Devialet Expert Pro - MQA support

[sjors.ehv]

Hi Devialet user,


I'm using Tidal (in ROON) with my Devialet Expert 250 Pro and I like it a lot.

However, sadly I'm seeing that Devialet is not supporting MQA music playback yet. Tidal's MQA files offering has become very large now, and I think this is a really nice - and great sounding - file type.

So, is there anybody who knows a little bit about Devialet and MQA... will Devialet ever start with supporting MQA playback ?


With kind regards,

Sjors - The Netherlands

[Pim]

Hi Sjors,the architecture of the Expert line doesn’t allow for MQA. I believe Devialet looked into it and concluded adding MQA to the Expert range would degrade the sound quality.

[sjors.ehv]

Hi Sjors,the architecture of the Expert line doesn’t allow for MQA. I believe Devialet looked into it and concluded adding MQA to the Expert range would degrade the sound quality.

Thanks Pim for your helpful answer.

[Confused]

Hello Sjors,

I would suggest that you have a read through this thread:

https://devialetchat.com/Thread-Devialet-and-MQA?

It is quite a long thread, but there are few posts there which are worth reading.

[markush]

You could also get a iFi ZEN stream if MQA is important to you. It also overall improves sound quality as obviously the streamer component is better than the one built into the Devialet.

[daniel.avasilichioaei]

If you don't want an aditional box in you system (streamer), then you can use Roon MQA core decoding, and you will have MQA with first unfold done.

[Confused]

You could also get a iFi ZEN stream if MQA is important to you. It also overall improves sound quality as obviously the streamer component is better than the one built into the Devialet.

The Zen Stream has MQA passthrough, which is useful if you have an MQA DAC, but not much use with a Devialet.

One thing the Zen Stream would allow you to do is use HQPlayer, which includes a choice of MQA optimised filters, this could be used in conjunction with the first unfold performed in Roon or Tidal. I suspect this is the optimum way to use MQA with a Devialet Expert, or even a Phantom.

Opinions vary on this one I know, but from a technical perspective, the ultimate approach is not to use MQA.

[Pim]

Opinions vary on this one I know, but from a technical perspective, the ultimate approach is not to use MQA.

Whilst @Confused is probably right (I don't know enough about digital to make my own conclusion) it seems to be that every time a 'new and improved' format comes out, there's an effort to bring out better mastered versions. 

It's the mastering that can make the new version sound better, so there's no need to stick with the format. Playing MQA without unfolding will probably still sound better if the mastering has been done well. Having said that, I'd start with learning about speaker setup before anything else. Nothing beats that. Nothing.

[Snoopy8]

Please have a read of this. 
https://goldensound.audio/2021/11/29/tid...-lossless/

I do not like MQA.  It is an attempt by a few to take over the digital music chain, and in the process, enrich themselves. All of us pay when we play MQA music and buy MQA enabled gear.  And for little, if no gain.  MQA was supposed to save the world by using less bandwidth while playing at Hifi quality.  What they tried to hide was that all the music masters will be distorted by a lossy process.

[Confused]

Opinions vary on this one I know, but from a technical perspective, the ultimate approach is not to use MQA.

Whilst @Confused is probably right (I don't know enough about digital to make my own conclusion) it seems to be that every time a 'new and improved' format comes out, there's an effort to bring out better mastered versions. 

It's the mastering that can make the new version sound better, so there's no need to stick with the format. Playing MQA without unfolding will probably still sound better if the mastering has been done well. Having said that, I'd start with learning about speaker setup before anything else. Nothing beats that. Nothing.

MQA themselves are very opaque about this. From what can be gathered, MQA files are basically in two categories. Some have been given the "white glove" treatment (such as the ones used for the original demos), but the vast majority are put through some kind of MQA mass production conversion process sausage machine. If you look at the sheer number of MQA tracks available on Tidal now it is clear that is impossible that they have all been given the white glove treatment and then authenticated as being "as the artist intended". I am not sure of the exact number, but they are well into the tens of millions, which would be a lot of hands for those white gloves, unless it was an automated system. It is simply impossible that they have performed any kind of high quality remastering on thirty million tracks or whatever in such a short time period.

There are of course some good reasons why those that have had the "white glove" treatment could indeed sound good.

For the files fed through the MQA sausage machine, there is some evidence that a touch of equalisation has been added. This might be the reason why some people like MQA, or why some people prefer some tracks on MQA, but not others.

The curious thing about all of the above is that it has nothing to do with the MQA format itself. You could add a touch of EQ to thirty million FLAC files and a proportion of people would state that they prefer it. The difference with MQA is that they want you to use modified DACs that require payment of a licence fee to MQA and use of the music requires payment of a licence fee to MQA. Even Roon have to pay a fee to MQA every time their software conversion is used, this is money that would be better spent elsewhere in my view.