The mere mention of MQA creates nutters emerging from their caves like bats. I see it on all the forums. They're like blockbuster video execs looking at netflix back in the day.
For the rest of us sentient beings: spread the good word on RP. Great content, solid servers, free (I donate monthly).
Oh and: if you're not donating a buck or three each month, you shouldn't even be on these forums. Pony up for these guys.
I was (very) pleasantly surprised when I saw the MQA option when streaming via BluOS. To my ears, the sound quality has been further improved. Opinions aside, thanks Bill and Rebecca for giving us so many listening options. Where else can you get this level of quality and number of listening choices with a donation supported service model? RP has become a standard fixture in my home, car, etc. Let's make sure to keep this listening jewel around for a long time! Thanks Bill and Rebecca!
How about having the flac streams as a reference guaranteed to send a bit-perfect copy of the original CD track? It might lead to very different sound levels between tracks, but it would be a useful tool for audiophiles. Is that a possibility?
That wouldn't work. For one thing, the flac streams are the source used for transcoding into AAC & mp3.
How about having the flac streams as a reference guaranteed to send a bit-perfect copy of the original CD track? It might lead to very different sound levels between tracks, but it would be a useful tool for audiophiles. Is that a possibility?
TBH I'd prefer to listen via Roon as I can quick link on the artist/track/album and find them and add them to my library, I'm pleased to report RP has opened my ears to many a new artist and the integration with Roon make it so easy to find out about the artist.
Absolutely agree. For me, RP through Roon is a total game-changer. RP plays me great music which I can then discover more about via Roon and then add the album to my library (with a Tidal or Qobuz subscription) and generally discover more about artists previously unknown to me. Brilliant
When we're ready to launch a hi-res stream, it will be available as straight FLAC as well as MQA.
Due to the nature of how we deliver our audio, it will never be a mix of different sample rates & bit depths. Everything needs to be standardized to the same rate, probably 24/96. Even if the only master we have is 16/44.1 it will be upsampled to 24/96 and will read out as such on your DAC.
Because we mix songs together into a continuous flow, there is absolutely no way around that.
(Old post, I know but just arrived)
Thank you for that, Bill. It answers the question I often have on my mind regarding the future of RP.
Most of my digital music collection is 24 bit at least. I have a strong musical background and I believe there are many like me who can hear the difference between different violins, or pianos, or given an appropriate source, 16 bit CDs and 24 bit audio. I'm on my third LG Vxx phone mostly because of the built-in DAC. Wired into the stereo it's a beautifully full, detailed sound. Bluetooth doesn't cut it. I eagerly look forward to RP offering 24 bit audio (and I get the upsampling dilemma).
Thanks again.
There is no crap, it's a scam. Who the hell are you to tell someone on a forum to STFU? You are right about the world, but thats irrelevant to this specific forum and topic.
MQA threatens the entire music distribution chain all the way down to the artist. There is no demonstrable proof that MQA improves anything, it's actually the opposite, there is proof to the contrary.
Educate yourself as to the facts on this, rather than lecture others based on your acceptance of marketing-speak and TAS/Stereophile propaganda. MQA increases costs and decreases consumer choice. You appear to be ignorant to all of these real and verifiable facts.
Sure. Some services, labels, etc. could use MQA as a tool to do evil, exploitative stuff. But we're not. We're just offering another listening option to a free online radio station. Seems like an odd thing to get all worked up about.
Let's confine the discussion here to *our* use of MQA, shall we?
Cut the scam crap. If you don't like it, just don't use it and STFU. Find something else to complain about. There's lots of truly bad things happening around the world.
This is not one of them. Jeeze...
There is no crap, it's a scam. Who the hell are you to tell someone on a forum to STFU? You are right about the world, but thats irrelevant to this specific forum and topic.
MQA threatens the entire music distribution chain all the way down to the artist. There is no demonstrable proof that MQA improves anything, it's actually the opposite, there is proof to the contrary.
Educate yourself as to the facts on this, rather than lecture others based on your acceptance of marketing-speak and TAS/Stereophile propaganda. MQA increases costs and decreases consumer choice. You appear to be ignorant to all of these real and verifiable facts.
I use a Bluesound Node 2i however I use it as a ROON endpoint, my question is will you make the MQA stream available via ROON or will you be sticking with BLUOS ?
I can obviously access via BLUOS but I like to stay inside my ROON world if possible
Thanks in advance and keep up the great work !
Cheers
Mikey
OMG! My jaw dropped, and then I witnessed the birth of a whole new world.
MQA isn't just lossless, it's Better than lossless! Just drop 2 hits of acid and MQA's marketing-speak becomes reality.
If, in your opinion, the changes to the audio introduced by MQA detract from your listening experience, then listen to FLAC.
If all recordings were mixed and mastered perfectly â or even properly â then we'd have no need to ever process any audio files. But they're not, so we do. So that the recordings meet our standards â ie: our opinion about what sounds best.
The statement that we make about our audio quality is that â in our opinion â it sounds better than anything else out there. And that, in our opinion, the MQA encoding adds to the enjoyment of the experience.
Note the common thread in all of that: "our opinion". There is no right or wrong in the realm of music. Ultimately, it all comes down to preferences and subjective judgements.
With a few exceptions (where uncompressed masters simply aren't available) all of our master files are uncompressed. Unlike most online stations â and all FM & satellite broadcasters â we do no overall processing of our stream. Well-recorded and mastered material is presented without alteration. But if you want everything to sound exactly like your CDs, then you should probably listen to those.
Been listening to this "station" for about 20 years, the quality of which combined with the mix of tunes I've found to be unsurpassed.
MQA is lossy format, compared to FLAC which is lossess. Its proven that MQA adds lot of distortion and noise, sometimes audible. Even I use Tidal, i am trying to avoid MQA as much is possible.
But, RP confirmed that they're processing audio stream with EQ/compressor/expander/... to sound "better", asked them once when noticed songs I know and own on a CD sound very different on RP.
If MQA is "Master Quality Authenticated" - which means its original studio master - how can RP be processing it and still maintain MQA certificate?
Also MQA is made for hi-res (48/24 and up), while almost all songs or RP are 44/16 - are they using upsampler?
Are all songs on RP from uncompressed source?
If RP wants to make statement that its "high quality" and "hifi", think it needs to answer those questions first. And stop EQing the stream.
Until then, I will enjoy RP in 160/320kbps mp3, because everything above that is useless.
If, in your opinion, the changes to the audio introduced by MQA detract from your listening experience, then listen to FLAC.
If all recordings were mixed and mastered perfectly — or even properly — then we'd have no need to ever process any audio files. But they're not, so we do. So that the recordings meet our standards — ie: our opinion about what sounds best.
The statement that we make about our audio quality is that — in our opinion — it sounds better than anything else out there. And that, in our opinion, the MQA encoding adds to the enjoyment of the experience.
Note the common thread in all of that: "our opinion". There is no right or wrong in the realm of music. Ultimately, it all comes down to preferences and subjective judgements.
With a few exceptions (where uncompressed masters simply aren't available) all of our master files are uncompressed. Unlike most online stations — and all FM & satellite broadcasters — we do no overall processing of our stream. Well-recorded and mastered material is presented without alteration. But if you want everything to sound exactly like your CDs, then you should probably listen to those.
Interesting, as i dont think Schiit has an MQA Dac...so you are not getting the final "unfolding" of the file.
Thank you for your comment. Obviously my qualifications do not include being an audio engineer. You are absolutely correct in that the Schiit Modi 3+ does not accommodate MQA. That being said, the myriad of published positive and negative assessments of MQA really don't mean a lot to me personally. My only audio "skill" is evaluating whether the music that I'm listening to sounds good or not so much. As I commented previously, RP's MQA stream, through the Bluesound NODE 2i with or without utilizing the Schiit Modi 3+, sounds better to me . Perhaps if I spend more $ on a higher end DAC that accommodates MQA I might find the stream better? Today I'm happy. Maybe an upgrade tomorrow?...I'm not opposed to improving my audio streams.
MQA is lossy format, compared to FLAC which is lossess. Its proven that MQA adds lot of distortion and noise, sometimes audible. Even I use Tidal, i am trying to avoid MQA as much is possible.
But, RP confirmed that they're processing audio stream with EQ/compressor/expander/... to sound "better", asked them once when noticed songs I know and own on a CD sound very different on RP.
If MQA is "Master Quality Authenticated" - which means its original studio master - how can RP be processing it and still maintain MQA certificate?
Also MQA is made for hi-res (48/24 and up), while almost all songs or RP are 44/16 - are they using upsampler?
Are all songs on RP from uncompressed source?
If RP wants to make statement that its "high quality" and "hifi", think it needs to answer those questions first. And stop EQing the stream.
Until then, I will enjoy RP in 160/320kbps mp3, because everything above that is useless.
Although a 20+ year streamer of RP, I'm just one month or so into streaming RP via Bluesound Node 2i utilizing a Schiit Modi 3+ external DAC. Admittedly, I'm not an audiophile and I know little about the technicalities of music, thus my qualification to comment is limited to generic terms. However, friends who are in the music industry, performing and broadcasting, describe me as a critical listener. To my listening, in an A/B comparison, the MQA stream sounds "fuller" than the FLAC stream that I have streamed for several years.
Although a 20+ year streamer of RP, I'm just one month or so into streaming RP via Bluesound Node 2i utilizing a Schiit Modi 3+ external DAC. Admittedly, I'm not an audiophile and I know little about the technicalities of music, thus my qualification to comment is limited to generic terms. However, friends who are in the music industry, performing and broadcasting, describe me as a critical listener. To my listening, in an A/B comparison, the MQA stream sounds "fuller" than the FLAC stream that I have streamed for several years.
Interesting, as i dont think Schiit has an MQA Dac...so you are not getting the final "unfolding" of the file.
Although a 20+ year streamer of RP, I'm just one month or so into streaming RP via Bluesound Node 2i utilizing a Schiit Modi 3+ external DAC. Admittedly, I'm not an audiophile and I know little about the technicalities of music, thus my qualification to comment is limited to generic terms. However, friends who are in the music industry, performing and broadcasting, describe me as a critical listener. To my listening, in an A/B comparison, the MQA stream sounds "fuller" than the FLAC stream that I have streamed for several years.
I am not seeing the FLAC as an option on my Bluesound Node 2i, which I am using the S/PDIF coax output to a Schiit Audio Bifrost 2. I would prefer the FLAC stream. I only recently got the Node, because I can sign into my RP account and listen to My Favorites, as well as the other four streams. This isn't possible on the Raspberry Pi4 Volumio unit I had earlier.
Location: Greater Boston area, Massachusetts Eaarth Gender:
Posted:
May 7, 2021 - 10:16pm
ronald.dejong726 wrote:
Dear Bill,
firstly many thanks for your ongoing innovation!
I have listened to the MQA stream for some days now and switched back to the FLAC stream .
I have the Bluesound Node 2i already for a year or so. I use this in conjunction with the DAC chord Qutest.
So I use the digital signal via Coax from the Bluesound into the DAC.
I have this set up because I have found the DAC of the Node 2i okay but not exceptional.
The chord Qutest DAC is a level up. So with this I have the MQA stream with its first unfolding step according to the MQA info I could find.
It is different but to my ears the FLAC sounds more coherent.. I also compared the MQA stream directly via the bluesound node RCA output ( this has the complete unfolding step) with the FLAC via the Qutest..
Still the original FLAC does it for me. Off course it would be briljant if in the future you would send out the original Hi Res files!
anyway I thought I give the feedback, thanks again for all the great music!
Ronald
I am not seeing the FLAC as an option on my Bluesound Node 2i, which I am using the S/PDIF coax output to a Schiit Audio Bifrost 2. I would prefer the FLAC stream. I only recently got the Node, because I can sign into my RP account and listen to My Favorites, as well as the other four streams. This isn't possible on the Raspberry Pi4 Volumio unit I had earlier.
I just watched the GoldenSound video, and he is quite conclusive - the MQA is a problem, and is not as good as true high resolution FLAC. And the file size is larger than the equivalent resolution FLAC. They just upsample things, much of the time.
