Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

What are your thoughts on this? Is DSD even a 'must-have' now? Or are these destined to remain fringe technologies?

 

Personally I'll always choose rich content over ultra-fidelity. I'm a heavy Tidal premium user and they're working on adopting the technology apparently.

Also buying a new front end soon, so decisions, decisions.....

 

 

http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/beyond-high-resolution/

http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2016/01/myteks-brooklyn-dac-adds-the-kitchen-sink-to-mqa-decoding/

 

Posted

I'm not sure where they get the information WRT those graphs of temporal blur but double speed DSD has superior transient response to 192kHz.

Further to this I believe there is actually some 'repair' type of algorithm that compensates for the temporal damage that the ADC (digital recording front end) does.

So the question is what happens when we record at DSD 256 (11MHz) or use a PCM ADC that does not have decimation filters? We can now build a VHQ ADC that works at

384kHz that is not delta sigma, ie; zero oversampling 384kHz. How does MQA know what ADC was used?

Food for thought.

Terry

  • Like 1
Posted

$299 to hear exactly what the mastering engineer heard sounds a bit too good to be true. However, I'll keep an open mind.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Posted
Will MQA make current DACs obsolete soon

 

 

No. If anything the integration of HQ Player and Roon will make MQA redundant. Anyway eg Roon/Tidal will have to unpack it for use with all current dacs. It unpacks to 24/88 or 96. Its just a lossy container, the rest is marketing hype.

  • Like 1
Posted

2015 was a quiet year for MQA, but a major announcement is expected at the up coming CES

 

http://www.whathifi.com/news/ces-2016-news-highlights-new-products-and-more

 

A potential game-changer is MQA. This is a streaming technology launched last year, promising the sound quality of hi-res audio without the massive file sizes.

Whoever can incorporate MQA into their service is onto something huge. And it looks Tidal and MQA could have the hi-res answer. All eyes are on CES for a full reveal.

Then there's the arrival of MQA-ready products such as the Pioneer XDP-100R. MQA, for its part, has told us to expect major announcements.

 

Posted

Interesting times. Who knows what is hype and what is reality. Anything to improve from MP3 is a good thing IMO

Posted

Interesting times. Who knows what is hype and what is reality. Anything to improve from MP3 is a good thing IMO

 

What MQA is able to do is not hype  (whether it is beneficially audible is totally another thing).    It can pack 24bit 176.4khz audio into a redbook audio container (16/44.1) ...   the audio will play as rebook on regular equipment, or as 24/176 with a MQA decoder.

 

 

The irony of your second part is quite amusing to me..... in the original demos of MQA (they may have changed now) they were asking people to compare MP3 128kbps (known to be not audibly transparent vs the encoded audio) with MQA.    :-S

 

 

MQA can also apply filters which attempt to compensate for different recording equipment.

Posted

No.

 

The whole idea of MQA is to not make existing DACs or other devices obsolete   (ie.  MQA is backwards compatible with redbook audio players)

But who wants a DAC that can't decode MQA in three years times if all the new ones can?

Posted

MQA can also apply filters which attempt to compensate for different recording equipment.

That's an interesting proposition. I read that they could undo the "damage" done by some of the early generation ADCs. But many releases would have been mastered taking that into account. I guess this offers the prospect of some interesting re-mastering possibilities

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted (edited)

But who wants a DAC that can't decode MQA in three years times if all the new ones can?

I guess that depends on how widespread the adoption of MQA is? Somewhat like DSD or other high res - not that much exists....

If your DAC sounds great for 99% of you're music, and sounds great for the last 1% (although your missing a bit) - it's probably not a big deal?

Edited by mmv
  • Like 1
Posted

But who wants a DAC that can't decode MQA in three years times if all the new ones can?

 

I guess that depends on how widespread the adoption of MQA is?

 

Because MQA is redbook compatible (a very smart move) .... then it doesn't matter how widespread it's adoption is..... only what advantages it offers.

 

If MQA offers little advantage (over the redbook audio) ... then who cares if you can decode it or not ?!

Posted

If MQA offers little advantage (over the redbook audio) ... then who cares if you can decode it or not ?!

 

Replace MQA with DSD...:P

Posted

I assume the streamer (e.g. bluesound) - would translate the mqa before sending to the DAC? Or would we need a DAC that supports it/a box between the streamer and dac?

Posted

Yep, auralic have a similar explanation that their streamer will decode/unpack/unfold the higher quality stream and send it through PCM to whatever DAC you have

  • Like 1
Posted

24/192 tracks are huge files, DSD file sizes are ridiculous. If that quality can be squished into files the size of 16/44 without loss that is extremely appealing. Especially given Australians are unlikely to have decent internet speed for for the foreseeable future.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 4

Posted

MQA is a very clever encoding strategy.

 

It will almost certainly eclipse DSD in terms of sound quality and market penetration in years ahead for a number of reasons:

 

  • most punters will find it sounds better
  • it will be much more convenient to download and store
  • it has cross compatibility with the CD standard
  • it ill more easily penetrate the professional recording industry

 expect MQA to become a standard in coming decades.

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)

24/192 tracks are huge files, DSD file sizes are ridiculous. If that quality can be squished into files the size of 16/44 without loss that is extremely appealing. Especially given Australians are unlikely to have decent internet speed for for the foreseeable future.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MQA CANNOT challenge DSD64 much less DSD256...all other things being equal, such as music mastering.

 

I heard a demo of MQA and was decidedly underwhelmed. it think its more of a streaming play. Nothing close to DSD128. Methinks most here have never heard DSD done right.

 

Plus, you dont need MQA in the Dac, you can have it in a streamer like the Aries feeding any Dac.

Edited by wis97non
  • Like 1
Posted

MQA is a very clever encoding strategy.

 

It will almost certainly eclipse DSD in terms of sound quality and market penetration in years ahead for a number of reasons:

 

  • most punters will find it sounds better
  • it will be much more convenient to download and store
  • it has cross compatibility with the CD standard
  • it ill more easily penetrate the professional recording industry

 expect MQA to become a standard in coming decades.

You are joking, right?

 

ROTFLMAO.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...
To Top