (or 24/88.2).
If you play back a 24-bit/192kHz MQA-encoded file through an MQA-enabled DAC, you will get a 24-bit/192kHz file. If you are also using a software decoder like Tidal HiFi, Audirvana, or (soon) Roon, you can have the software decoder perform the first 'unfold'.
Nowhere in the explanation does it mention the unfolding, or decoding, of the improved timing information that MQA is touting as one of its major strengths. So - the big question is - reading from one of the four ways of dealing with MQA below: If you play back a 24-bit/192kHz MQA-encoded file using iTunes through a regular DAC (i.e. a non-MQA DAC), you will get a 24/48 file. - does this mean that you do get the timing benefits of MQA 'whatever' - it's just the resolution that progresses through steps 1 - 4?
An MQA encoded file can be played back in four ways; with no decoding, software decoding, hardware decoding, and a combined software/hardware decode.
If you play back a 24-bit/192kHz MQA-encoded file using iTunes through a regular DAC (i.e. a non-MQA DAC), you will get a 24/48 file.
If you play back a 24-bit/192kHz MQA-encoded file through an MQA software decoder like Tidal HiFi, Audirvana, or (soon) Roon, and you are using a regular DAC (i.e. a non-MQA DAC), you will get a 24/96 file. A software decoder does not offer the ability to 'unfold' the original file to resolutions higher than 24/96 (or 24/88.2).
If you play back a 24-bit/192kHz MQA-encoded file through an MQA-enabled DAC, you will get a 24-bit/192kHz file. If you are also using a software decoder like Tidal HiFi, Audirvana, or (soon) Roon, you can have the software decoder perform the first 'unfold'.
Strictly Stereo
Trade: Strictly Stereo
Have a look at post #69...
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f...ming/tidal-master-mqa-tidal-27528/index3.html
As far as I can tell this is broadly accurate as an aerial view of what goes on, although I believe that the actual folding/unfolding process is somewhat more complex than this might suggest.
Julf
Facts are our friends
That is a good question, as the explanation of the actual timing benefits is rather vague, but as it is based on the filter behaviour, I would assume they need the full bandwidth to accomplish that.
It will be a 24/48 file, but the actual music content will be 16 bits or less, because the lower bits are used to encode the MQA high-frequency stuff.
It also has no ability to reconstruct the lower order bits, so the result will always be effectively 16 bits (or less) in a 24-bit package.
See above - effectively a 16-(or less)-bit/192 kHz file.
Strictly Stereo
Trade: Strictly Stereo
misterdog
Not the canine kind
Quote from John Westlake.
WRT to MDAC2 and MQA - if you use Tidal and enable software decoding combined with the MDAC2's optimal transient filter then I dont see how onboard rendering can be better then our own optimal transient which has a perfect time domain response and the full MQA data has been decoded by the software.
"MQA code that sits on a certified DAC’s USB receiver chip can pre-emptively correct for the DAC chip’s own time domain smearing. MQA call this process ‘rendering’."
As we have NO time domain smearing with optimal transient filters then there nothing to be gained from "rendering" so suggesting Tidal software decoding is all we need.
A good explanation here:-
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2017/01/mqa-tidal-where-are-we-now/
The link is very informative, the best explanation I have seen for the MQA process.
WRT to MDAC2 and MQA - if you use Tidal and enable software decoding combined with the MDAC2's optimal transient filter then I dont see how onboard rendering can be better then our own optimal transient which has a perfect time domain response and the full MQA data has been decoded by the software.
"MQA code that sits on a certified DAC’s USB receiver chip can pre-emptively correct for the DAC chip’s own time domain smearing. MQA call this process ‘rendering’."
As we have NO time domain smearing with optimal transient filters then there nothing to be gained from "rendering" so suggesting Tidal software decoding is all we need.
A good explanation here:-
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2017/01/mqa-tidal-where-are-we-now/
The link is very informative, the best explanation I have seen for the MQA process.
beammeup
pfm Member
Actually that link answers my question about improving the digital blurring (if you like) it happens at both the A/D side from the beginning, and at the D/A inside the DAC - or 'rendering' ...
MQAs third point of sonic amelioration: the MQA code that sits on a certified DACs USB receiver chip can pre-emptively correct for the DAC chips own time domain smearing. MQA call this process rendering.
So for full benefit, which to me includes the timing corrections, you do need an MQA certified DAC - because it won't all be sorted by the software alone.
bonesetter
pfm Member
Blimey - just hooked up Auralic's linear PSU
Very significant improvement in every respect. Much more lifted, wider, liguid, musical... everything
Not sure it's worth its price tag though - plenty of other PSU's around for a lot less dosh, but certainly, there's no going back
Very significant improvement in every respect. Much more lifted, wider, liguid, musical... everything
Not sure it's worth its price tag though - plenty of other PSU's around for a lot less dosh, but certainly, there's no going back