Amazon HD vs. Tidal HiFi (MQA)

Equipment / Electronics / Gear / Accessories Source Gear / Other
55

You know, that is a good point. Most modern music today should have a warning label printed on it that says “WARNING - No musicians or actual instruments are being played on this album.” It’s all canned, pre-programed crap. That and their ridiculous, millennial woops. Nope, you can have it. And you can have MQA as well. I have no interest in chasing that phony format.

I’m using AMHD and like it very much. Like @PicknPop , I’m no fan of Amazon, but at least they provide worthwhile services as opposed to the other three parts of the GAFA axis of evil. That is why I never looked at YT Music. I foresee a time when I give Quboz a try. But if they try and force MQA down our throats I will not even bother.

1 Like
56

After all of the crap that’s been going on with Tidal and MQA specifically, I highly doubt Qobuz is going to do anything with MQA. If they did, their subscriber accounts would start dropping like flies just like with Tidal.

It’s bad enough Qobuz has 2L Nordic Sound in their library, as 2L produces nothing but MQA.

1 Like
57

Same here.

3 Likes
58

Here’s the thing with MQA, even if it didn’t compress and add noise, other than filling up Bob Stuart’s bank account, what does it do? What is it offering that is worth paying for? I still haven’t seen a single person answer this question.

The vast majority of the music listening public doesn’t give a shit about formats and of the tiny minority that is audiophiles only an even smaller minority say they like MQA. And even those guys who are like 0.00001% of all music listeners probably like it because they thought it was “lossless” and “more accurate” and the promise of “better”.

The even tinier minority who just like how it sounds are ultimately doing nothing but perpetuating a sham. Bob Stuart really did well for himself.

1 Like
59

For the first time I have a thing my future Dacs must NOT have: MQA

3 Likes
60

I’d be surprised if any of the services did anything but host what they were given by the rights owners.

2 Likes
61

True. I’m not blaming Qobuz for providing 2L content. At least with Qobuz, you have the choice to not listen to it if you don’t want to. And that’s a perfectly fine option. Let them carry whatever they want and let the end user listen to whatever they want. Give them that honest option.

That’s one of the many issues with Tidal. They shove MQA in your face whether you want it or not, then lie about other titles being “originals” only to find out that they are still MQA.

1 Like
62

i think MQA ruined everything that TIDAL wanted to achieve with their “master”-approach: to gain trust, that you listen to a better version than the CD-version. What i just mean is, that MQA advertises the streaming format itself more than the quality of the recording/mastering of the songs in the studio. As an alternative, they should invent an authentic, trustworthy way to ensure their customer, that they’ve got a better version from the record label or studio or artist, making a hi-res stream a necsessity. And no - NO stupid lights and proprietary BS. Just legit, authentic, better master rips with regular FLAC in a higher-paid tier. The music industry and streaming services have to re-gain trust in this matter and imo have to do even more in this regard than the film industry. At least you can easily see the difference between FullHD an 4K. And even there real and fake 4K movies are a thing - but at least there are people committed to testing and making information public. That’s a way i’d like hi-res audio to go.

2 Likes
63

Wouldn’t inflame the issue any more than the soup is actually cooked.

It is quite conceivable that such formats will be withdrawn because they do not catch on.
That has happened many times before.
Let’s look back Thx worst way to enjoy music but there is a part that likes it.
3D sound is still a long time coming and hardly catches on.
Hd audio is a trend that has only changed and we hardly hear anything about it.
The same game as with HD,HD Plus,4k,Qled,Plasma and so on and so on.

Surely Tidal is following this and has invested in it.
If you want to boycott it indirectly, you buy a dac that doesn’t support it.
The manufacturers will ask themselves why the customer doesn’t buy the latest Dac, which is much better.
It can do Mqa and much more…
And at some point there will be another stupid marketing
analysis that will then determine that people don’t buy it for reason X and Y.
What do the manufacturers do?
New product design Mqa everything that costs money and was unnecessary out and bang new product the rub rolls again.

That’s how it will work at some point if it is rejected.
The profiteers are those who pulled the strings.
They don’t want to have anything to do with music, they want to earn money and then they leave.

The interests of the musicians are not preserved, regardless of whether they can sing or play instruments or are good at the computer in order to sample something.

The film industry has made so many films that they don’t show us because they wouldn’t earn anything, also because they are too stupid to offer video on demand.
The music industry is better off using modern technology, but of course you can overdo it.

Music is also for dancing, to keep people happy.
To associate events with it, like children growing up, celebrating weddings, having parties.
No one asks and will say is that Mqa or Lossless or Dsd and then condemn everything.

It’s nothing new that others want to get rich from something, it’s the same in every industry up to politics.
Even in the current situation where other countries are, they are still at the beginning because others wanted to take advantage of something before.

But that can also break your neck if you try to deceive people like that.
The limits of being able to enjoy music on another level, like analogue, the limits are slowly there too.
You can’t reinvent the wheel, but you can improve the technology in the hardware. As you can see, more and more tube amplifiers with better technology are coming onto the market, which makes more sense than getting angry about the Mqa issue.

Give the topic of Mqa a little more time to develop, it will probably take care of itself.
Tidal has achieved what it wanted, which is to talk about it in order to lure the stupid with it.
The stupid one lures the next one until the stupid one meets the smart one and the smart one falls for it.
That is the market strategy that is being pursued, also on the part of the manufacturers, who also have something to say about it.

64

I dont stream but always considered quboz because it avoided all the bs. I think many people migrated there, or are still migrating there since the mqa controversy. Supporting it, even if they do keep true flac hifi and dont mix the two will surely sour things.

1 Like
65

This is awesome its like a 2ch format war. Wait long enough and disco will be cool again.

66

Maybe this is the right way to do hi-rez…just saying.

6 Likes
67

There will be a spike in ODs from uncut PCM hitting the streets.

1 Like
68

YES!! Seems like Qobuz really got the message lol …currently listening to that and it actually sounds amazing. That’s how it’s done!

2 Likes
69

Help, what does this mean and is it science ? Think i want to discover the flaws in search of excellence. Also im not against altering the recording to gain a sterile digital version. Theres another ASR video that brings into question the source files websites obtain to market as high resolution music.

1 Like
70

I’m a Qobuz subscriber now. $12.99 a month when paid up front for the year. Some observations since I’ve been playing with it for nearly a month.

  1. It’s not as polished an interface as Tidal but workable and it doesn’t suffer from real nasties with Windows. (not as big of a deal since I use Roon)

  2. Definitely different libraries than Tidal, I found one album by Caribou that was in Tidal but not on Qobuz, but I also found DJ mixes by Roisin Murphy on Qobuz that weren’t on Tidal, so definitely a mixed bag.

  3. Another point to mention, there’s clearly suspect stuff happening at Tidal. The new Yello album, 40 Years. Not available anywhere outside of 16/44 CD quality and 24/48 Hi-Fi… well on Tidal it’s magically 24/96 MQA.

I will never claim that my ears are good enough to hear those subtle differences but it goes to support the claims on the MQA video up empty up sampling.

I’m paying more because I was getting Tidal’s college student discount $9.99 a month, but it’s a small price to pay for shedding the forced MQA even when listening to 16/44 tracks. Paying attention to Roon I was able to see a whole bunch of 16/44 tracks that were being MQA unfolded by Roon, why the need to do so? Don’t know, there is literally nothing to be gained and as the MQA video shows it’s adding artifact shit for no reason.

  1. The biggest benefit, it’s being able to listen to 24/192 tracks where with Tidal’s software unfolding for DACs without MQA, the max attainable was 24/96

That’s it, nothing but facts in this report, leaving all subjective judgements to you as the listener. :slight_smile:

6 Likes
71

I assume you mean per month?

1 Like
72

Hello,

I don’t know about Roon, which may be similar to Audirvana or simply a player that upscales.
The fact is that my listening test also confirms this
It doesn’t matter what happens to the source material once it is upscaled.

I did not hear any difference in Audirvana.
whether the file is 16/44 or 24/192 because it upscales it to 32/96 depending on what is set.

It can/will be different if you use the bad developed app in Windows.
Among other things also because mainly wasapi is used and of course the difference in the bit rates and frequencies.

The question now is does what was mentioned about MQA happen under the bad developed app and Wasapi mode with a MQA Dac?

Or can the whole story be buried if one uses a MQA dac together with Audirvana and possibly operates with the Asio to achieve better results, possibly even with Roon?

For me it doesn’t really matter whether I leave the 20$ with Tidal or Quboz.
I’m still thinking about it, but I can’t come to any conclusion about it.
Also because I know that I won’t promote buying an extra Mqa Dac, especially if I don’t have to.
I would be more interested in Denafrip’s Ares 2 than in a MQA Dac at the moment.

1 Like
73

very, very much rightfully so. The benefits of a better, higher-tier DAC far exceeds getting a lower-tier DAC, or one that doesn’t meet your sound goals, just for the (litteraly dubios) benefits of MQA. That’s an absolute no-brainer for me. Just imagine all of 16/44 sounding worse just because you want MQA … LOL. And just imagine listening to 24/192 recordings via Qobuz on your Ares II. What is MQA for again?

2 Likes
74

The nearest trash can.

5 Likes