jello
extremely active
Posts: 1,569
|
Post by jello on Jan 10, 2017 1:52:15 GMT
It seems to have been coming for a while but MQA (master quality audio) support was finally added to Tidal a few days back. Quite a few albums available (mainly Warner Brothers at present). tidal.com/gb/mastersI'd been under the impression that in order to listen to the content an MQA enabled DAC would be required but pleasantly surprised to see that is not the case. If a non-MQA DAC is used then the Tidal desktop app will do the 'unfolding' on a software level prior to sending the content to the DAC. Have listened to a few 'Master' quality albums on the Mojo (which it receives as 24/96 as opposed to the usual 16/44.1) over the last couple of days and I'm really quite impressed. To my ears the albums have audibly better instrument separation and sound more dynamic (not heard any loudness related clipping either thus far) than their 'Hifi' quality counterparts. That said I don't normally hear much difference between CD and hi-res material so possibly some, or most, of what I'm hearing is down to the way these MQA albums have been (re-)mastered? Either way I'm not complaining! Anyone else had a listen?
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Jan 10, 2017 6:32:35 GMT
I'd like to actually, but not keen on another subscription.
On some hi res stuff, I hear not a lot of difference tbh. I wonder if some is just a rehash of poor mastering anyway.
On good stuff, I normally spot a better dynamic range. That is if the original hasn't been compressed to virtually flat!! That seems to be the most obvious giveaway for me. A sense of space, I'd say with a better dynamic range.
|
|
jello
extremely active
Posts: 1,569
|
Post by jello on Jan 10, 2017 11:10:19 GMT
That's really what I'm hearing Ian. I think it's the sense of space that makes the individual instruments easier to pick out in the mix.
But a lot of the albums I've listened to were probably well recorded to begin with. Albums like Division Bell and Aqualung and I half wonder if they were cherry picked to give the wow factor.
That said they've got a few Led Zeppelin albums that might prove a better test. I seem to remember the recent remasters not sounding too hot.
Could be my imagination but when I go back and forth between the Hifi and Masters versions of an album the MQA one has lower volume levels so perhaps they have done something to improve dynamic range.
I think they are currently doing a 60 day trial if you want to give things a listen. You can sign up and cancel straight away and the sub will automatically expire after the trial period is up. They also accept Paypal so to be extra sure you can also cancel the recurring payment via your Paypal account.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Jan 10, 2017 11:56:04 GMT
Sounds good actually. I might give it a go. Very often, when the dynamic range is bigger, the average volume is indeed lower which is why compression is used. We seem to hear average levels more than peaks and troughs. I think that some expect the music to sound completely different because it is in hi res but it's not as simple as that because even MP3, in spite of what Hi-Fi people say about it actually can do quite a good job. Better than they would have you believe imo and many would struggle to tell the difference between 320 and hi res. They often kid themselves and if they were honestly tested and asked to identify them, the truth is that they'd be in trouble. That also includes me. Differences can be very subtle from the same master. Not so subtle when there is a different master for the hi res because the companies are desperate to demonstrate differences so that the cost is justified. So they mix down a little differently and tbh, just a subtle touch of bass makes people think that the file is vastly superior!! Great trick!! If you want everyone to believe that your company's dap is better, just add a 'touch' in the bass. It will tend to win in the majority of cases when people listen and report on say, HF. Or, a little more output helps as well. Both together gives a 'Wow' factor as long as it is subtle for the hi if guys. So I am a little careful about what I say about hi res copies. I have heard the same master played via MP3 and in hi res at source and the differences are more a question of 'air' or space and not really tonal. I think, with the extra dynamic range, bass can 'seem' stronger but extremely quick as well. I think hi res is worth it for home use but not mobile really. Too noisy environments will take the benefits away in order to appreciate the differences. Also a bit of a waste of space. It's also a subject that kick off all kinds of arguments and insults which, if I'm honest make me laugh. The one insult that is flung about is that 'if you can't hear the differences, then you must be deaf.' Like being deaf is the biggest insult a Hi-Fi guy can throw out there. Not at all. Differences are subtle and some REALLY can't hear the difference. If you are aware of what to listen for, then you might get it, but as long as the low and hi res version comes from the same mix/edit. I'll confess, that I have played tricks on people and they have been totally unaware.
|
|
jello
extremely active
Posts: 1,569
|
Post by jello on Jan 10, 2017 13:56:13 GMT
Agree with much of that Ian. There's a lot of smoke and mirrors going on in this game!! I'm not surprised that you've tricked people as quite often we find ourselves wanting something to be good and that's half the job done. The placebo effect and the power of positive (or negative) suggestion are incredibly powerful things.... I do find it funny that some people get very worked up about this kind of stuff though. Some of the tiffs in the HF Sound Science section are priceless. I honestly don't know how some of those folk derive any kind of pleasure from their listening....perhaps they don't. Here's a better Tidal trial for you Ian. Install the following Sennheiser app onto either an IOS or android device, go to the Tidal option and choose new account. You should then see an offer for 90 days free access (MQA currently only works with the desktop app though)! play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.sennheiser.captuneI've installed the app myself but not really tried it but it does looks quite interesting. Appears to have specific EQ settings for a number of their portable headphones.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Jan 10, 2017 14:43:34 GMT
Oh dear. Stop. I'll be spending money again!! Btw - the Led Zep hi res are a bit too revealing sometimes. You hear john Bonham's bass drum pedal squeaking and all kinds of hiss, hum and buzz. Sometimes you might be better of just not knowing!!!
|
|
jello
extremely active
Posts: 1,569
|
Post by jello on Jan 10, 2017 17:23:33 GMT
No, the idea of a free trial is that you don't spend any money Ian! And then you can put the money that you didn't spend towards some nice gear. So when you think about it it's almost like you are getting free money (some fuzzy logic helps to understand this concept)
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Jan 10, 2017 17:33:29 GMT
The wife .... Me ...... Then .....
|
|
|
Post by tunkejazz on Jan 11, 2017 7:20:37 GMT
Isn't MQA also some form of (hated by me) DRM?
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Jan 11, 2017 9:14:24 GMT
I don't think so. If any file is drm proofed, I won't buy them if possible. Awful idea in that the music gets locked to your player. One reason why I got rid of my Ipods.
MQA is another way of packing files for streaming purposes I think. It was developed for hi res audio streaming but the bad news is that a lot of people don't really get the difference or benefit because the listening gear isn't great.
I think there are three qualities of MQA as well. Depending on your network speed but it was designed specifically for streaming purposes.
It might be the way we all end up listening in the end perhaps, although the wrapping up might be different with time.
It surprises me just how long MP3 has remained as the basic kind of 'standard' actually. It seems pretty robust. I can't remember when I got my first player, but it was one of the first, when anyone listening to Hi-Fi really did turn their noses up. I was almost chucked out of a Hi-Fi shop for daring to ask for an MP3 player and the file sizes were tiny in those days because the players' memories were so small. So that is where the idea of 128 was enough for good quality came from. Many were using quite a bit less!!
|
|
jello
extremely active
Posts: 1,569
|
Post by jello on Jan 11, 2017 13:17:59 GMT
I think MQA purchases are DRM protected. With a lot of people using torrent sites I can understand companies wanting to take steps to protect their IP and revenue streams tbh. Some hate it but I don't really have an issue so long as it's not done in a draconian way that impedes the way I use MY media and the devices I use it on.
Whether there is a better way to go about things I'm not sure and given the choice I'd buy DRM free where possible. Nowadays that's becoming increasingly difficult though - just try buying a PC game or an app that isn't tied to a Steam, Origin, Uplay, Google or Apple account etc.. near impossible! I suppose doing the same with music purchases is a logical extension.
But with services like Tidal where you are only granted access to the content whilst you actively subscribe some form of DRM is essential. Don't have any issues with that at all.
|
|
|
Post by tunkejazz on Jan 11, 2017 13:31:54 GMT
Well... related to the DRM, this summer I bought 2 audiobooks on iTunes, and I did not know anything about the DRM.
The result is that I cannot listen to them on my Android phone, I cannot listen to them on my main stereo system via my linux server, and I will be only able to listen to them as soon as I have an iPod (which is getting rather old). For 25 EUR that I paid for each of these audiobooks I would expect a little bit more...especially when it wasn't me going for torrent sources!
But what do I know!
|
|
jello
extremely active
Posts: 1,569
|
Post by jello on Jan 11, 2017 13:56:14 GMT
That's the problem. Companies take steps to stop folk illegally accessing their content but it often impacts on the poor sods who do pay!!
But if there was no DRM what would that mean for the 'health' of the respective industries?
Part of me thinks there has to be a better way of going about things but maybe that's wishful thinking? The worrying thing is that people have had access to 'free' content for so long they would literally balk at the idea of paying for anything digital. I mentioned to a friend that I'd bought a Lou Reed box set in the Qobuz sale (17 digital hi-res albums for < the price of a couple of pints) and he asked why I didn't just torrent it? He literally couldn't understand why I'd want to pay for anything digital but he'd have no issue about buying a CD from the local store. Better pricing might help as some suggest but don't think it is the solution.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Jan 11, 2017 15:41:50 GMT
It is a problem, but if you buy the music, you are buying the content. If you buy a book, I guess it must be illegal to lend them out as well? It is a real pain when you have other daps and was the reason why I got away from ITunes which has great content but can only be played on iPods.
Amazon MP3 files are 320 Kbps and can be moved onto any player which makes things a lot easier really.
Then again, they have to make money so it is a very difficult thing.
|
|
jello
extremely active
Posts: 1,569
|
Post by jello on Jan 11, 2017 16:28:21 GMT
I ditched iTunes for the same reason Ian. Too much of a closed ecosystem for me.
I think when it comes to books it's perfectly legal to lend them out but some other uses are restricted by copyright. I suppose the biggest difference between physical and digital media is really the speed and ease with which it can be shared. With a book I can lend it to one person at a time but with a digital copy of an album say I could upload it today and by this time tomorrow 20,000 people across the globe could be listening to it!!
An interesting question is whether you even own the digital content you paid for. With many content providers what you are actually buying is a non-transferable licence to merely access the content. This seems quite a contentious issue and I think there have been a few legal challenges filed but not sure if any rulings have been made.
|
|