Interesting – audio things leading to benefits for the greater community. They should have a plaque with your name on it at the switching station!
4 Likes
3 posts were merged into an existing topic: Power Discussion: Power cables, conditioners, regenerators, surge protectors, outlets, dedicated lines
To bring this thread back and to simultaneously address Raspberry Pi audio, consider the following deathtrap XLR amplifier:
I’d avoid buying this for its open and unstable construction (i.e., shock hazard), nor do I see the point when there are 100s of quality audio products on the market. Only $149.99. Bring your own Pi (bottom board).
In contrast, the Khadas Tone2 Pro looks rather professional (the first version was just a bare DIY board that worked with the Pi and other devices).
6 Likes
A couple of years ago, I finished off a bottle of Tokaji 5 Pottonyos after a birthday celebration.
Its a very pretty bottle so I stuck a candle in it and placed it on my right speaker.
WOW. I experienced a more inky blackness, Better rhythm and pace and a veil was lifted from in front of my speakers.
The next morning, except for a headache, everything returned to normal.
9 Likes
This video came out today. 
astic.
13 Likes
Best argument I’ve heard for switching from TIDAL to Qobuz. I think that I’m going to finally pull the trigger on a switch.
6 Likes
This is absolutely fantastic. Well-researched, well-presented, and approached in a professional manner. I particularly appreciate that he didn’t seem to be “out to get” MQA, and reached out to them for a response. I didn’t really have a particular opinion on MQA, from a technical perspective, prior to watching this. However, being a subscriber to both Tidal and Qobuz (more for content coverage than anything else, as it isn’t a perfect overlap), I had noticed that I consistently preferred the Qobuz lossless file to the Tidal MQA version of a track, in terms of sound quality, whenever both were available. When I first got into Roon (making both services easily accessible at the same time) I frequently compared the two, just out of curiosity, and I gradually shifted to only using the Qobuz version, if available.
Needless to say, it was fascinating to see objective research back up my own, subjective experience.
Now I need to decide if it’s worth losing the Tidal content coverage as part of a protest subscription cancellation…
10 Likes
I’m even more certain of my initial decision to not mess with streaming.
What good is having a huge catalog of music if it is of dubious quality?
I’ll stick with Ripped CD’s or true HiRez files.
Mark Gosdin
2 Likes
I did cancel Tidal and start Qobuz last night. I do like Tidal’s selection in some areas. And in the first years, it seemed that artists knowing that they were going to use MQA may have taken more care in mastering. But if many of the “masters” are just upsampled redbook, I don’t want to pay for that. I had noted some odd numbers on ROON also. One of the kickers for me was that I listen to Radio Paradise quite a bit, and have not heard much - if any difference between their streamed FLAC and Tidal. This video points out a probable cause.
3 Likes
With my current hardware I can often hear the difference between compressed audio and Redbook, and compressed reliably leads to fatigue. However, I can’t reliably distinguish between Redbook and the ultra quality formats. Each particular recording/mastering is more important.
As DACs improved over the years, most (what percentage?) post-Redbook formats may reflect wishful thinking.
Marketers always gonna market.
3 Likes
So, I have to respectfully disagree, here. The streaming quality, even of MQA, is quite good. Sure, it isn’t perfect, and streaming straight FLAC is even better. They’re just barely worse than having the files locally, and the fact that you have access to virtually infinite music is an invaluable benefit. Even if local FLAC files are marginally better, Tidal and Qobuz are worlds better than lossy streaming (e.g. Spotify 320 Kbps), and this is an inexpensive way to be able to trial whatever music you want for as long as you want - and then you can buy the music you like most to your heart’s content.
9 Likes
@andris we just don’t see this issue with MQA, Tidal & Streaming the same way. Hardly surprising since we are two very distinct people. As they say, “It would be a boring world if we were all the same.”
If it satisfies your needs then by all means stream, I can’t deny that there is an amazing variety of music available.
I will still be happy without streaming and so it goes.
Mark Gosdin
2 Likes
Diversity is key.
It seems your takeaway was the streaming service itself. My takeaway though was on hardware and licensing fees. I mean, until this video I had a tolerance in purchasing a MQA enabled device even though I was never interested in MQA myself. However, after seeing this, I just can’t do it any more because I’m not willing to pay for 3rd party fees on something I won’t use. We already have taxes for that. 
Their marketing is so strong that “everything” has to be MQA-enabled in these days. 
3 Likes
I really do like the MQA masters of some recordings. Santana’s “Africa Speaks” for example. I’ve not yet listened to it on Qobuz hi-res. But like the other legit masters this is not an upsample of 44.1. It was clearer in vocals, drums, and staging than the standard flac. But there have been a lot of more recent “Tidal Masters” that did not sound that much better to me. Couple that with albums that suddenly have been “remastered” and suddenly had TIDAL MASTERS when I know the original was analog. Think early Who, Led Zep 1,2,&3, The Band, Bluesbreakers, - music that I grew up with. I can usually pull out the vinyl if I want a real comparison.
This is not to say that I won’t find resampled and remastered work on Qobuz. But that purple light don’t mean a thing about the artists original intent. Especially if that intent was in the smashing guitars phase. So don’t show me a Master and Artists intent for the 1972 Blue Öyster Cult album. I was there baby.
6 Likes
A few months ago I tested Qobuz vsTidal and concluded that Qobuz sounded better to me as well. I noticed that Tidal was louder but once I adjusted levels and did numerous A/B comparisons, I preferred Qobuz.
How do people feel about paying for something that was not delivered? I’m wondering if there’s enough evidence here to form a legal case even though that was probably not the original intent. I was surprised to hear how Neil Young pulled all his tunes out of tidal.
2 Likes
I also did A/B comparison with Tidal and Qobuz, at the end I found Qobuz was more to my taste, I didn’t like the idea of not having the hardware that supports MQA, I know Tidal will uncompress MQA for me but the thought of not been done on my end was an issue for me, and didn’t want to spend the extra money on MQA support, also I do like the digital booklet that Qobuz offers for some albums and also I like the extra info they provide about the album, artist and song.
2 Likes
I used to have them both until the firs of the month and dropped Tidal and kept Qobuz. With my downloads on my NAS , my CD’s and my LP’s I just figured I would just hang with what I got. Even with DACS that can handle MQA, I could never really ID any real difference in sound to benefit my needing it.
3 Likes
Dolby ATMOS. Listened with headphones - one way is sort of binaural, but no, it’s ATMOS. Get an old pair of Bose 901 speakers and put a band over them to make em into headphones. Well that’s not quite my view. Heard the ELAC speakers with the ATMOS tops - did not sound bad. But did it change the timber of the ELACS? I remember early 4 channel sound. Dynaco made a little mixing box, and there were quadraphonic records. Done right, you did lose some of the local room sound. Best implementation I heard of that was using 4 Polk SDA-1 (Wood Version) Circa 1985 speakers. Then came the various subwoofers and middle speakers 2.1 4.1 5.1 7.1 Trying to re-create movies.
And don’t get me wrong - Dolby sounds good in theaters. Don’ know if it’s the new ATMOS or not.
I was listening to some of the pointers from the Dolby page to videos on artists using ATMOS [using Audeze LCDi3 and Cipher Cable], mixing engineers, all kind of stuff. Immersive, they say. Too much reverb I say. Immersive they say. Yes, when this girl speaks or sings it sounds as if I’m in her mouth. I don’t need that realism - reminds me of Rosanne Hosannasana Saturday Night Live looking under her tongue.
The link below has Billie Eilish video in ATMOS. Supposed to be ATMOS on Apple Music, Prime Music and TIDAL.
Apple even has a support page:
You need to listen to it a bit. For me, it’s fine for movies. But for audio???
Is it a GIMMICK?
2 Likes
Adding to the above. Listened for a while to the Apple Music “Made for Spatial” playlist - 164 songs - many of them warhorses. This is a better test for what Dolby Atmos does for music - although I am still listening with headphones and not atmos-enabled speakers.
A word on that - many devices seem to be “enabled” but that hardly means that it’s designed for Atmos. In speakers, SONOS and some of the others are. Most of Apple senses Beats or Dr.Dre phones, or Airpods/Airpod Max.
For my listening I switched Apple Music preferences to “Always On” which is what’s recommended for non-apple Headphones.
One song on the list, I Want You Back by the Jackson 5 sounded very good indeed with Atmos. Very nice spatial positioning. Good clarity. The sound is not complicated. Grover Washington Jr’s Just the Two of Us also sounded pretty good, although it felt like a tad too much reverb. Several Beatles selections, Come Together was a bit of a surprise. It sounded as if the cymbals were actually above the kick drum which was quite realistic, but inexplicably for a few seconds it sounded as if the cymbal had shifted position to the bottom center before re-appearing in the upper left. Lucy in the Skies with Diamonds passes muster, as it’s supposed to sound psychedelic. Rush’s Tom Sawyer was pretty raw, as it’s supposed to be. OK for that style of rock. Queen… Another One Bites the Dust did not seem to benefit of lose - just a different presentation. But I give a thumbs down to “Bohemian Rhapsody” because it does NOT sound like guys singing in a car - which is how I have had Wayne’s World make an indelible impression with it on my cerebrum…
1 Like
I wouldn’t say gimmick, I’d say it has a narrow and specific intent. Multi-channel home theater systems need to (1) carry a lot of separate signals in restricted bandwidth, and (2) keep each channel distinct from others to produce quick theater effects. There’s no time to savor musical details when hearing a gun shot, screeching tires, or the sound of a fist punching another person. In bringing back my old 5.1 receiver for its good stereo amp, I tested the two channel performance through the internal DAC and digital 6 channel inputs (i.e., Toslink fiber optic). Your description above is identical to that dated DTS decoder: very distinct and position-grounded but excessively forward sounds.
Some music was spatialized and channel-happy from the start (e.g., Hendrix All Along the Watchtower, etc.). A lot of music is recorded through a few mics and mixed to present a narrow basic stage. It’ll never benefit, and there ways to simulate spatial effects without hardware too:
