“maybe you’re someone who buys the sales pitch that you’re sold instead of someone who knows what they’re doing”
@brianlucey
That’s quite presumptuous on your part…LOL! Since you asked and folks with an aptitude to learn may benefit from this information,
What is High Definition (Hi-Def) Audio ~ High-definition audio refers to audio recordings with higher resolution than the standard CD quality of 16-bit/44.1kHz. It typically involves:
• Higher Bit Depth: Increases dynamic range and reduces quantization noise. Common values are 24-bit or higher.
• Higher Sampling Rate: Captures more detail in the frequency domain. Typical rates include 96kHz or 192kHz.
Why is Music Mastered at 96kHz Superior to 44.1kHz?
• Frequency Range - While 44.1kHz can theoretically capture frequencies up to 22.05kHz (Nyquist theorem), 96kHz extends this to 48kHz, reducing the risk of aliasing artifacts and better preserving high-frequency overtones, even if they’re outside human hearing.
• Phase Accuracy - Higher sampling rates improve phase coherence, particularly for complex waveforms, which contributes to more natural sound reproduction.
• Anti-Aliasing Filters: 96kHz allows for gentler filters in the ADC/DAC process, reducing pre-ringing and phase distortion.
However, the perceived superiority also depends on:
• Mastering Quality: A well-mastered 44.1kHz file can sound better than a poorly mastered 96kHz file.
• Playback Chain: Many systems don’t fully exploit the benefits of higher sampling rates.
How Does Upsampling Improve a Master File?
Upsampling doesn’t add new information but can improve playback by:
• Gentler Reconstruction Filters: By upsampling, DACs can use less aggressive filters, reducing artifacts like ringing or phase shifts.
• Noise Shaping: Moving quantization noise to inaudible frequencies improves perceived clarity.
• Interpolation: Smooths transitions between digital samples, potentially reducing harshness in the sound.
I do not believe in upsampling cause upsampling can’t recreate lost detail from a lower-resolution source. That’s why I always gravitated towards files in its native resolution and focused on optimizing playback system. This has served me well over the years as I am able to experience recordings as intended by artist or recording engineer.
Why is MQA More of What the Artist Intends vs. the Mastered File?
MQA (Master Quality Authenticated) claims to deliver “studio sound” through,
• End-to-End Authentication: Ensures the file you hear is identical to the studio master.
• Time Domain Accuracy: MQA emphasizes reducing temporal blur, which it claims improves the spatial and timing cues in music.
• File Compression: MQA uses a folding technique to deliver high-resolution audio in smaller file sizes, making it more accessible for streaming.
Artist Intent vs. MQA Mastered File
While MQA markets itself as aligning with the artist’s intent, this is subjective. The “intent” could already be achieved in the master file, and MQA’s processing may alter that….I could go on but I see no sense in debating a defunct medium.
IMHO, Artist intent is more about the quality of the original recording and mastering than any specific format or technology.
I don’t claim to be an expert, just a person with little bit of understanding on how technology works and deep admiration for musicians and engineers responsible for the music we have been enjoying in our personal space.
