Quote:
Originally Posted by gadawg
So I may be a little confused... is it supposed to sound better than say DSD or high end PCM ... or is it just supposed to sounds a lot better than the MP3 files that they are similar to in size? I'm not sure I understand the goal.
|
The goal is music streaming.
I don't think MQA is better than other hires music per se, but it is much more friendly on bandwidth needed for streaming services.
And with TIDAL support, it seems like the floodgate has opened. I expect that most studios are less keen on releasing a full DSD or full DXD/HR PCM version for download but are happy to release them for streaming with some copy protection built in.
Potentially though, if MQA's filtering and reconstructing filters are used correctly, I reckon it could make hires sound better than conventional HR PCM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crwilli
I see it as a potentially (yet mostly only advertised) solution to streaming Hi Res with less bandwidth. BUT and it is a BIG but, you need new equipment (if I understand things - but may not). I hate having to purchase new equipment for new digital - but have done it in the case of DSD.
So:
1 does it sound better?
2 does it stream better sound at less bandwidth?
3 does it require new - proprietary - equipment?
|
MQA has flip flopped on this issue so it is not surprising that you were mistaken in your understanding
In the latest TIDAL native app for Mac and PC, the software will decode the MQA stream to 24/96 if you don't have an MQA compatible DAC.
1. like with most formats, mastering is more important than just being hires
2. yes - but with caveat, see 1.
3. no