@maxijazz - I do not subscribe to Tidal, so effectively that makes MQA non-existent in my little world. I have tried an MQA download out of curiosity, but as the difference between masters tends to be vastly greater than any differences between file format I really have no view on the sound quality of MQA. Interestingly, HQPlayer now includes filters for use with MQA, poly-sinc-mqa-mp and poly-sinc-mqa-lp. These are intended for people who do not have MQA enabled DACs (such as us Devialet owners) and do the first unfold in software. Whilst these are optimised for mqa, HQPlayer developer Jussi has advised that these filters work well with non MQA hi-res content, and a few users have reported liking these filters. A strange world we live in. I will certainly be working through the various filters including the new HQLayer options
@Markpd - I have to agree with your last point. Consider that when I was listening to the Archimago files, I was using HQPlayer with poly-sinc-xtr. This is a linear phase fiter. So, I was listening to various devices blind, and finding that I had a preference for those with minimum phase filters, whist using a playback system I have optimised using linear phase filters. Quite how that works I have no idea!
As to the Archimago results, they are quite fascinating, although I suspect the sample sizes are too small for any definitive conclusions, after all we have no idea how much care anyone was taking when performing the listening comparisons. Looking at my notes, there were a few occasions I picked the same order as yourself, so we were not far apart. Looking at the results, I can see that my observations were not far of the median for the representative groups, with the exception that I tended to place the Sony lower. As an example, in every instance I had A as either last or second last choice, but it was the Sony that trumped it for bottom place. I notice that Archimego has looked at noise, and basically decided that choosing the quietest devices over the nosier ones is the "right" answer, but dismisses the fact that the Sony was the worst with respect to jitter. I suspect I may have picked this up, because I was listening to the occurrence of very specific artefacts in the reproduction, almost certainly causing me to ignore other things. It is impossible to know for sure though. It shows how the subjective side of things is so important, and how I guess we all perceive things a little differently, and maybe even perceive things differently on different days, depending on where our focus may be.
One other thing, I have lovingly held on to my iPhone 6 Plus because I like the fact that it has a 1/4" headphone socket. I have always thought it sounded pretty decent, albeit maybe a little underpowered. Now I know that objectively it is actually very good, it should subjectively sound even better thanks to an increase in expectation bias, I may have to keep it forever!
I haver to say that I have enjoyed the test and the results far more that I was expecting, it has been quite enlightening. I am now hoping that Archimego does something similar in the future, but maybe with kit more representative to that used at home, maybe a comparison of DACs from $100 to $20000. Now that would be fun.
@Markpd - I have to agree with your last point. Consider that when I was listening to the Archimago files, I was using HQPlayer with poly-sinc-xtr. This is a linear phase fiter. So, I was listening to various devices blind, and finding that I had a preference for those with minimum phase filters, whist using a playback system I have optimised using linear phase filters. Quite how that works I have no idea!
As to the Archimago results, they are quite fascinating, although I suspect the sample sizes are too small for any definitive conclusions, after all we have no idea how much care anyone was taking when performing the listening comparisons. Looking at my notes, there were a few occasions I picked the same order as yourself, so we were not far apart. Looking at the results, I can see that my observations were not far of the median for the representative groups, with the exception that I tended to place the Sony lower. As an example, in every instance I had A as either last or second last choice, but it was the Sony that trumped it for bottom place. I notice that Archimego has looked at noise, and basically decided that choosing the quietest devices over the nosier ones is the "right" answer, but dismisses the fact that the Sony was the worst with respect to jitter. I suspect I may have picked this up, because I was listening to the occurrence of very specific artefacts in the reproduction, almost certainly causing me to ignore other things. It is impossible to know for sure though. It shows how the subjective side of things is so important, and how I guess we all perceive things a little differently, and maybe even perceive things differently on different days, depending on where our focus may be.
One other thing, I have lovingly held on to my iPhone 6 Plus because I like the fact that it has a 1/4" headphone socket. I have always thought it sounded pretty decent, albeit maybe a little underpowered. Now I know that objectively it is actually very good, it should subjectively sound even better thanks to an increase in expectation bias, I may have to keep it forever!
I haver to say that I have enjoyed the test and the results far more that I was expecting, it has been quite enlightening. I am now hoping that Archimego does something similar in the future, but maybe with kit more representative to that used at home, maybe a comparison of DACs from $100 to $20000. Now that would be fun.
1000 Pro - KEF Blade - iFi Zen Stream - Mutec REF10 - MC3+USB - Pro-Ject Signature 12
