[MLA] TIDAL & new beta site

[Bob Katz]

On 12/12/17 11:17 AM, Robert Ludwig wrote:
> Hi Bob K!
>
>> I cannot justify a Tidal subscription each month so I am not subscribed.
>
> But Bob K. you CAN _test out_ the TIDAL Hi-Fi/ TIDAL-Masters for free 
> for 30 days.
>
> It should sound identical to the MQA site you are beta testing. You 
> can compare buffering algorithms when used for DSL and less-than fast 
> internet hook-ups.  Tidal used to work well on my home DSL, now not as 
> much after the last software revision.  The new beta site seemed to be 
> better in that regard.
>
>> But I am currently beta testing a new high resolution MQA streaming 
>> service that has not yet become public. The sound quality of the MQA 
>> on the stream made from good 2496 and higher resolution masters is 
>> astounding. If this service can obtain more high resolution masters 
>> and have a good selection, I would subscribe to them at $19.99 a month.
>
> Just playing devil’s advocate:
> So, being that TIDAL already HAS lots more high resolution masters 
> than the beta site, and the fact that they are BOTH $19.99 a month, 
> why favor the beta site?

Fair enough. I must admit that having friends turned me onto it and I 
was reluctant to jump into Tidal. If the other service doesn't get lots 
more titles I should go with Tidal.

"So much time, so little to do". Yeah, I'll add a 30 day trial of Tidal 
when I get the time  :-)


>
>> I have not yet brought up the issue of loudness normalization to 
>> them, as I suspect the director of the company will hit the roof…
>
> I completely agree here, I would not want to be the one to bring it up.
>
> As a matter of curiosity, have you come across titles that do NOT seem 
> to benefit from MQA?  For me, I have found quite a few pop titles and 
> even some  classical titles where they sounded better without clearer 
> transients.  Just curious!
>
> Best!
> Bob L.

Bob L, I have very little experience yet with MQA. For technical reasons 
I cannot enjoy the full unfolding on my loudspeakers. The reason is that 
I am using a superb PCM-based digital crossover and correction filter 
(Acourate Convolver). For 5 point 1 it feeds 8 channels of DAC, that is, 
6 channels plus low pass crossover to stereo subs.  Bob Stuart has 
intimated that they have an architecture that could handle that (perhaps 
not fully implemented at this point) but I shudder at the idea of having 
to replace 8 channels of Cranesong Avocet (superb DACs, by the way) with 
8 channels of MQA-compatible. The cost would be enormous, just to get 8 
channels of deblur ????? Scary, huh?

I can use an MQA-compatible DAC on my headphones though I haven't bought 
one yet because I want to use loudspeakers for most of my pleasure music 
listening. So I have only experienced (on my loudspeaker system) the 
half-way Tidal decode. The first decoding happens in the player and that 
comes out 2496 if the source is 2496 or higher. What I hear in this room 
at 96k is very pleasing, compared with the 2496 masters that they were 
made from. I haven't detected any artificial transient emphasis, in 
fact, I actually cannot hear a difference between a 2496 original master 
and the MQA 96k stream (first decode, no unfold). If it's audible, it's 
damn subtle! Perhaps if I ever get the full unfolding to 192 I'll be 
able to answer your question about the transients and there may be a 
detectable audible difference in that case.


Best wishes,


Bob
-- 

If you want good sound on your album, come to Bob Katz 407-831-0233 
DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO Author: *Mastering Audio *Digital Domain 
Website <http://www.digido.com/> No trees were killed in the sending of 
this message. However a large number of electrons were terribly 
inconvenienced.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20171212/f65933ed/attachment.html>