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

Showing 4 responses by ukthunderace

ukthunderace OP
24 posts
 
Yep, I noticed on bass extension as well...def less forceful.  
ukthunderace OP
24 posts
 
For the "beginner"?  Approach with caution.  It is tough in the day and age of COVID if you are in a location where you might not be able to listen to equipment or specific music before laying your money down.  Measurements do matter when they translate to clear distinctions in music quality...that's where it all goes sideways--people swear to clear distinctions for all kinds of stuff.  So basically, don't buy into the hype...listen and buy what you like.  If you hear something you like better, sell what you have an buy the new thing if it is worth the difference.  In the case of the vid I referenced in the start of this thread, the measurements were more of a verification of what I was hearing when comparing FLAC vs MQA.
ukthunderace OP
24 posts
 
I agree that the Tidal catalogue is really good and I really haven't looked into Qobuz, so I am not sure what they offer.  Is Qobuz Hi-Res 24/96 and above?  

The cost for Tidal MQA is $20 a month--is Qobuz Hi-Res cheaper?  I guess that's where it makes a difference. If Qobuz is serving lossless hi-res files for less than Tidal, then if catalogues were equal, I would go with Qobuz.  When that starts to reach parity, I will switch.
ukthunderace OP
24 posts
 
Oh if only we were all so amazingly adept audiophiles as you p051, but alas, our self righteousness is limited by actually reading threads in their entirety and not making judgements and ASSertions that aren’t warranted.
My original post was that I was listening, or "using my ears to judge" as you so eloquently put it, to MQA files compared to my own FLAC collection and noticed a marked difference in that the FLAC was much richer and had better extension. The measurements, as I said, came after this realization, but only backed up what I was hearing.
Some of us aren’t afraid to look at empirical data (look it up) as it applies to this hobby. While measurements are only a single facet of the big picture, they can definitely inform decisions.

More to discover