Today MQA Audio

Just spotted that and that Audirvana +3 will offer MQA playback early this year - sounds interesting

We need MQA-support in our streamers!

And for 15 or 30 or 50 or 100 titles or more. And will the catalogue grow or are we just into another dsd fantasilion high bitrate.

I believe Bluesound announced that the players were MQA ready last summer, and Tidal announced MQA at last years CES. Well at least I have not paid extra for it, and I look forward  to hear comparisons between the same MQA  master and non-MQA  mastered file.  

I received a newsletter today from Bluecoast records, known for many dsd downloads. They said that they had not been able to find out what they would have to pay to MQA to get the necessary equipment to create MQA files, but from what they have heard this would not be  a small investment.

Claus

StigO posted:

We need MQA-support in our streamers!

What on earth for?

I'm with Rob Watts, I think there is still a lot more that can be done with RedBook ... and that is where I would prefer effort to be expended.. No shortage of titles there.....

I've just updated Tidal desktop on my MacBook, and noticed that Tidal HiFi is now called HiFi/Master. There are about 150 varied albums available as so-called Masters, whatever that means. (Presumably nothing yet, for Naim and most other users.) Should I be getting excited about this? No idea, to be honest.....

Claus-Thoegersen posted:

 

I received a newsletter today from Bluecoast records, known for many dsd downloads. They said that they had not been able to find out what they would have to pay to MQA to get the necessary equipment to create MQA files, but from what they have heard this would not be  a small investment.

Claus

As I understand it you deliver the files to MQA and they encode them.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

StigO posted:

We need MQA-support in our streamers!

What on earth for?

I'm with Rob Watts, I think there is still a lot more that can be done with RedBook ... and that is where I would prefer effort to be expended.. No shortage of titles there.....

Don't know exactly but I can actually stream the ''Masters'' albums with the Tidal application and the little hub on my Hugo is showing a green light and it's sounding pretty good.

ChrisSU posted:

Should I be getting excited about this? No idea, to be honest.....

Maybe, providing three conditions are met:

- People can hear or perceive a positive difference. Audiophiles have long trusted their ears and perceptions over empirical measurements; how else do you account for the success of the high end cable manufacturers. Rightly, there have been lots of technical arguments about what MQA is or isn't. If people think it sound better, it has a chance.

- It doesn't cost extra. It's unrealistic to expect people to re-buy their library. Tidal always hinted MQA support wouldn't cost extra. Todays announcement confirms that.

- There is an extensive streaming catalog. A few hundred tracks won't cut it. I'm a bit hazy on the details, but I think I remember Bob Stuart indicating in a video interview (Possibly DAR) that they expected Warner's library to be converted by Q1 2017 and the remaining majors by the end of the summer. Today Tidal is claiming 30K tracks in Master/MQA quality. http://tidal.com/gb/mastersfaq

I'm optimistic. For the first time in a long while the major record labels are showing an interest in improving audio quality rather than the opposite. Without DRM the labels are not going to get behind Hi-Res or DSD streaming. MQA is probably the only show in town.

[@mention:1566878603995136] The theory is that even without an MQA DAC, MQA has the potential to sound better. Only time will tell on this. Very few people have actually been able to do proper comparisons.  

GregW posted:

[@mention:1566878603995136] The theory is that even without an MQA DAC, MQA has the potential to sound better. Only time will tell on this. Very few people have actually been able to do proper comparisons.  

In theory, you can now do the comparison through Tidal, as more than one version of some albums are listed. 

ChrisSU posted:

GregW posted:

[@mention:1566878603995136] The theory is that even without an MQA DAC, MQA has the potential to sound better. Only time will tell on this. Very few people have actually been able to do proper comparisons.  

In theory, you can now do the comparison through Tidal, as more than one version of some albums are listed. 

Assuming the Tidal desktop app is doing the MQA decoding it should be possible. With Tidal Masters 30K tracks there are plenty of comparisons to be made.

Update: I've just listened (Yamaha NX-N500 desktop speakers via USB on macOS Sierra) to Second Hand News from Fleetwood Mac's Rumors album in both Master and Hifi and it definately sounds different, greater detail in the percussion on the Master. Way to early to tell though.

GregW posted:

ChrisSU posted:

GregW posted:

[@mention:1566878603995136] The theory is that even without an MQA DAC, MQA has the potential to sound better. Only time will tell on this. Very few people have actually been able to do proper comparisons.  

In theory, you can now do the comparison through Tidal, as more than one version of some albums are listed. 

Assuming the Tidal desktop app is doing the MQA decoding it should be possible. With Tidal Masters 30K tracks there are plenty of comparisons to be made.

You can set Tidal to 'Passthrough MQA', presumably for those with an MQA DAC, otherwise Tidal will decode it. Listening to versions of Joni Mitchell/Blue now, but through MacBook built in speakers, I'm not expecting to learn too much! Except that the MQA 'Master' buffers more. 

So far I have only heard MQA at a show, but not well compared with other options. I will keep an eye on it. I hope Naim will support it when it is better.

So, I can now browse Albums in Tidal (desktop app), which have been MQA encoded as 'Masters'

I can add them to 'My Music', where the Album is tagged as 'MASTER'

then in Roon, I can play it, as a 24-bit, 48kHz version (i.e. without any MQA unpacking), note the Source description.

However when the same Album, in the 'My Music' within the Tidal integration in the Naim app, it plays at 44.1KHz

Now I know this Recording is available in 24/192, as a reissue from Warner Music.

So couple of questions:

1. Is the Naim app to be upgraded to support the playback of the Tidal MASTER recordings, i.e. the non-unpacked MQA version at 24/48 that Roon desktop application is able to play?
This would mean Hi-Res streaming from Tidal, which would be v.cool and a further justification for the HiFi level subscription. It would also mean that the Naim playback chain is able to keep abreast of new developments, hugely important in the one-box market they are targeting with the new Uniti range.

2. Have Warner Music completed the much publicized conversion of their back catalogue to the MQA format?
Is they have, this should end the 'but what about the available content' argument.

Or it is just those recording already reissued in a Hi-Res FLAC form at 24/192, such as this Roberta Flack recording, the Maria Callas recordings, Fleetwood Mac, James Taylor, Prince, REM, Van Morrison, etc. However there is already quite a good list on the launch of this service.

3. MQA support in the Naim playback chain - possible or do we have to wait until there is some transcoding endpoint that can bridge and then serve the Naim players UPnP.

I am still investigating the possible move to Roon, as my iOS based Controller, with the Roon core on a NUC (running the Roon CoreKit, a stripped down Linux OS) phyiscally next to the NAS, and then the SonoreUPnP Bridge to the NDS. This can run on a small dedicated server, as the last step (https://www.smallgreencomputer...ts/sonoreupnp-bridge) close to the NDS (replacing the RaspberryPi2 I currently use for Asset - shame as we have just got the customized set of icons for Asset looking really sweet.)

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

StigO posted:

We need MQA-support in our streamers!

What on earth for?

I'm with Rob Watts, I think there is still a lot more that can be done with RedBook ... and that is where I would prefer effort to be expended.. No shortage of titles there.....

Streaming HD flac (master recordings) will be the next thing (my guess). It would be a shame if Naim didn't support it. Of course we will be able to play it, but not as good as it can be (mqa dac needed). Streaming is today what most people use, streaming high def will be the next big thing. Warner Music's catalogue will be available, and more to come... I will not rip my cds using mqa, No point in that. Streaming it, makes sense as you get the extra information decoded into the tracks. So again, hope Naim DACs can/will be listed as supported!

ChrisSU posted:

GregW posted:

[@mention:1566878603995136] The theory is that even without an MQA DAC, MQA has the potential to sound better. Only time will tell on this. Very few people have actually been able to do proper comparisons.  

In theory, you can now do the comparison through Tidal, as more than one version of some albums are listed. 

I had wondered why albums were listed twice! Also I had noticed that some Tidal albums were sounding so good. 

Regarding Naim and MQA, the last comment I am aware of is this from Phil Harris. 

The current Uniti platform is capable of MQA playback from a hardware perspective and so is the new platform ...

... but neither currently support the MQA format itself.

MQA support can be (and has always been possible to be) added by a firmware update should it be decided that it is appropriate but at this time there have been no announcements made as to whether MQA will be supported or when and until such time as an announcement is made then that's all I can tell you.

It was posted on 13/10/2016, just after the launch of the new Unit range. 

Paul Quigley ie posted:

ChrisSU posted:

GregW posted:

[@mention:1566878603995136] The theory is that even without an MQA DAC, MQA has the potential to sound better. Only time will tell on this. Very few people have actually been able to do proper comparisons.  

In theory, you can now do the comparison through Tidal, as more than one version of some albums are listed. 

I had wondered why albums were listed twice! Also I had noticed that some Tidal albums were sounding so good. 

Prior to the 'Masters' thing, I'd noticed duplicate artists, albums and tracks on Tidal, as well as variable sound quality, so I think we have to be careful how we assess all this. Shoddy curation and selling lossy streams to those who have paid for lossless does not endear me to Tidal, I'm afraid.

just compared Coldplay "a head full of dreams" Master version vs Hi-fi version

Since the master version is 96/24, it does sound better than the hi-fi 44.1/16 bit on my MacBook pro with headphones. 

But INXS - Kick sounds very different on MQA....  

Thanks all - particularly GregW post about Phil Harris statement. I'll wait and see what happens.

ChrisSU posted:

GregW posted:

ChrisSU posted:

GregW posted:

[@mention:1566878603995136] The theory is that even without an MQA DAC, MQA has the potential to sound better. Only time will tell on this. Very few people have actually been able to do proper comparisons.  

In theory, you can now do the comparison through Tidal, as more than one version of some albums are listed. 

Assuming the Tidal desktop app is doing the MQA decoding it should be possible. With Tidal Masters 30K tracks there are plenty of comparisons to be made.

You can set Tidal to 'Passthrough MQA', presumably for those with an MQA DAC, otherwise Tidal will decode it. Listening to versions of Joni Mitchell/Blue now, but through MacBook built in speakers, I'm not expecting to learn too much! Except that the MQA 'Master' buffers more. 

But the whole real point of MQA from what I can gather is the controlled DAC reconstruction that matches the the ADC filter, so it has to be part of the DAC process itself, otherwise all you doing is taking advantage of the lossy hidef which quite honestly I would not be excited about... I prefer lossless audio, though AAC 320k can sound ok

Simon

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

ChrisSU posted:

GregW posted:

ChrisSU posted:

GregW posted:

[@mention:1566878603995136] The theory is that even without an MQA DAC, MQA has the potential to sound better. Only time will tell on this. Very few people have actually been able to do proper comparisons.  

In theory, you can now do the comparison through Tidal, as more than one version of some albums are listed. 

Assuming the Tidal desktop app is doing the MQA decoding it should be possible. With Tidal Masters 30K tracks there are plenty of comparisons to be made.

You can set Tidal to 'Passthrough MQA', presumably for those with an MQA DAC, otherwise Tidal will decode it. Listening to versions of Joni Mitchell/Blue now, but through MacBook built in speakers, I'm not expecting to learn too much! Except that the MQA 'Master' buffers more. 

But the whole real point of MQA is that it is a controlled DAC reconstruction that matches the the ADC filter, so it has to be part of the DAC process itself, otherwise all you doing is taking advantage of the lossy hidef which quite honestly I would not be excited about... I prefer lossless audio, though AAC 320k can sound ok

Simon

 

I was trying not to sound excited 

Further developments on Roon and MQA. Chris Connaker from The Computer Audiophile is claiming Roon will officially support MQA software decoding. Software decoding was always part of the MQA spec, but the labels were reluctant. It appears this may have changed. 

One small thing to add. If anyone bought the second generation AudioQuest DragonFly DAC/Amps, AudioQuest have indicated they hope to offer MQA decoding, via a software update. 

Yes, from my understanding the labels are now looking to perform the encoding of their back catalogues and then enable decoding in either hardware or software based playback - which will create the demand for the MQA encoded content, i.e. they are hoping that we re-buy our entire libraries again - just as everyone did with CD, after Vinyl was positioned as old-fashioned and obsolete, and only having certified hardware for MQA playback would restrict the levels of adoption and therefore the overall demand.

However, it does mean that there is the possibility of a 'MQA decoding, transcoding UPnP serving end-point' - which unpacks the Hi-Res elements from within the MQA to re-generate the source 24/96 or 24/192 (or even the 24/384) and then transcodes to WAV, and serves it through a UPnP protocol chain - all the benefit without the need to certify the DAC as MQA enabled.

What won't be possible is for MQA encoding of your existing library, to fold the HiRes elements into the MQA format, so they use less filestore. The labels will want to control that end of the distribution pipe. 

There are an interesting article on Stereophile re. the MQA format - it gets a bit technical in places, but still a good reference document. See http://www.stereophile.com/con...#liiyfPFIWAQJGOZa.97

Simon.