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

Showing 4 responses by tomic601

re the point about FPGA is that it is advertised as somewhat future proof vs implemented in H/ W which is somewhat more difficult to change..

IMO both DCS and Brinkman have been pretty transparent about plans for MQA...Aesthetix not so much. IMO Jim White is brilliant designer who offers an upgrade path - I am holding off on the next level upgrade because I want to know what the plan is...versus silent fence sitting

its all a downhill ride from the origional acoustic event...

seriously lats assume for simplicity the analog master represents what the artist wanted us to hear at that time.

Plangent - the fruits of which I have heard and for most part agree does improve sound - a boon to the hyper pitch sensitive for sure.

so post plangent we still have an A to D converter to deal with....they are not artifact free - this is just factual. My Wadia ( actually both of them ) and Ayre are nite and day different. Why object to cleaning up those artifacts - many temporal - and as I believe MQA requires somebody ( label, producer, artist  ) sign off on those changes..

Diana Krall stops by my house every time I roll tubes in the preamp...


how many of you have one or more A to D converters and have listened to discern the often massive differences between them ? In my live recording work i will almost always take two converters...I would love to learn what Bob is actually doing..but then that is his intellectual property that he developed..
we live in a world where everybody wants everything for free...and yet defend the capitalist as deserving of fair rents at every turn,,,
which is it ?
me, I will pay of better...to my ears it is better

ya everybody has an axe to grind. My DAC manufacturer for whatever reason is silent on the matter..even tho it is FPGA so change should be relatively easy..any of you flat earthers want to buy my Pandora Sig ???? Has some wicked Nos tubes in it...
oh thats right not all the respected believe in tubes..

As for throwing out the many respected are against it list, there are just as many respected in the pro MQA camp including Brinkman and DCs, MSB....

enjoy the music

i hope I have offended none, that was not my intent


another worthless opinion based on selectively reading part of a review...
go back to your finely etched pre ring....

i formed my opinion by actually listening .... not that difficult to do

as for not being able to discern temporal changes, it might help if reviewers and listeners used speakers capable of that - there are few....