How do they get the MQA files? Do they send the files to Meridian with the hardware details as Peter McGrath did?
MQA discussion
- Thread starter asiufy
- Start date
How do they get the MQA files? Do they send the files to Meridian with the hardware details as Peter McGrath did?
Ack, Madfloyd, Al M. and PeterA. I don't happen to have an opinion about MQA because I have not yet heard it, I am not particularly into digital, and I don't have the technical background to really understand it or to even be able to ask the questions that my friends here can. I would enjoy such a gathering and listening session though. And yes, a report on our listening impressions and conclusions, if we could agree on them or not, would make for interesting reading.
EDIT: I wrote this prior to reading the last few days worth of posts. Ack has listened to MQA at Goodwins High End and I appreciate his reporting.
Last edited:
If Peter McGraph happens to be visiting Boston. I would highly recommend that you guys go and give his demo a listen. Peter A, like you, I am not particularly into digital, and like you I don't have a technical background. However, I was very impressed with the MQA demo and easily heard significant differences that would- and have, made me reconsider my opinion of what digital can do.
Perhaps the difference between MQA and the standard files are highlighted the most with excellent front end and back end gear...and possibly with great redbook files to start with...that I cannot say. Nonetheless, the difference is so obvious that the ability for any DAC to unfold MQA is ---at least IMHO, a major requirement; that is if anyone is now shopping for a high end DAC for their system.
Davey, Goodwins no longer carries Wilson speakers, so I doubt he would be going to that dealer for a demo. I have heard some of Peter's demos at past audio shows and up in New Hampshire at a dealership. Personally, I would prefer to do such a direct comparison between digital formats in a very good and familiar system belonging to a friend with plenty of time and no leading from an advocate for one of the formats. Not knowing which format is which would also be important to me and preferably with familiar music.
I have been impressed with recent advances to DACs. I remain open minded about MQA in a high end system, but I agree with others who have been skeptical about it's future success, want to know more and will wait to see about adoption and number of titles. I'm all for the technology being adopted for mass market streaming if it delivers content with improved sonics. That may help to bring younger listeners into the high end. Time will tell.
Peter, you make some great points. Here's the thing of it, with the MQA files, you do not have to strain to hear the difference, unlike some of the other "improvements' that we have been introduced to in the past, MQA is so clearly an improvement that one doesn't need to be 'lead' by an advocate. Peter would tell us which file was which, which perhaps he should not have, however, I don't think he was actually advocating for MQA, but he was advocating for the SQ improvement. ( and what's wrong in that? )
To say that the MQA file and the standard file are 'night and day' apart, while somewhat hyperbole, isn't really that far from the truth! Yes, I know this demo could have highlighted the very best circumstances for the demo, and that listening on one's own system or a very familiar system in a familiar and well known room would be better ( and IME required before a purchase), I still believe that anyone who hears what MQA can do is going to be very impressed.
What I find odd, is that there are so many arm chair quarterbacks here who have proclaimed that this technology is bogus...economically and other ways, and yet they have never even bothered to get off their duff and go and listen...I don't really get this attitude??
Your post, Davey, ignores that not everyone is as impressed by MQA as you are. Ack who posted yesterday, for example, does not seem to think it's day and night. So why should I believe you over Ack when you say that the difference is day and night? Hey, I don't even think anymore that the difference between top analog and top digital is day and night, so how could it be such with MQA?
At some point I want to hear MQA but I don't expect it to be a revelation, frankly. We'll see.
At some point I want to hear MQA but I don't expect it to be a revelation, frankly. We'll see.
O.k. not quite day and night, sorry misread your statement. But saying that wouldn't be too far from the truth either?
Right, but you may have missed the other point I made: overall, I was not as impressed with MQA as I was with the Vivaldi or the 4000SV playing silver discs, last year, driving the older Cygnus 1. That could mean the 2L MQA material isn't up to par and we have to wait for more and better material, or that MQA really isn't that superior, or the Berkeley is not that good - hence the question today: who can compare the Vivaldi CD against MQA????
It shouldn't be long, thanks to MQA implementation by dCS, when you can compare the Vivaldi without MQA to the Vivaldi with MQA.
The more apples to apples comparisons there are out there, the more the conjecture and hyperbole on both sides will fall away. Let the chips fall where they may.
I think that's absolutely right...
I don't think it's any surprise some MQA quality vary
I listened to 4 dsd recordings of Mahler 6 yesterday
The quality difference were night and day
Maybe JA is right as he said in his review of the Meridian Dac Ultra
MQA cannot make up for microphone placement
IMO, the "point" at this stage of the game is does a MQA track sound better than a RBCD track of the same music?
I haven't listened to any of the 2L MQA tracks.
My simple listening test set up using the Tidal desktop app on a MacBook Pro with a AudioQuest Dragonfly Red driving Sennheiser HD600s, tells me the MQA tracks sound better.
Al, no one is asking you to believe ack or me...simply to go out and hear a good MQA demo for yourself.
What I heard with the demo from Peter McGraph that day may have been shining MQA in a very great light, but the fact that MQA could change the sound of the original file so much ( and to all in attendance, in a such a positive manner) certainly speaks well of those results, IMHO.
Here's the only question that I would have...,would MQA benefit other files recorded in an inferior manner to those that Peter recorded, and to such a great extent?? I don't know the answer to this; but here's the thing of it--- IF we use an analogy with Direct to Disc, there are several
marginal recordings on DtoD ( most of us know what titles I am talking about) but this doesn't stop a great recording to really shine when listened to on a DtoD.This is how I would view the MQA comparison between the standard redbook file and the MQA file, the same kind of difference
one hears on a great DtoD recording vs. a simple run of the mill vinyl pressing.
Ack, did you happen to listen to the same piece played back from the standard file and then do an AB with that exact piece played back with MQA added...and in a completely unfolded scenario??
Last edited:
The Goodwin's folks made the same comment - bad recordings still sound bad. I chose the 2L recordings because: a) of their reputation; b) they sounded so much better than Marley, Armstrong et al. Effectively, I focused and reported on the best recordings I could find. And sure enough, Diana Ross sounded like ___t
That ought to be a very convincing comparison, one way or another... looking forward to it.
That's not the question at all. If MQA didn't sound better than RBCD there would be something seriously amiss. MQA starts with a hi-res digital file, does some DSP and compression, and ends up with a digital file still more than twice the size of a losslessly compressed RBCD file.
The question should more properly be, does MQA sound better than a hi-res PCM (or perhaps DSD) fileset mastered from the same original, allowing a mastering engineer to do his best work on each.
As soon as folks like you take the time to listen to some form of MQA, which you can't do with your current gear, I'll start paying attention to your posts on this subject.
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |