[VinceT]

I hope this is the right place for this question.

Reading about MQA on the forums reminds me of  the many "is botique speaker cables and ICs worth the price or snake oil?!?" Type threads on the internet. 

Now that being said I am a vinyl guy, and looking to get into streaming and in the market for a DAC. I am kind of at this cross roads between a nos tube dac vs. MQA dacs. Now a days you can get an affordable tube dac that sounds great, some claim you can play high res MQA files through them, though not totally MQA quality, it still sounds fantastic and in most cases you cannot tell the difference on a non-MQA dac.

Others claim MQA is worth the price of admission and can absolutely tell the difference. Most seem to agree it is system dependent, and high resolutions files sound better it seems on all gear. I have no preconceived notions about the subject, just looking for some input. Coming from vinyl, I do want access to better recordings. As my gear improves and evolves, the quality of the source makes a huge difference.

[wilsynet]

I’ve owned a fair number of NOS DACs and ultimately did not find them resolved or refined enough to be happy with them. Great tone, but missing stuff. I understand that some of the newer R2R DACs may have solved this problem but I started going in a different direction before I got to the more recent state of the art.

My current DAC (and streamer) is the Lumin X1. It’s really great. I won’t say that it sounds like my last turntable. There are variations in tables, cartridges, phono stages, etc. These ears can’t tell you that the X1 sounds like direct drive or a Sumiko Blue. But what I can say is that the music is relaxed and at ease, and my stereo system has just disappeared.

For less coin, I hear the Lumin T2 and D2 are pretty good too.

[jjss49]

no

[displayname]

It's certainly a split topic. I personally feel the analog output stage of a DAC and the quality of the recording are the most important factors. If I find a DAC that I like the sound of and it happens to decode MQA, that's a bonus. But in my experience (which is admittedly somewhat limited) MQA didn't do much for me, so I don't actively pursue it. But I know others feel differently as well. 

[Stercom]

I had a Bluesound Node 2i and now I have a Lumin D2. They both do full MQA decoding which is important. Go to the MQA website to see the differences in MQA decoding (unfolding). Via Tidal I could easily hear the difference between a fully unfolded MQA and a non-MQA stream when switching between the exact same songs. Since you are mostly into vinyl and just getting into streaming I would highly recommend you get a Bluesound Node 2i and give MQA a try. A new one is $550 and a used one is $400 so relatively affordable.  Like most things in hi-end audio you can argue about something until you're blue in the face but you will never know until you try it in your own system.

[Craig B]

Your question of the value of an MQA DAC could be viewed a couple of different ways: 1) is your comparison between MQA files played with final unfolding vs without final unfolding; or 2) is your comparison between fully unfolded MQA files vs hi-res versions from other sources?

I have a Node 2i, so I haven't heard MQA files that haven't been fully unfolded. I would suspect, though, that you'd hear a difference between fully unfolded and not.

As to the other question, and this is just my experience, I don't hear a consistent difference in SQ between a fully unfolded MQA file on Tidal and the same recording on Qobuz at, say, 192/24. So for me, if I was only getting content from Tidal, I'd say yes, it's worth it. If I was getting content only from Qobuz, I'd say there's no point in having an MQA DAC. If I was getting content from both (which I am), I'd say it depends on how much of the content I wanted was available only from Tidal.

[Stercom]

I had a Bluesound Node 2i and now I have a Lumin D2. They both do full MQA decoding which is important. Go to the MQA website to see the differences in MQA decoding (unfolding). Via Tidal I could easily hear the difference between a fully unfolded MQA and a non-MQA stream when switching between the exact same songs. Since you are mostly into vinyl and just getting into streaming I would highly recommend you get a Bluesound Node 2i and give MQA a try. A new one is $550 and a used one is $400 so relatively affordable.  Like most things in hi-end audio you can argue about something until you're blue in the face but you will never know until you try it in your own system.

That's a good point on what streaming service you use. I only use Tidal. Obviously, no reason to get a MQA DAC if you don't have access to the content.

[rbbert]

The “answer” appears simple.  If Tidal is going to be a significant part of your listening it’s probably better to get a DAC with MQA capability, and there are plenty to choose from in every price and quality range.  There is no reason to use MQA outside of Tidal.

[VinceT]

Your question of the value of an MQA DAC could be viewed a couple of different ways: 1) is your comparison between MQA files played with final unfolding vs without final unfolding; or 2) is your comparison between fully unfolded MQA files vs hi-res versions from other sources?

I have a Node 2i, so I haven't heard MQA files that haven't been fully unfolded. I would suspect, though, that you'd hear a difference between fully unfolded and not.

As to the other question, and this is just my experience, I don't hear a consistent difference in SQ between a fully unfolded MQA file on Tidal and the same recording on Qobuz at, say, 192/24. So for me, if I was only getting content from Tidal, I'd say yes, it's worth it. If I was getting content only from Qobuz, I'd say there's no point in having an MQA DAC. If I was getting content from both (which I am), I'd say it depends on how much of the content I wanted was available only from Tidal.

Thanks to all that have chimed in thus far
I really do not have a reference in regards to the unfolding stages and comparing a first fold to a final unfolded file. I have not compared the different file types, I do not own a dac at this point. If I am going to make the plunge I am doing all the research on the front end. When I do I would probably use multiple services, it seems that is the case with a lot of ppl having access to the largest High rez libraries. Right now using spotify free version over the firestick.

[jjss49]

vince

most digital format music streamed or not is on redbook standard resolution... key is to get a dac that makes redbook sound right... rest is gravy

i have been thru the mqa gamut... it is inconsistent at best, not worth the chase

quboz sounds better in any case

[Stercom]

 

[Stercom]

i have been thru the mqa gamut... it is inconsistent at best, not worth the chase

What do you mean you've "been thru the mqa gamut"? What equipment were you using?

[rollo]

The “answer” appears simple.  If Tidal is going to be a significant part of your listening it’s probably better to get a DAC with MQA capability, and there are plenty to choose from in every price and quality range.  There is no reason to use MQA outside of Tidal.

 Agree with that.

charles

[viggen]

so when i first got d90 mqa, i upgraded my tidal subscription.  and, i can't hear the difference between mqa and non mqa though the d90 is doing the final unfolding.  sure, maybe my system is not resolving enough.  almost a year goes by, my system sounds much better now that I got a new DDC.  however, with DDC, i can't use D90's usb input thus have to depend on software unfolding.  bottom line, d90 mqa is $100 premium and is worth it because it sounds slightly better than its non MQA counterpart even with non-MQA media.  however, there's no point in paying tidal for MQA.

[jjss49]

What do you mean you've "been thru the mqa gamut"? What equipment were you using?

Auralic Aries G2, Bluesound Node 2i, Mytek Bklyn Bdg streamers

DACs - Topping D90/D90MQA, Metrum Jade w and w/o MQA module, Hegel H390 w/without MQA via internal DAC, Sonnet Morpheus with and w/o MQA module, (and internal DAC of Mytek)...

...compared to non MQA DACs - MHDT Orchid and Stockholm, Audio Mirror Tubador III SE, AVA FET Hybrid DAC, Chord Qutest and Hugo TT2 w and w/o M Scaler, Ayre Codex, Jolida Ice FX Tube DAC, Denafrips Ares 2 Pontus and Terminator

[Stercom]

Auralic Aries G2, Bluesound Node 2i, Mytek Bklyn Bdg streamers

DACs - Topping D90/D90MQA, Metrum Jade w and w/o MQA module, Hegel H390 w/without MQA via internal DAC, Sonnet Morpheus with and w/o MQA module, (and internal DAC of Mytek)...

...compared to non MQA DACs - MHDT Orchid and Stockholm, Audio Mirror Tubador III SE, AVA FET Hybrid DAC, Chord Qutest and Hugo TT2 w and w/o M Scaler, Ayre Codex, Jolida Ice FX Tube DAC, Denafrips Ares 2 Pontus and Terminator

You've owned ALL LOT of different equipment and MQA was worthless on all of them. What DAC did you end up keeping?

[jjss49]

You've owned ALL LOT of different equipment and MQA was worthless on all of them.

those are your words... not mine

please read what i said earlier  -- "it is inconsistent at best, not worth the chase" -- not worthless

also -- "key is to get a dac that makes redbook sound right..."

that sums up my input to the op

[Promee]

Tossing in my $0.02.

I think you're asking a couple of separate questions.

First, I would say that you might want to keep the tubes and the DAC separate. A tube preamp (that you could also use for your vinyl) or buffer stage, or if you're using headphones, a tube headphone amp could be something that you could use over a very long period of time, even if DAC technologies and tastes come and go over time.

Second, on the MQA question, you have already seen that there are a variety of feels out there about it. Personally, I think it's pretty awesome as a general rule. It is not going to make a bad recording sound good, and a good mastering of an album on red book is going to sound better than a bad one on MQA, but for the most part, the selection of excellent MQA albums on Tidal is awesome and has been growing steadily. I have subscriptions to Tidal and Qobuz and almost always choose to listen to an MQA version of a given recording over its Qobuz hi-res counterpart, assuming availability of both. The biggest difference between the two in my experience is in soundstage and presence. It is immediately apparent on A/B comparison to my ear that there is much more refined spacing and a general improvement in the sense of realism and engagement, particularly on music with heavily featured vocals in MQA. I do think that sometimes red book or hi-res PCM can win out in terms of tonality, however, especially if I have just been listening to MQA, it immediately feels like there is a major reduction back in the direction of 2-dimensional sound when going back to standard PCM.

I wouldn't say I've ever been primarily a vinyl guy, but I do spend about half of my listening time on it, and I would not be surprised at all if there were a link between a preference for MQA and vinyl, as there are sacrifices in certain elements of precision and dynamics, but you get a natural presence to the sound with either of those formats that is totally worth it to the right set of ears (and to be clear, the sacrifices made with MQA are minimal). I own 4 DACs that decode MQA, and I will say that the difference between MQA and PCM is similar across all of them to my ear. I would also agree that it is critical to get a DAC that does a good job with handling red book to your tastes. Don't go for one that is otherwise junk just because it does MQA. For reference, I have the iFi Zen DAC, AudioQuest Dragonfly Cobalt, Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 Digital, and the Matrix Audio X-Sabre Pro MQA.

One other thing that might give you a hint if you're going to like MQA is that it achieves much of its effect through a specific set of filters. If you tend to notice a difference between PCM filters, then I think you'll notice a difference with MQA, and its effect is most similar to a perfect transient filter, like GTO on an iFi DAC, or like Apodizing filters or other transient optimized filters on other DACs. If you tend to like the sounds of those filters, you will find that you get a similar flavor of benefit with MQA with a smaller hit to tonality than with those others.

A final caveat to MQA as well. I have come to believe that it is very sensitive in a very bad way to certain DAC features. I am specifically speaking to the features of dithering and jitter reduction present on the X-Sabre. I believe that both of those features add a little bit of artificial shine and make music generally a bit harsh or fatiguing and are included primarily to make the DAC measure better on paper. When I first got the X-Sabre, I was almost convinced that, with that DAC, PCM sounded better, as the MQA sounded like a total mess when those features were enabled. I don't know if they interfere in some way with the way the extra data is folded in MQA, but they definitely break MQA much more than they damage PCM. With both features disabled, both formats sound better, and MQA has the same profile I had come to expect from the other DACs I had listened to it on previously.

As others have said, the best way to know if you'll like it is to try it. Hope this helps! Good luck on your quest for audio ascension!

[ThePriest]

Now, i have no experience with MQA myself, but did stumble across  this a while ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSv0lcHlawk
Worth the time, I'd say.

/The Priest

[Stercom]

Promee - I see you are new to AudioCircle. Thanks for a well written and informative response! That's what threads like this are for.

ThePriest - I see you are new to AudioCircle as well. Great video! Too bad they actually didn't listen to any MQA files v. non-MQA files but it was fun hearing the CEO of MQA and the presenter go at it over how MQA works! haha.