Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion MQA - Related technology, products and music What is the point of 16/44 MQA?

I understand what you are saying (I think). In other words, 16/44 MQA can sound as good as, or even better than, high resolution files as traditionally defined. My point is that 16/44, the specification of CD, is not how we have traditionally defined high resolution.

If 16/44 is how the Music exists then the only way to achieve what is traditionally called high resolution, is to upsample. Well, Meridian does that anyway with Apodising to great effect.

Well, to my ears, you can up-sample all you like and it won't make 16/44 HiRes. MQA is utterly different.

MQA is a paradigm shift in what we once experienced and expected from audio reproduction.

I totally agree with that point.

Yes, you are right. I can hear the difference. But for an even punchier example try Jeff Beck, "Blast from the east" on Jeff Beck Who Else. This is on standard 16/44.

Luckily, Meridian does more than that by resolution enhancing as well. But, good though it might be, the end result is not high resolution. And you have not really addressed my question.

This is truly fascinating and carries significant implications.

Are you suggesting that 16/44 MQA can carry the same temporal and spatial information as full-fat MQA, such as is seen on the much-vaunted 2L 24/384 files? And are we to presume that 16/44 MQA does not need either first or second-stage unfolding? (Presumably, through Roon, you know the answer to this?) If that is the case then, given bit-perfect transfer, there would be no need for specially-licensed MQA-processing equipment. And are tweeters with extended frequencies (super-tweeters) still mandatory?

Some have suggested that Qobuz actual high-resolution files are superior to lossy MQA (I don't want to enter into this). But if 16/44 MQA is equal to, or superior to high-resolution MQA then we have entered a completely new scenario. MQA has ceased to be a company delivering high-resolution in a convenient form and instead has become a company specialising in superior mastering. Furthermore, these new MQA files may be open to all insofar as they do not require specialist processing.

I write the above not to dispute your findings but rather to explore their implications. And we now seem to have arrived at an answer to my question, "What is the point of 16/44 MQA". The point is to provide superior mastering. I now await the deluge of marketing from MQA extolling this fact.

If the 16\44 files are the original resolution of so many recordings. How are other companies getting High Res versions of these files?
MQA is not mastering but removing unwanted artefacts from digital gateways as I understand things, thus revealing the master for us to enjoy, free from said artefacts.

Hi Asa
Time to just lay back and enjoy the available 44.1kHz 16Bit MQA (Hi Res) music.

I don't have to fully understand the technology or make judgements to be captivated by the obvious improvements.

Hector

As an example of what can be achieved listen to "Hymn For My Soul" Joe Cocker.

Stephen Thomas Erlewine has it right here (Tidal album notes). "This has been polished and cleaned until it sparkles" The MQA effect?

Hector

My guess is that you are referring to the correction of ADC flaws. If that is the case then it does not apply to more recent ADCs which have considerably better performance. I do not know at what date ADCs ceased to need this rectification but I expect someone else will know.