2. music
  3. 166045-37235

MQA actually tested

I got a Tidal subscription a few months ago with the hope of streaming hi res music rather than continuing to buy WAAYY overpriced files from HD tracks and the like....and while the Tidal catalogue is great, some of the Master files just seemed a bit, well, not so masterful. So I decided to listen to Master files in Tidal (full unfold) and compare them to 24/96 min FLAC that I already own, and there wasn’t a single file I owned that did not sound better in clarity and extension than the “Master” file I was comparing it to on Tidal.

I had heard a lot of thoughts from different manufacturers about MQA and just put them down as interesting but not proven since none of them offered anything but their opinion...no testing etc.

then I came across this vid (. https://youtu.be/pRjsu9-Vznc ) last night from a guy who managed to actually test MQA on Tidal using files he created and had loaded onto Tidal. VERY interesting results. First real tests I have seen of MQA and I can now see why my FLAC sounds better to me.
Might have to check out alternatives.

ukthunderace
jjss49's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
jjss49
6,601 posts
 
mqa can sound very good

it is just inconsistent and variable in a way the user cannot really control, not to say some recordings based on great master versions aren’t excellent

same deal for non mqa recordings... recording/mastering quality is the dominant driver of sound quality

thing with mqa is it makes the user do somersaults and spend $ on gear that may not be otherwise necessary, adds a layer of complexity cost and worry that doesn’t really consistently deliver the goods as the marketing would lead you to believe and desire

thus my advice/conclusion from having been through it is to make your digital front end sound great without mqa (basically targeted at redbook res and/or quboz hi res flac) -- these standards encompass most recordings out there that one would care about
dletch2
455 posts
 
If Tidal goes under, does MQA go with it?
larry5729's avatar
larry5729
1,000 posts
 
I like Tidal and their extensive library.  When I purchased my BlueSound Node 2i the dealer talked me into adding a ProJect S2 DAC.  After hooking things up at home I noticed the bass sounded thinner.  As soon as I removed the DAC the bass came back.  I thought I also liked the sound of total MQA unfold.  However, I also wondered if I wasn’t convincing myself MQA was better.  I did appreciate the detail of hi-res quality sound regardless you.  Tidal doesn’t offer that many MQA recording but I do like Hi-Res.  Still like Tidal and their library and format.  I am sure MQA is gimmick.  But you can’t argue with the quality of hi-res.
sgreg1
612 posts
 
Having not watched the vid I would like to know the delivery chain. I run quobuz hi res from MacBook Pro into balanced dac out to balanced pre into mono blocks balanced in. First was using WiFi for stream sound was great with big sound stage. Then I switched to Ethernet cat 7 and up graded usb cable. Soundstage opened up more and bass was night to day. I next want to add fiber in the signal path. Is Mqa more snake oil or real thing? I have learned just like a fish fry 9 out of 10 that say it is better never seems better to me but when I do find better I can think back on the journey and appreciate the end result. Play around with the options and enjoy when you strike gold.
surfmuz
374 posts
 
MQA is just another codec... let it be, disregard their own claims how good they are from tech point of view and just decide for yourself based on your own listening experience. For me (Tidal Masters through Teac NT-505) it sounds fine, better than CD quality. Qobuz high res is just a little bit better of both however Tidal’s selection is wider what’s makes it equal member of sources community.
More to discover