Question to Devialet regarding Roon and MQA

[Confused]

@Confused, I think the idea behind MQA (at least as far as Meridian peddled it) was that it was aimed at high quality streaming rather than anything else, and that streaming providers weren't likely to ever stream higher than CD quality (say 192 or DSD) because of bandwidth - both server side and user side. They then argued that there's minimal gain from highres files or DSD - not that they aren't better than cd - but that they are huge files for the additional small benefit, since the actual issue allegedly isn't primarily bit depth and sample rate, but the other artifacts in digital music which will never go regardless of how big you make the files. So the idea is MQA tackles the issues we didn't know were issues, while also keeping the file size to that of a CD. The result - a CD sized file that sounds better than highres or DSD.

The folding 'origami' is alleged to be light years ahead of all the genuinely lossy codecs used previously - who's aims were to make the file smaller at some known loss of quality for convenience.

I'm not sure how much I buy of it, but won't know until there's enough out there to listen to, and DACs all have MQA. This situation may never happen of course. I think the intention behind it's good, but having read Bob Stuart's Q&A I wasn't entirely convinced. The fact that it's really Meridian technology - more recently spun off into its 'own' company, is obviously not ideal - all good intentions aside there are business interests at stake here.

I may buy an Explorer 2, as Id like a headphone amp/DAC where I'm working right now, and it's on sale. If so I'll use it with Tidal and see how the difference is under full MQA. It's interesting that the device is two years old and only now is there any real MQA material available. I'd say the next six months are critical to its success. I think they're allowing software decoding simply because practically zero hardware vendors have taken it up. Two years in and there are about 4 MQA DACs - two of them Meridians!  So it's not looking hopeful based on that.

Of course being a closed system we've no concrete idea what this DAC side decoding or de-blurring is - it could just be marketing for something incredibly simple. Then again it could be pioneering? In fact we don't really have independent consensus on what any of it is. Are these albums being remastered, or just run through an MQA box? How the hell does it detect every ADC used in the chain? What about electronic music where samples are hacked together on laptops at 44.1 and processed umpteen times? I mean, I imagine a modern mastering of non-classical music has thousands of hardware and software filters and processing going on. How could that possibly be 'fixed' afterwards?  I'm sure all will become clear over the coming years, that is if MQA hire a decent PR person. It's been very 'Devialet' so far

I'd never by anything in MQA format. Who knows one day the licensing could change and suddenly new players would be region specific or something. It's not implausible. Start soft then tighten up the rules over the years, probably from music industry pressure.

But right now I have Tidal hifi and it's a free thing to try so if I get an explorer I'll get a chance to find out as a headphone streaming customer, which is allegedly who it's aimed at.

Meanwhile I do wish forums could ban discussion about it!

Yes, I agree MQA is aimed at high quality streaming, I just don't buy the argument that streaming at 24/96 or similar is in anyway problematic.  In this regard it is interesting that Rhapsody/Napster and Pandora announced plans for 'hi-res streaming' at CES.  Quite what this will  be in terms of content and quality is yet to be seen, but it will be interesting to see how this develops.

As for the multiple A/D conversion issue, this is case specific.  With some remastering, there will only be one A/D conversion, so nice and easy.  Even with some later material, all A/D conversion will be done in one mixing desk, with one type of A/D conversion.  But I agree, some music will have been through all kinds of digital processing and conversions, so how can MQA help here?  Having said that, if you take something that has been processed to death, say for example something produced by the Orb, who by their own admission process samples so much that it would be impossible to determine the original source, then the digital hash is part of the 'studio master', it is what it is.   Plus a lot of electronic processing in music is actually analogue, I'm certain MQA can't fix anything here, and neither should it.  Plus why should MQA fix digital processing, this is part of the master, I think MQA themselves have only referred to A/D conversion? Fair to say that this MQA magic will work much better with some source material than others, but I think with a lot of material there will be far less actual A/D conversions than you might think.

There is a lot of 'smoke and mirrors' stuff surrounding MQA at the moment though, I'm genuinely happy to sit back as a spectator at the moment and see what happens.