Thank you guys, please keep this thread updated! I am eager to go all-digital but for now Vinyl sounds superior to my old ears
MQA - Music Discussion
This thread is to discuss MQA music currently available, listening impressions, and how they were encoded.
Please keep tech. talk (except provenance) out of this discussion! :) This thread is about finding good music sources, listening impressions, and mastering. There is a lot to be said about the algorithms, hype, and politics but please use other threads for that in the Digital section perhaps. :)
I'll start. I know right now of only two big labels offering MQA:
2L.no (maybe only test tracks)
and
https://www.highresaudio.com/studio_master.php?fids=153&cr=MQA
as well as at least one indie label. Thanks to Peter Veth over in the DAR thread here:
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2016/08/mqa-a-non-hostile-takeover/#comment-135610
I'm particularly interested in talking about works we can find to do A/B comparisons with, as well as any tracks listeners feel are exemplars and say "This is good stuff!" because so far I've had no luck at all.
As others know, the thing that has so far affected music the most is the mastering choices made by the engineers, as opposed to actual encoding technology, so I welcome details of that along with listening impressions.
Thank you.
Please keep tech. talk (except provenance) out of this discussion! :) This thread is about finding good music sources, listening impressions, and mastering. There is a lot to be said about the algorithms, hype, and politics but please use other threads for that in the Digital section perhaps. :)
I'll start. I know right now of only two big labels offering MQA:
2L.no (maybe only test tracks)
and
https://www.highresaudio.com/studio_master.php?fids=153&cr=MQA
as well as at least one indie label. Thanks to Peter Veth over in the DAR thread here:
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2016/08/mqa-a-non-hostile-takeover/#comment-135610
I'm particularly interested in talking about works we can find to do A/B comparisons with, as well as any tracks listeners feel are exemplars and say "This is good stuff!" because so far I've had no luck at all.
As others know, the thing that has so far affected music the most is the mastering choices made by the engineers, as opposed to actual encoding technology, so I welcome details of that along with listening impressions.
Thank you.
- ...
- 42 posts total
I should have posted my experience so far. I compared the 96/24 and MQA tracks for the two songs uner this listing at www.2L.no/hires Vivaldi: Recitative and Aria from Cantata RV 679, "Che giova il sospirar, povero core" Tone Wik & Barokkanerne (period instruments) I chose 96/24 and MQA because (for each song) they were roughly the same byte size. I used my streamer to let me switch back and forth pretty quickly between tracks. Honestly the biggest problem was just the treble. Ugh, very hard for me to listen to. It was congested and microphones were placed too close to the sources for me Still, I could hear NO difference at all in the two formats. So far I agree with Peter McGowan of PS Audio that it’s value, if any, is "meh" I plan to listen to better tracks, but part of the problem is, the best MQA examples are going to have to be remixes, so it's almost impossible to do an apples to apples comparison and know where changes (if any) are coming from. The reason is that MQA works best when you go back to the multitrack masters, and separately de-blur (and I use the term for lack of knowing if it does anything) each track, then remix. Well, most engineers don't take such careful notes, or settings that they can precisely reproduce their choices again and again, especially when they are making dozens of changes on the fly in an hour. It is possible that a mix-down tool could keep track of all this, but I haven't heard of such being used. Best, Erik |
@dbtom2 Hahaha, it sounds like you and I had the same problems with the 2L recordings. :) "Distracting" is exactly the word I would have used. I'm honestly not thrilled at the idea of giving 2L or HighRes Music $50 or $100 for tracks. It feels like I'm going to waste my cash. It's part of why I have been hesitating. To me, I need MQA to be at least as useful as Dolby A, B or C or dbx was. If it's not that easy to hear and experience the benefits, it's useless. If I have to hunt for the improvements with a microscope and tweezers, it's the same as all the other charlatans. |
So over at Darko’s site, I got a tip that the Mozart Violin concerto’s were also not very good. << sigh >> I really resent having to buy an album I would not, to see if something is marginally better, so I'm not going to get the Buena Visata Social Club. Most of the other albums from High Res Audio are not available for purchase in the US. << sigh >> Meridian should have sample tracks for free. Maybe I’ll go back to the 2L.no site and look for better sounding test tracks besides Vivaldi and Mozart. |
So on tap for today is: Britten: Frank Bridge Variations - Romance TrondheimSolistene I'll be listening to the MQA version vs. DSD 64 and PCM 96/24 It's a very short (1:37) and simple piece. Not complicated at all. Should be ideal for listening to individual instruments and the acoustic space they are in. I'll also be switching to my AKG 7... 7... I forgot. I'll post that later. This way we don't get into arguments about speakers, cables, blah blah. |
- 42 posts total