2. digital
  3. 126765-79517

MQA ? Pono? What's better than the CD?

The Pono format looks to me to be much better than an upsampled CD file, as the AD conversion has been re-done. Because the Pono format is .FLAC it should be universally playable (i.e., not just by Pono players). Comments on the Pono format?

I have stumbled across MQA. Has anyone had experience with this? Better than Pono? Just another selection?

I don't see how the market can support too many formats, as the albums are going to be need to be re-mastered  and A->D for each format.

Are there are formats out there that have a good selection of re-mastered albums?

~Jim
128x128jimspov
psickerson
97 posts
 
MQA is getting rave reviews from other forums.  

Many are ticked off it has take this long to get digital right.  
randy-11
1,913 posts
 
on other forums, many are raving about MQA and DRM...

MQA is a std. that meridian meets, and is something of a "spin-off" from meridian, or bob Stuart's new project, etc.

it is designed to go from end to end - from the source on the masters to the last DAC near your ears

Chris at Computer Audiophile plans an interview with Bob Stuart in the near future, and DAC makers and others with a technical background have been combing thru the MQA process to try and figure out what it really does

but I suspect we will have to actually listen to it... ;]
erik_squires
16,443 posts
 
For the bazillionth + 1 time: MQA has no DRM. There is no management of rights. Only authentication of data.

And they can rave all they want to. I've been very pleased with a number of DAC's over the past 3-5 years. MQA is a barely noticeable change to my ears.

Best,

E
kalali's avatar
kalali
1,977 posts
 
The MQA topic has been (and is being) discussed ad nauseam in other (adjacent) threads, but my personal takeaway is the extent someone is impressed (or not) with the difference MQA makes in SQ completely depends on the quality of the digital components they own. The higher the quality of their gear, the lesser they hear a difference. The absence of very high end MQA capable DACs is making the comparisons a bit unbalanced, in my opinion. To my ears, playing MQA content from Tidal through my medium quality but MQA capabe DAC - Bluesound Node2, sounds much better than non-MQA CD quality content.
randy-11
1,913 posts
 
the difficult issue is that most higher bit rate or bit depth releases have (or may have) used different masterings than an original CD release

so, you really never know if you are listening to the re-mastering or the putative better than CD stream or package

may not matter at the consumer level unless you are thinking of buying a spendy new piece of hardware

the thing to do may be to find where something has been downsampled to CD levels and run thru a good double blind test regime

or just forget about it and upgrade your speakers, or spend a few months dicking around with room treatments...
More to discover