Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion MQA - Related technology, products and music MQA... explained beautifully

I think that's a pretty good analogy to be honest, but the "profile" is hidden from the user and the profile metadata pulled out of the MQA file by the MQA decoder.

That's more like it, but will it be more clear to the general public?

That's right, unlike an ICC profile, with MQA this metadata is transparent to the end user. Will this make it more clear to the general public? Probably not. Will it help me explain part of MQA to some of my friends? I'm not going to completely rule it out.

I just recently read the new Absolute Sound article and accompanying interview with Bob Stuart. Eloquent elaboration on the Audio Origami(sp?) behind MQA, makes my head hurt. An obvious sign I am not worthy? Wonder what Copernicus would think? Just joking. Exciting times. Hans- thanks for the videos.

A heavily revised version of the MQA video is now on line at MQA part 2 Version 2.

And yes. I have used the lens profile analogy for explaining the profile that MQA makes of the ADC.

This time Bob Stuart has read the text in advance to check for factual incorrectness. He did not have any influence on my opinions (he gracefully even didn't attempt or wished to).

Thank you for your time and explanations.

"Beautifully put"

Hector

This is a very good explanation indeed.
Thank you Hans.

P.S. that particular MQA'd Beethoven piece you mention was indeed very convincing and beautiful. I can't wait to hear it in my own room. However, I believe that Richard H mentioned during the MQA demo at BB&G they don't know who it was played by.

For those of you who missed these the first time round, here are a couple of great videos by Hans Beekhuyzen explaining MQA beautifully.

If you're at all interested in MQA, they are a must-see.

Part One, The advantages of 192/24
Meridian MQA Part 1

Part Two, How MQA works
Meridian MQA Part 2 (Revised - Version 2)

Thanks Rick. I watched them again and reread the various reports again and still come up with questions? So if anyone can enlighten me.

1) If a recording studio is using MQA files in their recording where the recordings are deblurred, then what they hear on playback is different to what they here directly in the recording room unrecorded - or if they are listening to the sounds post DA/AD then is it MQA'd on the fly?

2) According to Absolute Sound article CDesq playback of MQA is better than CD. Assuming 44/16 playback - is MQA better than CD? If so is this because the file was created by a 192 recording system without steep filters to modify the sound or why?

3) Is MQA (made with 196/24 masters) better than 192/24 Hires files? I see the comparison of impulse response but don't understand why it's better? Only if DA/AD deblurring is happening.

So I might have the wrong end of the stick but its making me think!

I am going to try answering my own questions! Hopefully showing the evolution of my understanding. If others are already there good for you - enjoy my bumblings.

1) This seems to be the essence of MQA. What the artist or engineer hears should be the closest they have ever heard to the real thing (real thing being direct sound through analogue studio sound system unrecorded). MQA removing the time distortion from the digital recording system.

2) Not sure of this one. If someone is listening to an MQA file through a traditional CD playing system there is no post processing(rendering?) to modify the digital info, so I assume it remains as CD quality - unless the digital recording already has been modified in the recording process to remove the A to D blurring?

3) It's better because the DA/AD time blurring/distortion (signature) has been processed out.

I would love to hear MQA recorded files available soon.

2) Bob Stuart answered this in the 2015 CES Q&A. The MQA file at 16/44 sounds better because the audio has been pre-apodized.

Wonderful! Thank you Hans, welcome aboard.