2. digital
  3. 129747-231

MQA according to new Stereophile "loudness button" and "tweaking EQ in presence region"

Stereophile’s May 2017 review of the Mytek Brooklyn DAC (Herb Reichert) states that "in every comparison, MQA made the original recording sound more dynamic and transparent, but only sometimes more temporaly precise."

Seems positive, right? But the next sentence reads....

"After a while the MQA versions began to remind me of those old Loudness Contour buttons on 1960’s receivers, which used equalization to compensate for loss of treble and bass at low listening levels."

Now for the bombshell.....


"Consistently, MQA sounded as though it was tweaking the EQ in the presence region."

"I also noticed that most of the MQA versions sounded rounded off and smoother than the originals."

My opinion is that we gullible audiophiles have been fooled in the past by supposed new technologies, similar to what supposedly early mobile fidelity pressings did with EQ to make listeners think they were hearing an improvement.

In my mind, an alteration of the source is distortion.

Just as TV’S in stores set to torch mode are often preferred on first glance, and speakers that at first grab you with some spectacular aspect can become tiresome over time, as accuracy and neutrality become preferred as one's ear becomes more refined.

The frightening thing is that 2 major music entities have signed on, seemingly to make MQA the defacto standard of how music will made available.


While I haven’t been able to do this comparison myself, reading a highly regarded golden ear admit this in print is warning enough for me.


Just like the sugary drink that tastes so good on first experience, our advanced society knows that consuming it regularly leads to diabetes, heart disease and worse.

Does this revelation reveal MQA to be the parlor trick that it appears to be?
emailists
shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,333 posts
 
@brianlucey

+1 Harmonic content and low mids

As a listener that is what I care most about in the work that you professionals do.

ATC 150ASL are nice and clean in the lower mids and my preferred choice. I find almost all other speaker designs sacrifice harmonic content or "timbre" in order to juice things up for the listener in some exciting way - usually over emphasis on bass and treble or some non musical resonances. I am not familiar with Sonic Allegras but a friend of mine had Audio Physics and they sounded great and imaged extremely well.
brianlucey's avatar
brianlucey
58 posts
 
Sonics is gone some years now and the new Allegra is by Canalis, which is Allen Perkins of Spiral Groove. Actually Canalis "was" Allen. He’s more of a designer than factory guy, so he sold the rights to the Weinstein family at Hollywood Sound in FL, and they are continuing the brand in conjunction with Joachim. I highly, highly recommend the Canalis Anima. Made of bamboo with other crossover and construction upgrades from my birch ply Allegra I have. Unless you have a room that is truly huge, these are a possible winner, and under $20k. The ATC 150 ASL is nice, yet I find it a bit stiff and less musical overall than the Allegra which manages to be technically sound and also highly musical.   More dynamic drivers in the Allegra, for example, as compared to the very capable 150s. Bigger drivers are generally slower, and the Allegra drivers plus that dual component tweeter (cloth and metal) and excellent design and high quality parts, are just the start of their beauty. Try them for sure if you’re in the market. Small and amazing 3 ways.

One last thought on A/B with MQA ... someone was comparing the MQA files without a MQA DAC, and that’s a no no. Totally unfair. Sounds very bad. We need to have the source file, and the MQA file with a MQA DAC.

Enjoy !
jon2020's avatar
jon2020
913 posts
 
Comparing an MQA file via an MQA dac vs a non-MQA hires file via a non-MQA dac has been touched on somewhere else.....

Does an MQA file played through a supposed high end MQA dac like Merdian's Ultradac or 808v6 player sound better than a non-MQA hires pcm/dsd file played through a high end non-MQA dac like the Total, Chord DAVE, dcs Vivaldi or Esoteric Grandioso, just to name a few?

I have only done an A/B between the Esoteric N-05 dac and the Meridian 808v6 player and I find the Esoteric playing a non-MQA file more satisfying and engaging than the Meridian playing the MQA version of the same music.

Has anyone else done such an A/B for other dac's? Would be interesting to hear of others' experience.

J. :)

shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,333 posts
 
Update :Tidal masters are once again a mixed bag just like other high resolution shops ....HD Tracks, Pono etc

It it ALL depends on the Mastering quality!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

...led zeppelin deluxe sounds great but red hot chili peppers stadium Arcadium is still the compressed Vlado Meller mastering...even though Steve Hoffman excellent master came out on vinyl years ago.
brianlucey's avatar
brianlucey
58 posts
 
Thank you shadorne.

All that matters is the quality of engineering. Daniel Lanois made a lot of great records that were mixed to 16 bit DAT. Really great records that will sound great and be great in 100 years.

Any real or imagined tech limitations of PCM, or sample rate, or what have you ... can and are compensate for in mastering. There is no perfection in recording, and perfectionism is a wild goose chase to nowhere that too many people get lost traveling. Recordings are man made illusions, it’s juice down a wire to drivers. It’s using distortion for a musical result. Musicality is ALL that matters as we connect humans to humans with the language of music.
More to discover