(2023) $80 MQA Decoder

[4-earredwonder]

Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But, there they are..

Then what could be more glorious, SW, than Nikolai Rimsky~Korsakov's 'Flight of the Bumblebees' dancing around in your head in unfolded MQA quality?

 

[Sonik Wiz]

Then what could be more glorious, SW, than the 'Flight of the Bumblebees' dancing around in your head in unfolded MQA quality?

The "Flight of the Bumblebee's" (music not real!) would be more glorious, in just 24/96 LPCM.

 

[Owen Smith]

If you take a look at the reviews over at Audio Science Review there are plenty of low cost stereo DACs that offer great performance.

That assumes you regard the one measurement ASR performs as being indicative of overall audio quality. I'm sceptical personally. It's a bench test, nothing more.

 

[4-earredwonder]

The "Flight of the Bumblebee's" (music not real!) would be more glorious, in just 24/96 LPCM.

But alas, SW, Bees produce more honey when they're MASTER QUALITY AUTHENTICATED!

 

[JediJoker]

That assumes you regard the one measurement ASR performs as being indicative of overall audio quality.

Amir definitely focuses far too much on SINAD, to the ignorance of other important factors.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

That assumes you regard the one measurement ASR performs as being indicative of overall audio quality. I'm sceptical personally. It's a bench test, nothing more.

Amir definitely focuses far too much on SINAD, to the ignorance of other important factors.

Agreed on the SINAD, but he does measure other stuff. Distortion, jitter, frequency response, filters. His best work is on speaker performance.

 

[JediJoker]

His best work is on speaker performance.

Yep! One of two prominent, independent reviewers with the state-of-the-art Klippel Nearfield Scanner (the other being Erin Hardison of Erin's Audio Corner, whose attitude I prefer and whose opinions I find more aligned with my own as concerns speaker performance).

 

[Owen Smith]

My Arcam AVR31 amp claims to have MQA decoding on board. I have no MQA source material to test this.

Turns out Arcam AVRs only perform MQA processing (supposedly the "Full" variety) when doing network streaming or playing MQA encoded files from USB sticks/discs or over DLNA. They specifically do not perform MQA processing of optical, coax or HDMI digital inputs. This rather limits its use as far as I'm concerned, but I suppose I could rip MQA CDs to FLAC and then play them. If I were remotely interested in MQA.

 

[4-earredwonder]

Turns out Arcam AVRs only perform MQA processing (supposedly the "Full" variety) when doing network streaming or playing MQA encoded files from USB sticks/discs or over DLNA. They specifically do not perform MQA processing of optical, coax or HDMI digital inputs. This rather limits its use as far as I'm concerned, but I suppose I could rip MQA CDs to FLAC and then play them. If I were remotely interested in MQA.

Conversely, the question arises: Is MQA remotely interested in being fully unfolded in the presence of a heretical non believer like OWEN SMITH?????????

 

[4-earredwonder]

Conversely, the question arises: Is MQA remotely interested in being fully unfolded in the presence of a heretical non believer like OWEN SMITH?????????

The MQA Consortium replies: A Thousand Times NAY!

 

[SmcAustin]

Back to the SMSL SU-1, over USB from my Mac mini desktop the MQA indicator indicates only when the Tidal app Exclusive is engaged but about every other track stops dead soon into the song in that mode. Anyone else experience this? Is there a solution?

Sounds great both Exclusive and non Exclusive, of course, but I miss Spotify's eq for my NAD and Sony headphones.

 

[James Hoffmann]

Does Tidal still stream MQA?
I liked the sound with my SMSL DAC, but let my Tidal subscription lapse.

 

[SmcAustin]

Does Tidal still stream MQA?
I liked the sound with my SMSL DAC, but let my Tidal subscription lapse.

I'm new to Tidal and have trouble finding MQA tracks. Even playlists with 'MQA' in the title have tracks in FLAC. I wonder if the recent update did away with them entirely.

The only benefit I've seen of MQA over high-res FLAC is the light on the SU-1 coming on. And the Exclusive mode is sometimes louder, which is a sales trick.

 

[JediJoker]

The only benefit I've seen of MQA over high-res FLAC is the light on the SU-1 coming on. And the Exclusive mode is sometimes louder, which is a sales trick.

 

[MidiMagic]

Then what could be more glorious, SW, than Nikolai Rimsky~Korsakov's 'Flight of the Bumblebees' dancing around in your head in unfolded MQA quality?

I already have that in Dynaquad by Perry-Kingsley.

 

[4-earredwonder]

I already have that in Dynaquad by Perry-Kingsley.

And lucky is the man who has Nikolai Rimksy~Korsakov's marvelous FLIGHT OF THE BUMBLEBEE in Dynaquad by Perry~Kingsley!

 

[4-earredwonder]

And lucky is the man who has Nikolai Rimksy~Korsakov's marvelous FLIGHT OF THE BUMBLEBEE in Dynaquad by Perry~Kingsley!

Actually my first intro into QUAD was via a Hafler Dynaquad thingamajiggy! I had a very modest system and I remember playing Flight of the Bumblebee [I believe from a Vanguard Quad sampler] and heard all the instruments swirling around the room. And it was probably the most convincing surround track on the disc.

Talk about being royally buzzed [well it was the late '60's]!

 

[par4ken]

I just ordered my first MQA CD "GRAND FUNK RAILROAD Mark Don & Mel 69 - 71 JAPAN MQA UHQ MINI LP 2 CD" off eBay. As of yet I have no opinion of the technology and I will have no way to unfold it. I do suspect that the CD will sound good due to better mastering. I doubt that any of these discs are brick walled, what would be the point! My purchase is largely out of curiosity. What I find most interesting is the idea of de-blurring. While modern digital recording is relatively if not completely free of digital glare, early efforts were not. Any effort to remove "glare" from digital recordings might be worthwhile. MQA is supposed to do that even without unfolding.

In that way MQA reminds me of Dynagroove which worked largely by pre-distorting the signal on the record to help cancel out distortion caused by playback using a conical stylus. That was actually a great idea but as elliptical styli became more common Dynagroove fell into disrepute for causing the distortion that it was supposed to be removing. Similar idea here?

Sad how the MQA technology has so many haters, most seem to have not experienced it and consider it to be just snake oil. People please keep an open mind and don't pre judge, your opinion is more important if you have experienced it rather than just attacking it on religious grounds.

 

[Owen Smith]

Sad how the MQA technology has so many haters, most seem to have not experienced it and consider it to be just snake oil. People please keep an open mind and don't pre judge, your opinion is more important if you have experienced it rather than just attacking it on religious grounds.

Why should I keep an open mind? MQA is lossy it imposes degradation on the normal frequency range of human hearing, whether unfolded or not. I'd rather have lossless at CD resolution, or higher if available.

 

[JediJoker]

Sad how the MQA technology has so many haters, most seem to have not experienced it and consider it to be just snake oil. People please keep an open mind and don't pre judge, your opinion is more important if you have experienced it rather than just attacking it on religious grounds.

It's not "religious" or dogmatic. It's a simple statement of fact that the technology is lossy, and arrived too late to be particularly useful. Modern broadband Internet makes streaming and downloading hi-res a dawdle, so why bother using lossy compression to pack it into a 16-bit/44.1kHz container? If it had arrived ten years earlier, and been licensed more liberally, it would have been a revelation. In 2014, though, there was very little reason for it to exist and there's even less now. Just give me lossless, be it CD or hi-res, physical or download or streaming.