DSD vs. PCM vs. MQA - Group listening experiment


Hi everyone,

So I just re-discovered the 2L website which has free samples of high resolution music.

I thought it would be worthwhile to ask the fans about the tracks here, specifically if there are any you feel are really good exemplars of why encoding scheme X is better or different than Y.

I just downloaded a bunch of Vivaldi and will share my own observations (and lack thereof) here.

As for me, file size matters so I'm going to try to stick to relatively similar file sizes when possible.

Best,


Erik
erik_squires
DSD vs. PCM vs. MQA - Group "listening" experiment

"Listening" is the word that should ring a bell???
Hi Erik,

Coming back to the title of the thread, I have listened to PCM vs MQA files from the 2L website via the mqa-capable Meridian 808v6 player in my home system.

I found that the 808v6 renders the PCM version beautifully, and there is an incremental improvement with the MQA version. Having said that, I couldn’t compare DSD vs PCM or MQA versions of the same files as the Meridian does not do DSD.

But comparing PCM vs DSD via my non-MQA Esoteric N-05 dac, I preferred PCM. Needless to say, I can’t listen to MQA via the Esoteric.

That said, comparing the PCM versions through the Meridian 808v6 and Esoteric N-05, I preferred the Esoteric. The Meridian foreshortens soundstage depth, bringing me to rows 1-3 while the Esoteric places me at rows 7-9 which I find much more pleasant and natural. Meridian’s Explorer 2 does the same thing according to a Stereophile report while RH of TAS observes the same thing in his review of the 808v6. Also, the highs are airier via the Esoteric.

The only way to compare DSD vs PCM vs MQA, would be via Meridian’ s new Ultradac which does all 3. Now, that’s progress. I have not brought home the Ultradac simply because of its prohibitive cost.

Best regards.
Jon.

The latest Mytek's can of course, play all three formats, but I have not yet been able to listen to DSD directly.  Too much computer configuration for me right now.

I guess when you boil it down I'm curious if there's really a compelling story to go with format x or y and whether we could find it among these free to download files.

Lots of claims,. and misinformation, circulates about any given format.

Besides file size compression, I have yet to experience a reason to go with MQA for instance.  To spend 1 Gbyte to store a single song in DSD format is also very pricey.  YMMV, of course. :)  But here we have a treasure trove of files in different formats. Are there champions here who would wave the flag for their preference?

Best,


Erik

I'm curious if there's really a compelling story to go with format x or y and whether we could find it among these free to download files. 


None, really.
Only 7 hardware manufacturers have signed up so far :-

http://www.mqa.co.uk/customer/our-partners

Not much to wonder why. Main reasons are :-

1. Licensing fees from recording studios, artists and hardware manufacturers
2. Stringent hardware/software requirements for manufacturers
3. Lack of content (Warner Music has no time frame for launch since announcement of joint venture with Meridian)
4. MQA foreshortens soundstage depth which they attribute to the temporal
deblurring process(see Stereophile report on Meridian Explorer 2 and TAS report on Meridian 808v6); if temporal deblurring does this to all MQA files, audiophiles may not be interested
5. Hires MQA files cost more than pcm/dsd hires files
6. MQA redbook files cost more and take up more data space than regular redbook files.

Looks like a long journey ahead for MQA.