MQA is Legit!


Ok, there is something special about MQA.  Here is my theory:  MQA=SACD.  What do I mean by this?  I mean that since there might be the "perception" it sounds better, then there is way more care put into the mastering and the recording.   Of course I have Redbook CD's that sound just as good (although they tend to be "HDCD" lol)... Bottom line:  a great recording sounds great.  I wish more labels and artists put more time into this--it's great to hear a song for the 1000th time and discover something new.  

What are your thoughts on MQA and SACD?
waltertexas
erik_squires

I heard it more as a softening of transients and removing of space.

I agree with Erik. I more recently have my Bluesound Vault 2 (with HiFi Tidal subscription) connected to an external, non-MQA, DAC. However, prior to that I had been using the MQA compatible internal DAC for some time. I compared quite a few of the same tunes in CD vs MQA quality. Consistently I found that the MQA versions deflated the soundstage. Less air and less space between images. I also found that the dynamics suffered as well. Less "pop" with MQA. The music kinda lost its moxie.

Occasionally I preferred the MQA version of a song if the recording was especially hard/harsh. MQA seemed to be more forgiving with these recordings and "smoothed" them out somewhat.

However, of course, much of this is dependent upon individual systems. Synergy is king. And also, the sound that one person finds "good" may not be exactly the same as the next listener. I’m a bit disappointed that many posters are using generic terms like "good", "better", "worse", etc. to make their points without being more specific about the actual sonic differences that they are hearing between MQA and other formats....

Happy listening all!
First off, you need MQA dac to hear full MQA unfolding.  I've only heard MQA streaming Tidal through Roon on non-MQA dac, sometimes sounds better than non-MQA. I've always suspected different masters responsible for qualitative difference. Whether it is better or not is moot for me. The proprietary nature of MQA makes it a no go, control of music catalogs by one entity is not healthy. I will soon try Qobuz, much prefer their method of high res.
Ha ha, "good" one paullyrockets! ;^)

And I fully agree with you sns concerning the proprietary nature, and potential monopoly, of those owning and licensing MQA. Quite scary...

All the best - Michael

I'm not opting for MQA.  I know, I have 7,000 78s, 7,000 CDs and 25,000 LPs.  However, I agree with the comment a well remastered CD beats a bad LP of the same.  Often they are neck and neck.  LPs can have a more ethereal, open quality but CDs can be just as musically viable.  Electrical 78s often have a visceral, dynamic, tonally rich quality with one take performances that astound.  Well, in my high end system (for decades I suffered from a lack of dynamic contrast with electrostat speakers or some other deficiency).  I skipped cassettes and 8 track and haven't ventured into SACD although I have heard some fantastic remasterings lately in Blu-ray.  I'll skip MQA.  Especially if there is a built-in filter which negatively impacts CD playback.