How many of you believe in MQA?

I am enjoying the MQA playback through Tidal myself . 

Brian, your post is music to my eyes :-)

What MQA promotes as "restoring" the impulse response, is not much more than forcing a minimum phase filter on the DAC, which creates a potentially "nice" looking step response .... at least nice to those that are unaware of what a step-response should look like in digital system.  To your point, the distortions that creates may float some boats, which is totally okay, but a DAC with a switchable filter response also can do that, no licensing fee required.

I thought the "master authenticated" would have brought more quality recordings to the forefront, but personally have not noticed any significant difference.


brianlucey67 posts09-20-2019 12:09pm... .  If it “sounds better” to you that’s fine.  But that’s because the subtle harmonic distortions of the codec float your subjective boat. A cable or speaker alter sound subjectively and so does MQA.  To me however, it’s ruining my work, the client approved work.  It’s a travesty built on greed and lies.  ...

...Most audiophiles have playback rooms rooms that are by far the weakest link in their chain.  By far.

@brianlucey


+1 thanks for that great explanation as it’s what I’ve thought was the case thru my research

not sure why anyone would want to pay (licensing fees) a proprietary format that turns a lossless file into a lossy one so that only “special” hardware can decode it. 
Money grab pure and simple. 

@Brianlucey @bkepke and @iopscprl  I agree with you three the most of this forum's posters.  I've heard MQA at audio shows and cannot remember the equipment.  Overall, I wasn't impressed.  The rooms had a spacious, wide sound but nothing wanted me to opt for that sound.   When the differences are marginally better, I'll stick to the easier to use technologies such as the CD (ha ha my LPs and 78s are not easier to use but I have 32,000 of them).   I have a SOTA listening room which is a good place to begin serious listening.  I thought the ayon/lumenwhite room using my LPs and CDs sounded great, second best sound at the LA audio show for two years running in 2016 and 2017.    

Hi @Gregm,
I meant that in theory, humans should not be able to hear better than 44/16.

@erik_squires 

192 is not inherently superior to 96 is not superior to 44.1. This is a marketing myth....

Mathematically, this is correct,

How so?
One has 24 bit word length, the other 16; one goes up to 192kHz, or 96kHz  (i.e. 2-4 octaves higher) whereas the redbook up to 44.1kHz. They cannot be mathematically identical; you are thinking of something else, no?

PS - Before anyone says it's my hearing, I had an old DAC and a new DAC at the same time and was able to compare side by side.

192 is not inherently superior to 96 is not superior to 44.1. This is a marketing myth. AD or DA is clock, chip, analog parts and filter.  Sample rate is not the primary factor in quality.  And engineers adjust each session for the subjectively best result given the audio chain.

Mathematically, this is correct, but from a practical perspective, for a very very long time, DACs just performed better at higher resolutions.


Fortunately in the last 15 years DAC's have improved a great deal in how well they play Redbook. My suspicion, with little to support it, is that cheap clocks got really good and/or really cheap, which has brought up the capabilities of most DAC's.


Number of DACs before which would absolutely show a sonic difference with different sample rates. Far behind us now.
So, no argument from me anymore. :) I've not really sought out Hi Rez files in a very long time.

Best,

E

While the analog outs of the Vault 2i / Node 2i sound really good playing a Tidal Master , I think my DAC sounds better with the 24/96k output from my Vault.   It's not subtle    

Larry there is a field under Settings on BluOS App, that refers to MQA External DAC. It took me a while to find access to it. I think you need to engage it if you have an external Dac that does MQA. I don’t have an external MQA Dac, so I don’t have it on. You can look on the Bluesound Forum for questions on the Node 2i, it’s very informative. Hope this helps. 

I have no experience with Bel Canto, but I can say I use my Node with an Ayre Codex. The difference between the onboard DAC and the Ayre is significant. And, considering the price, the Codex is a steal. If you are patient, you can score a used on for under $1500.

You say you traded your old speakers in. So, what are you using now?

If you are finding the onboard Bluesound DAC sounds better, then I think you might want to make sure all connections are correct. 
If I recall correctly the DAC in the Node was 'warm', but when connected to the Ayre, became much 'cleaner' and 'livelier'. Also, I would try playing either CD or higher rez material first-rather than MQA, in order to get an idea of what the DAC is doing. (And, remember, some recordings are just plain lousy recorded, even a high rez or MQA iteration won't help it).

Lastly, the AQ cables are great cables. Trust me.

Bob

Cycles2,

I wonder if you are familiar with the Bel Canto eOne streamer.  A Bel Canto dealer told me the Bluesound is an applance and the Bel Canto an audiophile piece.  For triple the price, could I have heard a significant difference.

At the dealer where I purchased my Bluesound Node 2i, he told me to connect the Bluesound using Audioquest Carbon digital coax to a Pro-Ject S2 DAC because the Pro-Ject DAC is better than the DAC inside the Bluesound.  I traded my 40 year old speakers for the cable and the DAC and after I got things connected at home, I think the Bluesound played by itself sound better and warmer when playing an MQA song on TIDAL.  If I decide to throw away the cable and the DAC I am out about $600 total.

What would you do in my position.  I just purchased a pair of S3 Rel subs and my budget is just so much.

Good mqa sounds fantastic, I don’t need an engineer to tell me this. I’ll bet the same people that put down mqa put down SACD, dsd, and hires too. Each of these formats when done right all sounded much better than redbook, not a subtle improvement either. 
But you also need quality equipment to hear the difference. This goes with cable comparisons, cartridge comparisons, and everything else.

This goes with most anything in audio. Say you want to evaluate a $500  cartridge and a $15,000 cartridge on a $500 music hall turntable. Do you really think your going to hear a big difference? Or, perform this same test using a $200 phono preamp. The best sound you are going to get is what the $200 phono preamp will get you or what the music hall turntable can provide.
The best sound you receive will be as good as your weakest link will provide.

@Larry
I don't think it's fair to judge the sound quality of MQA based on a BlueSound Node 2.  No offense but the old saying 'you get what you pay for' is in effect here. 

I can tell you that me and many friends who have listened to MQA on my dCS Rossini agree that the sound quality of MQA tracks using TIDAL sound noticeably better than the same TIDAL tracks in Redbook format.  Even on my 2nd system where I use a NAD M10 integrated streamer/DAC/amp, the MQA tracks sound better.  FWIW, both the dCS Rossini and NAD M10 perform full MQA decoding. 

The MQA naysayers will point to the fact that MQA is a lossy format.  I think the same could be said for most digital formats. The best way to judge is to let your ears tell you what you prefer. But it's got to be on a decent DAC or streamer so it's a fair fight.

Hi Larry,

From a digits point of view, nothing wrong with that.  MQA is just FLAC with additional data hidden in the stream.

The issue of getting MQA all the way out has to do with licensing and design choices, not always sure which.

If your streamer gets MQA and unfolds it, it will destroy the MQA envelope in the process. The DAC won't receive MQA stream, just normal high resolution.

The trick is to get your streamer to request MQA but leave it alone for the DAC to completely unfold.

No one has explained why connecting a Bluesound (MQA certified device) to a Pro-Ject S2 (also MQA certified device) by way of digital coax cable destroys the full unfolding of MQA when both devices are MQA certified.  

By adding a Pro-Ject S2 DAC to my Bluesound Node 2i, what will I loose in sound quality by breaking up the MQA chain?  Does the external DAC filter frequencies out or does it add frequencies to enhance tighter bass and more detailed highs?

Why do songs sound bassier by using the Bluesound only?

Maybe I need lessons in learning what to listen for in order to determine which is better.  Would the Bel Canto eOne streamer played by itself by way of RCA connection sounded better than the Bluesound for triple the price?  It is difficult to compare when dealers do not carry both Bluesound and Bel Canto to compare.  If I had been the Bel Canto dealer in town, I would have run out and purchased a Bluesound Node 2i to allow customers to hear the difference if I knew the Bel Canto would win hands down.  This would have made it easier for me to have made my decision.

The industry wants to push consumers to a subscription model, and wants to ensure that consumers can not copy streaming content. Pay to play. It is always about the money, never about the consumer. MQA creates additional revenue streams because of licensing rights and may encourage additional hardware purchases to ensure compatibility with MQA content. The primary motivation for MQA is DRM, claims of sonic improvement are secondary, but used to sell the concept.

 The real problem is that MQA may represent a marginal at best sonic difference vs non MQA content. Marginal is not enough to convince enough consumers to open their wallets and invest (new hardware, new MQA media) in a new technology. Consumers only respond to paradigm shifts, not incremental change.  

 78 to LP

Mono to Stereo

Tube to Transistor

LP to Cassette

LP to CD. CD was deemed good enough, and attempts to "improve" it only succeeded at the margins. The masses never embraced SACD/DVD-A.

 In other areas: B&W to Color

VHS to DVD

Tube TV to Flat Screen.

 Film to Digital Photos

 But 3D largely failed, curved screens are difficult to find, and 4K is expensive marketing hype.

 Most consumers could care less about Quad, 8 Track, El Cassette, 3D TV, Curved Screens,

DVD -A, SACD, CD-HD and so on.

Guess which category applies to MQA ?   MQA started with hype and a large bandwagon. As pushback developed, and consumers failed to respond, several adopters quietly or abruptly dropped support. Others who were “considering” adoption have stopped issuing progress updates.  

 If you can hear a positive difference, great. But is the quality of the difference worth your investment of time and money ? 

Is ‘believing’ in MQA anything like ‘believing’ in God? Asking for a friend.

I don't know about over or under rated but MQA sounds good on my equipment.

Larry
Bel Canto wasn't there. I said it was 2018 where I had them do the MQA vs. non-MQA demo. See 1st line of my 2nd paragraph.

Here is a high praise review for the e.One Stream at HiFi News:
https://www.hifinews.com/content/bel-canto-eone-stream-network-bridgedac

bkepke,

I did not realize there was a Bel Canto room at the 2019 RMAF?  I looked for them in the directory and was unable to see them listed as an exhibitor.  I really wanted to meet with them.  I wonder if you were referring to the 2018 show?

I wanted to go with the Bel Canto eOne streamer, but triple the price of a Bluesound was a budgetary concern.  I had just purchased a pair of REL S3 SHO's and adding another $1,600 would have really upset my wife.  I wonder how many of us have a wife factor to contend with?

Thanks. Good point Bob. Why didn’t I think of that? 😊 Likely because I was so gobsmacked by the sound quality that I was removed from the analytic plane. 😇 I will ask that at next MQA demo. Certainly once MQA has the 1st gen. master, they could easily make simple FLAC files at CD or hi-res resolutions to compare with the MQA file. 

@bkepke,
Nice first post and welcome to Audiogon!
Also, nice system.

I asked Ken Forsythe of MQA if he could compare an MQA and non-MQA file for me. He gave what I thought was a valid answer: He couldn't do this because he could not guarantee that the non-MQA file came from the same master as the MQA file

Though it sounds reasonable, I have some reservations.
If MQA is superior, why not have comparative MQA and non-MQA tracks available for comparison?
Second, is asking this question to someone from MQA is kind of like that Robert Klein skit on Hair Club for Men:
'I wouldn't lie to you for a very good reason- I am President of the company'.
'WHAT POSSIBLE MOTIVE COULD I HAVE'?


Bob

I don't want to join either side of the MQA argument yet, as I haven't had enough exposure to it, especially as I've had none in my reference system (Avalon Eidolon, Spectral DMA 250, Bel Canto DAC3.5VB MK II, Bel Canto REFStream, Bel Canto Phono 3, Thorens TD 2015, SME 309, Ortofon MM Bronze [soon to be replaced by Lyra Kleos], Niagara 5000, mostly MIT cables w/some Audioquest & Straight Wire).
Larry5729As you can see from my system above, I highly recommend Bel Canto. While I haven't heard the e.One Stream, based on past experience with many Bel Canto products, I have found them to be very detailed as well as highly musical and emotionally communicative. The e.One stream should also sound that way, but you should of course try it out in your system to make sure it is your cup of tea.

Regarding MQA, I will tell you my 2 experiences. At RMAF 2018, I compared in the Bel Canto room the MQA version vs. the non-MQA file of a track from Steel Dan's Gaucho album. The MQA file sounded different, but not better. At RMAF 2019, I went to the MQA demo in the B&W/Simaudio room. I had visited the room the day before and only spent 5 minutes there because the system did not impress me, despite the top of the line equipment. I asked Ken Forsythe of MQA if he could compare an MQA and non-MQA file for me. He gave what I thought was a valid answer: He couldn't do this because he could not guarantee that the non-MQA file came from the same master as the MQA file. This makes sense. For example a recording whose source was a 1st generation analog tape would sound different from one whose source was an nth generation copy of a digital safety recording from the same recording session. MQA has their recording company partners (or the artist, recording engineer or producer of the recording) certify that their file comes from the earliest generation master in existence and that if there were time domain & other errors in the equipment that made the recording, that these errors have been corrected in the MQA process (what MQA calls de-blurring is part of this process).

He then put on a Sinatra plus big band (don't remember the track or album) track from a 1st generation analog master. It was a revelatory experience, a real epiphany for me. The sound system completely disappeared and there was just very live sounding music playing before me. He then played a track from the Ella & Louis album: same result. I own this album in a superb Analogue Productions 45 RPM 2-LP set and the MQA file was at least the equal of it, as I have heard on my equipment. What was most extraordinary is that this was happening on a system that I didn't much care for the day before. Will all MQA files sound this good? While it doesn't seem likely, I won't know without trying many of them in my own system.

I haven't made up my mind about buying a DAC that can fully unfold MQA because as others have said here, the DAC whose sound you love best in your system may not have MQA capability. I am leaning towards the Ayon CD 35 (CD/SACD player/DAC/preamp/server & streamer in one box), which doesn't have MQA, because it was part of the Ayon/Lumenwhite room at RMAF 2017 & 2018 that I though had the best sound of the entire show. The sound in that room was also revelatory for me and in all the tracks played, including the 16/44 FLAC file of the same Ella & Louis album. So as many have said above, there is more than one way to get your musical thrills.

Why would Pro-Ject bother to manufacture their DAC MQA certified if it breaks the MQA unfolding chain?  To get MQA in the first place, you need to stream music through some sort of music streamer that is MQA certified?  What the dealer told me again does not make sense?  Hope someone can come up with the right information.  If connecting the Bluesound to the Pro-Ject DAC breaks the MQA chain then my did Pro-Ject bother to manufacture their DAC MQA in the first place?

Here are the specs for the Pro-Ject:

Features

• Dual mono construction
• High end ESS Sabre ESS9038 dual DAC
• Proprietary clock circuity design
• Organic polymer capacitors and thin film miniMELF resistors
• MQA hardware decoding
• DSD64, DSD128, DSD256 & DSD512 (DoP, DSD512 native)
• Up to 24bit/192kHz for optical & coax inputs
• 8 selectable digital filter characteristics
• 1 proprietary optimum transient digital filter
• Headphone output on the front (6.3mm)
• Synchronization of all internal oscillators
• Jitter as low as 100 Femtoseconds!
• Gold plated four layer PCB
• Full alu/metal sandwich casing in silver or black

Hi Audio Jedi,

I thought MQA played through a non certified MQA DAC defaults to 24/88.2 max vs the 24/96 you posted?

I have been thinking since the Bluesound is MQA certified and the Pro-Ject S2 DAC is MQA certified, why would the dealer I purchased the Pro-Ject DAC tell me by connecting the Bluesound by way of digital coax to the Pro-Ject DAC which is also MQA certified why I will not be able to realize the complete unfold of MQA since I am transferring electronic data from one device to another.  This does not seem intuitive, unless the dealer is wrong about this statement.  If the dealer is correct, why then didn't the manufacturer of the Project design their DAC with an RCA in and an RCA out.  It must have something to do with with the digital coax cable bridging the two devices?

When I attached the DAC to the Bluesound it delivered more treble and I was not sure I liked the sound.  However, I began to think maybe the increased detail in the highs is what is in the recording and this is the first time I have heard my tweeters deliver greater detail in both the highs and mid voicing.  I began to notice the shimmer sound of the cymbals for the first time.  When switching back between playing the Bluesound analogue out to my ARCAM, I also noticed the Bluesound sounds more bassy and more boomy.  When playing the DAC has a much tighter BASS.  Since I added two REL S3 SHO subs to my system, I have plenty of bass to work with.  Perhaps recalibrate the gain to achieve slightly more bass if needed.

Hope you guys can let me is the dealer correct or is my thinking correct, as I had hoped to hear the MQA offered by TIDAL.

Do you have a Bluesound?  If you do, did you connect it digital coax to an external DAC to your amplifier or receiver?

The Bluesound can play up to 32 bit just like my DAC.  i have switched the RCA's back and forth between the Bluesound and the Pro-Ject S2 DAC and I think the bass sounds tighter and the highs more detailed than the Bluesound DAC.  However, when I select an album from Tidal that is MQA recorded at 24/192, the maximum bit and sample rate I will hear is 24/88.2.  I still might go back to using just the Bluesound and hear this supposedly superior quality MQA sound.  I it difficult to know by using the DAC I am only able to hear up to 24/88.2.  However, I just can't hear the difference playing MQA.  I think most hi res music must be released in 24/96 and 24/192 is kind of rare.  

Amazon's roll out of their Amazon Music Unlimited HD prompted me to try the DAC because they offer Ultra HD up to 24/192 and they don't offer MQA.  So, if I stream a Ultra HD song at 24/192, it won't matter because I will get the full benefit of 24/192.  If this is the case, Based on this, I should have purchased an ARCAM R-Play streamer and connected that anaologue.  The frequency response plays down to 29 Hz and I wouldn't have had to add a DAC.

I agree with the dealer, MQA is overrated.

Brian,

I really appreciate your insight since you are a music master engineer.

How are most recordings made.  Are they recorded in 32 bit 192 kHz to begin with and then the recording studio copies 24 bit/192 kHz or 24 bit/96 kHz to a DVD or disk that can fit the greater amount of data and copy to a lower 16 bit/44.1 kHz to fit on a standard CD.  What then does MQA do that is different if it offers an original recording let's say in 24/96?  Isn't this going to sound exactly the same as any CD you pick off the shelf of the same recording done in 24/96 and pay more for the high res recording compared to the same recording sell on the shelf that is 16/44.1?  Is this what you are trying to say?

As a rookie starting out in this hobby I am beginning to begin to understand bit rates and sample rates.  I am also having problem hearing the difference between 16 bit and 24 bit recordings.  Maybe I am deaf.  The only thing I think I am hearing when hearing 24 bit is a bit more space and dimension.  However, maybe this is similar to THE EMPORER'S NEW CLOTHS phenomenon.  

I just connected a Pro-Ject S2 DAC to my Bluesound Node 2i after Amazon launched Amazon Music Unlimited HD.  I felt maybe the DAC is better than the DAC inside the DAC inside the Bluesound.  So far, I think it might sound more harsh after adding the Pro-Ject DAC.  Wonder if the Pro-Ject DAC emphasizes highs and the Bluesound is more neutral or is it I am hearing more detail compared to the Bluesound DAC and the DAC inside my ARCAM?  I called ARCAM and they told me the DAC inside the Bluesound was better than the DAC chip they put inside my ARCAM?  He said it can process more and since it has more processors, resistors, etc. than what they can fit inside the ARCAM, it should sound better.  My thinking was then maybe the stand alone Pro-Ject DAC, which has even more things inside than perhaps the Bluesound, maybe this will sound better than the DAC inside the Bluesound.

Several dealers and manufacturers at the RMAF told me what I am listening to remember everything I am hearing is the DAC.

Not too confusing!  I wonder what you would do if you were in my shoes.  Would you just connect the Bluesound via RCA analogue to my ARCAM or would you have connected the Bluesound via digital coax to a DAC like an affordable Pro-Ject S2 DAC and connect the DAC via RCA analogue to my ARCAM.  What in your opinion sounds better.  From what I can determine is if you want to hear MQA and in a completely unfolded format, you need to just hook up the Bluesound RCA's to the ARCAM.  I have a TIDAL subscription and I wanted to take advantage of the MQA technology.  However, dealers told me to forget MQA and either add a DAC to the mix that is better than the DAC inside the Bluesound and hear 1 unfold at 24/88.2 or take out a subscription to Qobuz and be able to take advantage of some of their recordings offered in 24/96 and 24/192.

I do think MQA could be just smoke and mirrors and a way to generate a lot of revenue from multiple sources by inventing a way to fold data and then in order to completely unfold it during the streaming process, you need to purchase expensive equipment.  

I will look forward to hearing some responses to this post. I must say, I am embarrassed to ask what might be stupid questions.

Sorry for the long post.  I just need to learn what some of you experts have learned already.  Some of you are highly technical and I really am fascinated by your knowledge.

@Brianlucey, Thank You for your response!  Very informative and helpful 👍

The narcissism in many listeners here is disappointing

I’m a full time, credential, music Mastering Engineer.  MQA is an intrusion on artist approved work to make ex Meridan DVD staff money and it’s running a 50 million GBP debt per the last public filing I read.

It’s not a lossless process.  It’s not an upgrade as there is no upgrade over the sample rate of any mastering session.  If it “sounds better” to you that’s fine.  But that’s because the subtle harmonic distortions of the codec float your subjective boat. A cable or speaker alter sound subjectively and so does MQA.  To me however, it’s ruining my work, the client approved work.  It’s a travesty built on greed and lies. 

Background concepts : 

192 is not inherently superior to 96 is not superior to 44.1. This is a marketing myth. AD or DA is clock, chip, analog parts and filter.  Sample rate is not the primary factor in quality.  And engineers adjust each session for the subjectively best result given the audio chain. 

MQA at a base rate of 44.1 or 48 is also not superior to the source rate if in fact it was above those rates.  It’s not possible to upgrade mastered PCM.  Anything that alters is going backwards. Else we would have done it in mastering. Modern PCM DA can be amazing.  I use Bricasti M1 SE.  with many other great options out there to suit your taste. 

MQA is CERTAINLY NOT mastering engineer authenticated, their calling card is a sham, as they are bulk processing back catalogues to create a market.  That should be all you need to know if you’re a person of principle. 

It’s bad form all around.  Get the native sample rate file of the mastering session and focus on your room. 

Most audiophiles have playback rooms rooms that are by far the weakest link in their chain.  By far. 

MQA shows u more holography and more of the room in which the recording took place. All the technical bla bla bla does not matter to me, what matters is what I hear!

Larry5729,

“I thought the Bluesound connected RCA (analogue) to my ARCAM sounded really good. I think it might have sounded less harsh”

... this is because you prefer the dac in the bluesound over the dac in the pro-ject.

Have you even read anyones response on this thread that you started?

My experience with MQA was through a PS Audio DirectStream Jr and was entirely positive. Some tracks I am very familiar with over decades sounded better than I had ever heard them, and I noticed the improvement without knowing they were MQA tracks and actually I didn't even know what MQA was at that point. I just noticed they sounded amazing with my (then) new Tidal subscription and started digging further to figure out why.

What I can tell you after thoroughly educating myself about MQA and digital audio in general is that nearly everything I see people write online is wrong. Most people have no concept of time resolution at all and harp on and on about frequency response, which is basically a non-issue in modern audio (modern including the last several decades) and something the human ear is far less sensitive to than time. You can take all the measurements you want but that doesn't tell you how the human ear perceives sound, just like anyone can show you a 1985 CD player measures better in every way than a record player, but lots of people think it sounds a lot worse. Alas, this MQA thing has gotten totally out of hand and people spew so much vitriol that it's become the right wing versus left wing argument of the audio world. Everyone could do well to take a deep breath and actually learn a little about what Bob Stuart has done for audio reproduction over the past 30 years before slandering everything involving the letters M, Q, and A.

That said, the simple answer to your question is you just have to listen to it. Audio is like food - there is no best and no one can tell you if what they like better is something you will like better. Try just using the BlueSound as a DAC for MQA and compare the same tracks with non-MQA versions. If you like MQA better, great, go for it. If not, don't. I'm not going to tell you vanilla ice cream is horrible and a scam because I like chocolate better. I wish people could see different file formats that way and stop telling everyone else what's good for them.

I added a Pro-Ject S2 DAC to my Bluesound Node 2i yesterday and I am not sure I like the new sound.  I seems to sound brighter and produces more bass.  I think the bass is more punchy and the highs are brighter.  To me, it sounds harsher, unless I am hearing some of the detail I have not been hearing for the past 3 1/2 years.  I thought the Bluesound connected RCA (analogue) to my ARCAM sounded really good.  I think it might have sounded less harsh.

According to the Pro-Ject specifications, it says it can do MQA.  So, if that is the case, why did the dealer tell me when I connect the Bluesound digital coax to the Pro-Ject DAC and then RCA's to the back of my ARCAM I will not be hearing the complete unfold of MQA.  If that is the case, I will then hear one unfold and the highest resolution I will hear then will be 24 bit/88.2 kHz.  Why if the Pro-Ject is rated as MQA certified wouldn't MQA be passed through completely unfolded to my ARCAM.  This sure is confusing for someone like myself who is new to this hobby.  Maybe someone could explain this to me so I can understand.  So far, no one has been able to do so.

With Amazon Music Unlimited HD launching 2 days ago, I thought I would try adding a DAC so I could hear more songs 24/192, as it appears they offer more 24 bit albums than what TIDAL is offering.  For example, a Herbie Hancock album offered by TIDAL offers this album in CD quality (16/44.1) and the same album offered by Amazon Music is in 24/192.  If this is the case, why then be concerned with MQA?  What is the difference between listening to a FLAC recording done in 24/192 and the same recording done in MQA 24/192?  What would MQA do to that same recording to make it sound different?

Teac nt-505 can be controlled by LUMIN app (recommended). That app is pretty good

Just a bit of clarification.  Larry, your Node 2i outputs Tidal/MQA by analog RCA, with the quality limitations discussed above, and by SPDIF Coaxial, but very few DACs decode MQA signals coming in that way.  The Mytek Liberty and Brooklyn DACs do, but the Pro-Ject PreBox S2 Digital does not...its MQA decoding is limited to the USB input.  With this item you do have to use a computer to stream your music...not an app on your tablet or smartphone.  But for that I'd have bought one of these myself! 
On the OP's main question, using my Tidal account and Node 2i, I find some Master files sound distictly better than regular CD quality files on Tidal...enough so to justify having the option, IMO, but some do not and in fact sound worse.  I suspect this has all to do with the integrity of the source file and less to do with the MQA process.
On balance, a desireable option, not a panacea.

I am currently looking into the Teac NT-505 as a better solution, but I am wary of the app used to control it.  I like Roon, but that's another expense.  As a Prime member I want to know if the NT-505 will be able to stream from Amazon Music.  Anyone know?

The Node 2i supposedly sounds quite a bit better than the original Node 2.

Larry, did you connect the Bluesound to your system yourself?

The bluesound node is a dac / streamer...  what were you using previously as your dac and have you a/b compared the two dacs (node / previously used dac).

Do you know how to a/b compare the two dacs?  If not, maybe we could help.  What is lacking in the bluesound dac?  What is lacking in the streamer?  

Its really odd that you bought a new streamer / dac and then right away ask about what kind of dac and streamer you should connect to your new dac and streamer...?

Again, when you were sold the Bluesound, what did he say it was?

Larry,

The DAC in the Bluesound is really good.  Try it first and see how you like it.  The Bluesound has everything you need to control it remotely, you just need to download an app for whatever device (phone, tablet, PC, laptop, iPad, etc.) you prefer to use.

I have both of my Node 2's connected to external DACs and there is an improvement in sound quality, but it's not a dramatic one.  In my main system I am using an Auralic Vega DAC.  In my bedroom system, I'm using a Mytek Liberty DAC.  The Vega doesn't do MQA and that doesn't matter to me.  The Liberty does do MQA and it sounds nice, but it's not as "natural" sounding as the Vega.  The Liberty retails for $1K and the Vega when it was new retailed for $3,500.  I think both improve the sound quality of the Node 2, but it's not as dramatic of an improvement as you might get with room treatment, better speakers, a preamp upgrade, etc.

I have no experience with the Bel Canto unit you mentioned, so won't comment.

My advice is to listen to the Node 2 for a while and see how you like it.  If you're happy with it, you're all set.  If you'd like to hear better sound quality, consider the MHDT Orchid DAC.  It's well under your budget and will bring a more "analog" like sound to your system and will retrieve more detail than the Bluesound's DAC.  It won't do MQA, but I doubt you'll care. 

I don't have a recommendation for a DAC that will do MQA, the Liberty is the only one I've tried and I think there are better sounding DACs even if they don't do MQA.

Big Greg,

I was talking about improving the sound quality of the DAC inside the Bluesound and being able to control TiDAl remotely by use of my iPhone and PC notebook.  Eventually, I will add a DAC in the $1,500 to $2,000 range to unveil more of what is there in MQA recordings.  I also am not hung up on MQA.  All I care about is being able to hear more detail and to play more 24 bit hi res recordings.

Again, everyone has really helped me to understand what I can do.  Still wonder if anyone owns the Bel Canto eOne stream?  Does this piece, costing triple the price of a Bluesound really sound better than the base sound of both units being connected RCA analogue?  So far, I think adding a Chord DAC to the equation might be a good move down the road should I decide to give up on MQA.  The jury is out on MQA anyway, as there are a lot of us who resent someone developing a format to take revenues from multiple sources.  If MQA becomes the norm, this guy is going to be rich, if he isn't already.

David,

Sorry for the confusion about the number of Albums Vincent Ingala has put out.  You are correct, it is 5 albums.  I had him confused with Herbie Hancock.

By the way, I was at the RMAF two weeks ago and I asked several exhibitors to play Vincent Ingala's song Nasty on his Coast to Coast song and before I knew it exhibitors were playing it by other exhibitors.  This is an incredible demo song.  I also had them play Herbie Hancock's song Watermelon Man on his Head Hunters album.  That too was played by a lot of exhibitors.  Great demo song for bass and separation.  Really shows off speakers.  I play these two songs when I want to hear what my system can do.  Sure glad I added a pair of REL S3 SHO's to my system.  Still dialing them in to make them seamless.

what i I was asking is what DAC’s are out that could be hooked up to the Bluesound that can totally unfold MQA and be controlled remotely by iPhone,iPad and PC Notebook without having to get out of a chair to change to another album?

You already have all of these things in the Node 2i.  There's nothing to "control" in a DAC, at least not in regards to your music selections, unless it is also a streamer (like the Node 2i). 

I have one of my Node 2's connected to my Auralic Vega DAC.  I control music selections with the Bluesound app on my phone or tablet.  You can also install an app on your laptop. 

I can change inputs and a few other things on my DAC with the remote, but it has nothing to do with music selections.  

Download the Bluesound app to your phone, tablet, and/or laptop, let it "find" the device on your network, and then you'll be able to use most of the major streaming services from your recliner as well as stream any music files you have available on your network.

This stuff isn't rocket surgery.  A little time spent reading the manual will go a long way.  There's also a lot of really simple and easy to read information on Bluesound's site and they also have forums.

what i I was asking is what DAC’s are out that could be hooked up to the Bluesound that can totally unfold MQA and be controlled remotely by iPhone,iPad and PC Notebook without having to get out of a chair to change to another album?

Hi Larry. My advice is to learn all you can about the chain:

--- from how and where your Internet Service Provided (Provider) signal first enters your home all the way through to a (generic) DAC ---

You need to understand the fundamentals first.

I also recommend ceasing your MQA perseveration until all of the 100 level courses are passed.

The answer to your two questions are:

Many. [Look them up]

And,

All. [via the Bluesound (Output/Input matched)]

+1 @b_limo   

If you didn’t know that the Bluesound Node 2i is a network streamer / dac, what did you think it was?  

There are not 20 albums with Vincent Ingala on Tidal - there are only 5 in my view.

I don't know the artist so I pulled him up on Tidal/Qobuz. As you say there are 5 main albums listed, which is correct.

I checked online and HE HAS FIVE (5) albums released and credited to him. Where are his missing 15 albums???

If he has collaborations they may be listed under the primary artist, but even his Facebook Page shows very limited collaborations.

A preponderance of confusion in this thread. : )