2. digital
  3. 180883-1363

Qobuz Hi-Rez Not Necessarily the Best Sound

Hello:

I stream Qobuz using Roon into a Bricasti M1SE DAC/Streamer into a Benchmark HPA4 headphone amp and then into various Kennerton or RAAL headphones.

Lately I have been comparing different versions of recordings on Qobuz.  For instance, lately it has been Depeche Mode but also Pink Floyd, Steely Dan, and Supertramp.  Oftentimes there are several versions of titles, usually Hi-rez files of 24/192 or similar, versus the standard 16/44.1 resolution versions.  Sometimes there are remastered versions in various resolutions.  

Quite by accident I have found that the highest resolution versions are not necessarily the best-sounding versions, often preferring the remastered and/or standard resolution recordings.  Today, for instance, I was listening to DM's A Broken Frame.  The 24/192 sounded a little sharper with perhaps a little more detail and spaciousness but was amazingly dynamically compressed.  The difference was not subtle.  Going from the 24/192 to the 16/44.1 remastered version was going from a bland recording to one that came alive.  I guess it goes to show that higher rez files are not necessarily superior sonically.

Anyone else found this to be the case in their streaming?  Thanks.

rlawry
johnread57's avatar
johnread57
210 posts
 

On another related experience I have sat comparing Qobuz and Tidal highest res editions, and there are easily audible differences especially in the bass and mid range. Qobuz IME sounds like a forward mid section with muddied bass. Tidal has more transparency across the range and consequently sounds better balanced to me. Of course many will disagree and have their own views and preferences. Many seem to prefer Qobuz over Tidal. I don’t, I remain with Tidal as my preferred streaming sound source. SACD then CD compete with Tidal based on individual album recording and mastering versions etc. Music and Hi-Fi are room equipment and personal experiences… with all of the variables that this brings.

Ag insider logo xs@2x
jallan
262 posts
 

My experience is that in general high res Quboz sounds better than anything else on my stereo. Tidal MQA are more variable, usually sounding smoother and warmer, more like vinyl (I interpret as MQA adding pleasing distortions). Sometimes, as with the Chicago Transit Authority first album (before they just became Chicago), the remastered high-res versions on both Quboz and Tidal are unlistenable because of added brightness. Earlier remastering at 44khz done in the 1990’s was much better, closely approximating the album version. 

sns
3,005 posts
 

Provenance is far more important than bit rate IME. Having Tidal, Qobuz and thousands of cd rips there is far more variability than consistency between services and bit rates. I've often compared hi rez rips and streams to 16/44 streams and rips and preference all over the place. Far more important is quality of original master and/or remasters, generally something I can only determine by listening. In the end I pay very little attention to bit rates, sound quality is what it is, if not to my liking I search for another stream version of same album, sometimes I find superior sound quality, other times not.

designsfx
793 posts
 

@sns 

x10 on Provenance 

czarivey
5,780 posts
 

CD is far better than what Qobuz or other streaming stuff offers by FAR. 

It's an audiophile masturbation to compare at least 20...30 versions of the same album, but no matter whatcha do, streaming is inferior to the hard media formats.

More to discover