Strange to hear any MQA bashing from a cost or sound quality issue.
But that's exactly how any new feature gets evaluated: Cost vs. value.
MQA is Legit!
Ok, there is something special about MQA. Here is my theory: MQA=SACD. What do I mean by this? I mean that since there might be the "perception" it sounds better, then there is way more care put into the mastering and the recording. Of course I have Redbook CD's that sound just as good (although they tend to be "HDCD" lol)... Bottom line: a great recording sounds great. I wish more labels and artists put more time into this--it's great to hear a song for the 1000th time and discover something new.
What are your thoughts on MQA and SACD?
What are your thoughts on MQA and SACD?
Showing 6 responses by erik_squires
And let's not forget MQA's biggest fail: It is a pretty lossy compression scheme. https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/application_notes/163302855-is-mqa-doa Just thought you should all know when I write stuff I usually have the receipts to back it. :-) Best, E |
One perspective, uniquely my own, is that MQA is very very late to the Audio world. Two things are true now that were not true before 2000: 1 - Network bandwidth is MUCH cheaper. 2 - A lot of DAC's are much better at playing Redbook than they were before, significantly closing the gap between it and high resolution playback. If we were still in that era, MQA would probably seem like a divine gift, and would be better in all respects. Almost 20 years into the 21st century however, MQA seems like a solution for the wrong era. Best, E |
The third easiest way to hear the difference is that MQA is slightly hotter or louder. The MQA apodizing filter tends to compress transients. This part I heard, but since I was able to switch it off with non MQA I attributed it to the filter and not to MQA itself. I heard it more as a softening of transients and removing of space. Whatever difference I heard with MQA, none of it was worth money. I would not pay a premium for it. My feelings are pretty close to what I later would read from PS Audio: https://www.psaudio.com/pauls-posts/mqa-thoughts/ Best, E |
The MQA ney-sayers sound exactly like the cable ney-sayers. If you compare these groups, they put down the people that can hear a difference. They state so-called facts, charts, expert comments, and whatever else they can find to support their cause. I don’t give a sh$# about so called experts opinions, charts, etc..., listen with your own 2 ears! If you don’t have good ears or a good quality system, then you probably won’t hear a difference. Well, in my case I tried it, and can't hear a difference. What's more, the consensus of the SF Audiophile society that I talked to was the same. No one could hear anything. The glowing positive press aside, it didn't make things better in such a way I'd shell out a single dollar for. Further, at least with the Mytek Brooklyn DAC I used, the apodizing filter removed a lot of air and sparkle from the music, so I switched to a different one which forced me to disable MQA. Never regretted it. Best, E |