MQA according to new Stereophile "loudness button" and "tweaking EQ in presence region"


Stereophile’s May 2017 review of the Mytek Brooklyn DAC (Herb Reichert) states that "in every comparison, MQA made the original recording sound more dynamic and transparent, but only sometimes more temporaly precise."

Seems positive, right? But the next sentence reads....

"After a while the MQA versions began to remind me of those old Loudness Contour buttons on 1960’s receivers, which used equalization to compensate for loss of treble and bass at low listening levels."

Now for the bombshell.....


"Consistently, MQA sounded as though it was tweaking the EQ in the presence region."

"I also noticed that most of the MQA versions sounded rounded off and smoother than the originals."

My opinion is that we gullible audiophiles have been fooled in the past by supposed new technologies, similar to what supposedly early mobile fidelity pressings did with EQ to make listeners think they were hearing an improvement.

In my mind, an alteration of the source is distortion.

Just as TV’S in stores set to torch mode are often preferred on first glance, and speakers that at first grab you with some spectacular aspect can become tiresome over time, as accuracy and neutrality become preferred as one's ear becomes more refined.

The frightening thing is that 2 major music entities have signed on, seemingly to make MQA the defacto standard of how music will made available.


While I haven’t been able to do this comparison myself, reading a highly regarded golden ear admit this in print is warning enough for me.


Just like the sugary drink that tastes so good on first experience, our advanced society knows that consuming it regularly leads to diabetes, heart disease and worse.

Does this revelation reveal MQA to be the parlor trick that it appears to be?
emailists

Showing 6 responses by shadorne

I have not heard MQA but it is predicated on the idea that you need all that high frequency sound above 48KHz to fully appreciate the music (even if you can’t hear it). We have had SACD and now DSD and I still find all these arguments for greater range way beyond human hearing dubious.

I don’t buy it from a technical perspective - despite the hand waving "smearing" that Bob Stuart imagines. I don’t really care about all that ultra HF noise for playback. Give me well recorded and well mastered 24 bit 96KHz and I am a happy camper as that really is about as good as it needs to get. 16 bit is the biggest weakness of CD IMHO as most studio gear can achieve 22 bit. Having 96KHz means a less aggressive brick wall filter and is a nice to have.
+1 Jafant.

I am slow to adopt new technology because of this artificial factor - no DSD or USB for me. I am using a PC optical Toslink out to a jitter resistant Benchmark DAC 2 - archaic approach but incredibly solid solid solid in performance. I don’t trust USB and PC - too many bugs in software and hardware - that is why optical is pretty safe approach as far as I am concerned (essentially I rely on hardware and firmware on a 30 year old standard. I don't care much to be at the full mercy of software and USB and other novel interfaces. recall how long it took to discover the jitter problems with CD playback)
@brianlucy 


+1 Brianlucey

I have been playing and comparing Tidal Master to the closest thing I have in my collection. Not all masters are the same so the comparison was not easy but I found a couple quite quickly as I have a large collection.

I hear a prescence boost (4 to 6 KHz) - subtle but it is there. On busy tracks it can sound tiring (over emphasized) but on vocal acoustics (guitar + vocal) it can sound really impressive (and easily mislead people to thinking this is a better audio file)

Not sure about the noise and other details that Brian is referring to but I confirm that I hear the presence boost. 

I am listening using the software decoder and sending the 24/96KHz file to a Benchmark DAC2 via active ATC EL150ASL (in case the audio chain has something to do with it).
I would add that most of what Tidal offer in their Masters section sound absolutely excellent. I especially enjoy the Led Zeppelin deluxe edition remaster from around 2015. These are boosted in the presence region quite significantly compared to other masters and this is certainly the effect of the mastering (cymbals sound really good) and absolutely not an MQA artifact. This is the best sounding Led Zeppelin I have ever heard.

I also enjoy the Smaal Faces collection! Great stuff and never has it sounded better.

If MQA has a boost it is subtle to my ears and I still find the music highly enjoyable.

Regardless of what MQA does, the music in their library sounds really great and is CD quality or better! I think $20 a month for this wonderful library of streamed music is a steal!

@brianlucey

+1 Harmonic content and low mids

As a listener that is what I care most about in the work that you professionals do.

ATC 150ASL are nice and clean in the lower mids and my preferred choice. I find almost all other speaker designs sacrifice harmonic content or "timbre" in order to juice things up for the listener in some exciting way - usually over emphasis on bass and treble or some non musical resonances. I am not familiar with Sonic Allegras but a friend of mine had Audio Physics and they sounded great and imaged extremely well.
Update :Tidal masters are once again a mixed bag just like other high resolution shops ....HD Tracks, Pono etc

It it ALL depends on the Mastering quality!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

...led zeppelin deluxe sounds great but red hot chili peppers stadium Arcadium is still the compressed Vlado Meller mastering...even though Steve Hoffman excellent master came out on vinyl years ago.