Yes ... Engaging is what immediately struck me! Music much more interesting and involving, it is much more interesting to the extent it feels wrong to analyse the differences. I just wanted to enjoy it.

But for those not able to hear it yet.. I would add that string sound for example is much more accurate in timbre and detail of music line. You can hear exactly how the player is interpreting and decorating the melody. The acoustic of the recording is much more convincingly conveyed, as are for example bass drum sounds, with impact on skin and the hollow nature of the drum more real and evident.

The overall sound on all the 2L tracks is sweeter more natural sounding and revealing. All of these comments are MQA versus 96 or 44.1. I am still working on 192 vs 44.1, partly because the 192 files take an age to download! I can detect no downside to MQA lossiness vs 192 so far.

Listening via Explorer2 and Stax 009 and Kef LS 500 headphones

Last edited by Brooster; 2016-02-09 11:36.
MC 200 Simaudio MOON P8W7 MOON 750D DAC Explorer2 MQA DAC Linn LP12 Transfiguration Proteus Magnum Dynalab FM tuner MacBook Pro, Sonore Ultra Rendu >Audirvana streaming Qobuz and Tidal Martin Logan Spire electrostatics Stax 009 headphones Velodyne DD12+ subwoofer