advertisement


MQA disappointment?

M

miles_b

pfm Member
I now have a MQA-compatible DAC/headphone amp, and spent a bit of time with MQA yesterday. It reinforced some of my initial impressions. The first time I got to listen to MQA was with a Meridian Explorer driving a pair of Audeze LCD-3. My own mobile playback is an Audioquest Dragonfly Red driving a pair of Etymōtic ER4-SR. In both cases, the music just didn't really grab me, but I think I figured out why. When I really listened to it, I found that it does fine on very simple, spare passages. But during complex, multi-layered passages, it really loses its dynamics. Comparing Jacob Collier's Djesse Vol. 1 on vinyl to the Tidal MQA was like someone took the life out of the recording. The bass also had a leaner timbre. But also just comparing some Bill Evans trio recordings to good CD playback was a disappointment for the same reasons.

Am I missing something here? Is there a particular mobile DAC that actually makes MQA come to life? Is there something better coming down the road?
 
garyi said:
Bobs got you covered:

Why is MQA so controversial? Bob Stuart answers.
Click to expand...
That doesn't answer what I was asking. When I know I'm listening to recordings that are very well-produced, and would fit his description of "high resolution," I'm still getting an unsatisfying musical experience out of MQA. At the very least, it shouldn't sound worse than CD. But it does with very complex, multi-layered music. It's as if it prioritizes being able to hear those multiple different layers as separate, over presenting a dynamic, cohesive piece of music. The rhythmic drive seems to disappear, and you just get components of the whole.
 
I'm sorry I wasn't answering your question to be fair. I had a dabble with MQA back in the day and at first was excited, then realised my ears were bleeding and have not revisited. I just wanted to link to the guy avoiding the the real reasons people are annoyed with mqa. He certainly does not look short of a few quid, so I can see why he is interested.
 
Sometimes it’s tricky to be sure you are comparing apples with apples.
Are you sure it was the same release of each album, or was one of them a remix, or off a compilation album, or off a remaster?
I’m non-plussed about MQA, I use Tidal Hifi stream & MQA is there to try at no extra cost, so why not. I wouldn’t pay extra for it. Additionally, I’m Still unsure as to how there are MQA versions of music recorded years ago, all analogue but that may be me just being a bit dim. Surely that’s just a remix/remaster isn’t it?
As an example, how do you compare an album from the 70’s & an MQA version of it.
Maybe it just comes down to “if you enjoy it use it, if not, ignore it”
I have no idea as to whether it’s still growing & gaining popularity or whether indeed it is a busted flush.
 
manicatel said:
Sometimes it’s tricky to be sure you are comparing apples with apples.
Are you sure it was the same release of each album, or was one of them a remix, or off a compilation album, or off a remaster?
I’m non-plussed about MQA, I use Tidal Hifi stream & MQA is there to try at no extra cost, so why not. I wouldn’t pay extra for it. Additionally, I’m Still unsure as to how there are MQA versions of music recorded years ago, all analogue but that may be me just being a bit dim. Surely that’s just a remix/remaster isn’t it?
As an example, how do you compare an album from the 70’s & an MQA version of it.
Maybe it just comes down to “if you enjoy it use it, if not, ignore it”
I have no idea as to whether it’s still growing & gaining popularity or whether indeed it is a busted flush.
Click to expand...
Yep, I was sure to compare the same releases. One curious thing I noticed is that when I switched from HiFi (lossless CD-quality) to MQA on Tidal on the same Bill Evans album, the frequency of the tape hiss actually dropped, which made me suspect that there are some situations in which MQA can sample at a lower rate than CD.
 
Informative read:

MQA: A Review of controversies, concerns, and cautions.
February 25, 2018
Archimago, for Computer Audiophile

“Controversy is only dreaded by the advocates of error.” 


– Benjamin Rush ​

My intent for this article is to provide a relatively broad but detailed overview. When appropriate, I will include links in the body of this article and footnotes below for further reading. I will embed a few images for reference realizing that charts and graphs can also be found elsewhere and perhaps in more detail. With the power of Internet search engines at our fingertips, numerous subjective opinions and results of objective tests are readily found elsewhere also. The core of what I’m interested in discussing in this essay is the simple question: “Why has controversy surrounded MQA to this extent?” By the end of this, I hope most readers will be essentially “caught up” with the discussions and debates surrounding MQA among audiophiles. As always, ultimately you decide whether you think MQA is worthwhile.

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/...-of-controversies-concerns-and-cautions-r701/
 
Hmm, someone who posts at great length yet under a pseudonym for anonymity. That does make me wonder about his impartiality or lack of.
 
Thanks @tuga , that was an informative read, and I think gets at some of the technical reasons behind what I'm hearing.
@manicatel In that case, I'd say take the opinion portion with a grain of salt. But the measurements and excerpt from the MQA patent application are illustrative of some real technical limitations. I also think that the fact that MQA were invited to write a response and declined to do so, says that they weren't willing to attempt to rebuff the technical findings.
 
Totally agree Miles, MQA sounds weird. And now I watched the Bob Stuart video posted above I think I understand why.

On the MQA version of Nirvana's "Breed", the timing of the bass and drums feel slightly off ... i.e. the MQA-remixed track simply fails to ROCK. Even a cheap radio played to distortion would not fail such a basic test.

But hey, there's a lovely decay on the cymbals and we can hear more "layering" of the guitar...I think that was the algorithm designer's intention.
 
It looks like Murdoch’s media products to me- I don’t have to use them and Id not touch them with a barge pole anyway. Is this only an issue with streaming online content and will it become mandatory to have licensed hardware to decode streamed content?
 
Here we go again...

This forum really hates MQA with near religious ferocity.

My experience with it (larger and longer than the many "experds" who opine on it here), is that it is often but not always better than standard red book CD of the same material and is competitive with vynil and standard hirez from Qobuz. It is possible it has limitations on very complex material, but I have not heard it personally. I will listen to Collier's music on it and see.

My listening is also mostly not with IEMs, so perhaps there is a difference there. Certainly using the same IEM/headphones for comparison is a must.

I can confirm that MQA does not make a good universal delivery system as MQA encoded material is not great when played on non-MQA enabled equipment. There is hashiness to the sound that is off-putting.
 
Last edited:
@DimitryZ, this comes in two parts for me - subjective, and objective. Subjectively, I came to this not having read any prior discourse on MQA, and expecting it to sound better than red book. I was sorely disappointed on two different DAC/headphone combinations with albums I’m well familiar with. My impressions mirror @Heckyman ’s description - no boogie factor, lots of layers, but the music lost all of its dynamic punch and physicality, especially when it gets complex. It’s like it gets congested and smeared, and something about the timing is off. On the objective side, you can see the measurements in the above-linked article that show excessive distortion in some situations that isn’t present in other formats.
 
In my stereo setup which includes a full decoding MQA DAC, Tidal Masters sounds almost always better than Tidal's Redbook version to my ears.

And that's all I care about. All this vitriol against Bob Stuart and MQA doesn't make any difference to me.

@miles_b if you only listened to MQA using either a Meridian Explorer or an AQ Dragonfly you haven't had the opportunity to listen to MQA's full decoding with a good quality DAC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top