After having downloaded the new Aurender Conductor App along with an MQA license earlier today (first unfold only) into my N100H and then reading the above challenges to compare the sound quality of the MQA files via Tidal to a bonified 24/96 “hirez” file, I realized that I had such a HDTracks 24/96 download of Diana Krall’s “Stepping Out” album (2016 remaster) and the same album and remaster is available on Tidal Masters (MQA).
So I decided to compare my two favorite tracks from that album,”Body and Soul” and “Jimmie”, between the 24/96 version stored on my N100H’s hard drive and the Tidal MQA version streamed through the same unit. DAC used is Denafrips Terminator, so same music server, USB cable, and DAC for each version (also the same rest of the system), so this is about as perfect an “apples-to-apples” comparison as can be staged.
After several rounds of swapping back and forth, I am confident that the differences is sound quality are absolutely minimal. Perhaps the 26/96 download was a touch more resolved than the MQA version but not enough to be able to select one from the other consistently, nor to alter the enjoyment of the music in any significant way.
Two other things that I feel confident in laying to rest: 1) the MQA update is not affecting the sound quality of the downloaded files in my N100H’s hard drive (I listen to both of these tracks from the 24/96 download multiple times as evaluation tracks when comparing components so I am intimately familiar with them) and, 2) both the 24/96 and the MQA version sound so much better than the non-MQA “Redbook” version on Tidal that even the most hearing deficient among us would have no difficultly hearing the superiority of the MQA version over the Redbook.
I have close friends that are very strongly polarized about MQA, both pro and con, as to its potential impact on the music industry and component manufacturers, etc., but personally I don’t give a flip about anything but sound quality and I am satisfied that MQA is a blessing to those of us that are heavy Tidal users and value best possible sound quality.
Dave
So I decided to compare my two favorite tracks from that album,”Body and Soul” and “Jimmie”, between the 24/96 version stored on my N100H’s hard drive and the Tidal MQA version streamed through the same unit. DAC used is Denafrips Terminator, so same music server, USB cable, and DAC for each version (also the same rest of the system), so this is about as perfect an “apples-to-apples” comparison as can be staged.
After several rounds of swapping back and forth, I am confident that the differences is sound quality are absolutely minimal. Perhaps the 26/96 download was a touch more resolved than the MQA version but not enough to be able to select one from the other consistently, nor to alter the enjoyment of the music in any significant way.
Two other things that I feel confident in laying to rest: 1) the MQA update is not affecting the sound quality of the downloaded files in my N100H’s hard drive (I listen to both of these tracks from the 24/96 download multiple times as evaluation tracks when comparing components so I am intimately familiar with them) and, 2) both the 24/96 and the MQA version sound so much better than the non-MQA “Redbook” version on Tidal that even the most hearing deficient among us would have no difficultly hearing the superiority of the MQA version over the Redbook.
I have close friends that are very strongly polarized about MQA, both pro and con, as to its potential impact on the music industry and component manufacturers, etc., but personally I don’t give a flip about anything but sound quality and I am satisfied that MQA is a blessing to those of us that are heavy Tidal users and value best possible sound quality.
Dave