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
That's rich: borders on audio derp. MQA has been suspect for some time now with manufacturers complaining about altering/modifying their software and the licensing fees for quite some time now. That, and an almost non-existent content to listen to.

I've yet to hear it but will at the LA Audio Show next month but some very respected innovators like BenchmarkPS AudioLinnSchiit, and Archimago's take on it have convinced me to go in with open ears and not fall for the first pretty note I hear. Granted, some have their own axes to grind but they all seem to agree on the basic misconceptions that have been touted by the press, who have their own axes to grind, monetarily speaking.

All the best,
Nonoise
Hey Folks,

I have heard lots of loudness circuits.  I have heard MQA through the Explorer2 and Tidal and Audirvana's  software decoding.

MQA does not sound like an EQ circuit.  I believe it was Robert Harley who said it takes you closer.  That is exactly what I experience on most of the MQA titles I have heard.  The old reviewer line about a veil is lifted is what I usually hear.

I have a subscription and read Herb's Followup review.  I immediately found it odd and still do.  If MQA was doing EQ then all MQA titles would reflect the presence boost. They do not.

As for the Brooklyn,  I am seriously considering buying one.  NO reviewer has mentioned any EQ effect with non MQA material and Herb is the only one that mentioned it at all.  However, two things bother me about the Brooklyn, the circuit appears to use op amps in the output and the DAC chip should be a newer ESS version.  Perhaps it was a long gestation and the newer chips were not ready during development.

Hope y'all have some fun,
Robert
BTW,  there is plenty of content on Tidal.  The problem is you cannot buy most of it for some reason.

Robert