New reissues noted today (10/11/18).

The Queen and Carpenters catalogue available on Release Date December 12, 2018.

I have a few of these Hi-Res CD's and enjoy them. I still believe the SHM-SACD are the best but this comes in a solid second place.

The Queen titles that I was not able to attain due to non-availability can fulfilled with these reissues. The prices are $26.75.

For more info and title reissues:

http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/feature/Worlds ... usic_Japan

The Queen titles will probably be the same as the SACD Japan releases which were clones of the Ludwig remasters. I bought the set of SACDs and could not hear any difference with the redbook and kept the cheaper option.

The MQA discs I have heard which feature 2018 mastering do sound nice (Traffic, Steely Dan). I plan on getting the ones I like that are newly mastered.

My understanding based on reading:

1. MQA is a lossy 24 bit; kind of like a hi-res mp3.

2. MQA requires a Meridian licensed decoder to get the sound as intended (turns out so does "HDMA" on blu-rays!; HDMA stands for High Definition Meridian Audio). On regular cd players, MQA is 16/44 at best (again, my understanding is they use a lossy algorithm. I don't know if that impacts the first 16 bits or not).

I get these because my OPPO loves them (and so do I).

Does the 205 have an MQA decoder?

The UDP-205 does have an MQA decoder. The user needs to upload the November 2017 firmware update for MQA audio files and the March 2018 firmware update for MQA CD.

That is correct!

That's good to know. As I mentioned, I've read some negative things from audio pros, but I would like to compare an MQA with a true 96/24 file of the same master & hear the difference (if there is one).

If it's truly lossless, it should sound MUCH better than any equivalent SHM (or other) cd, as cd is physically limited to 16 bit.

As much as I love the few titles that I have I still give the edge to the SHM-SACD's. But with the very limited releases on this format (SHM-SACDs) I am very glad to have an alternative with MQA.

So with this MQA format, it's not really worth it unless you have a player with a decoder, correct?

I mentioned "SHM CD's". Any well mastered SACD is likely better than MQA.

The point of MQA as I understand it is to get 24 bit on a cd (much smaller data area than an SACD)

I believe we need the SHM as well with SACD to really compete or beat MQA. For me the SHM alone is not worth the added cost but couple with SACD now were talking.

Wow, what a great surprise. I am preparing to play 'Waiting For The Sun' from the new Doors box and there is an insert stating that the disc is encode with A Hi-Res MQA. EXCELLENT!

I purchased three of these MQA CDs even though I had serious doubts. As far as I know, this is a lossy format and simply by definition have lost some of the musical information and should technically be inferior. I figured that even if I was disappointed with these CDs, they would be easy flips later as these are the type of discs that generally become collectable later on.

The three I bought were:
Ritchie Blackmore's Rainbow
Genesis - Foxtrot
The Police - Synchronicity

The three versions I A/B'ed them with are:
Rainbow - original USA CD issue on Polydor (which is a good sounding CD IMO)
Genesis - Foxtrot - the remaster from the USA 1970-1975 box set (NOT the SACD that was in the European sets)
The Police - Synchronicity - the Mobile Fidelity CD (which is a superior sounding CD IMO)

I'm listening on an OPPO-205 with OPPO PM-1 headphones plugged directly into the OPPO-205 (no additional headphone amp).

In terms of the loudness level. If I'm listening to non-brickwalled CDs that were released in the 80s, generally I'll have the volume level of the player set somewhere around 52. If I'm listening to shitty mastered CDs from the 10s, generally I have the volume level of the player set somewhere in the range of 28-31. For the Rainbow and The Police MQA-CD's, I had the volume level set at either 44 or 45, for the Genesis MQA-CD I had to turn it down just a bit and settled on 41. When I was listening to the Genesis CD from the 1979-1975 box, I had the volume set at 37 so actually had to turn up the volume a bit for the MQA-CD. Personally I thought the dynamics were there and nothing on any of these MQA-CDs seemed squashed.

In the A/B comparisons, I'm actually somewhat surprised to say I liked the MQA-CDs slightly better in all three cases. So I'd say my expectations for the Rainbow and The Police discs were exceeded, because I was happy with the originals and didn't think the MQA-CD versions would be any better (actually expected The Police one to be worse). But IMO the Genesis MQA-CD was a disappointment, because with it being a new mix/master, I figured if the MQA-CD format was really great then the MQA-CD should have been leaps and bounds better, but it really isn't IMO.

I really don't know if the difference would be significant enough to justify $30+ purchases on more of these. There is also a very much a your mileage may vary situation. To me the biggest difference were that the drums sounded a bit sharper on the MQA-CDs and there was a bit more bottom end. But if your ears prefer a more "resonate" type drum sound, then the MQA-CDs probably are not for you.

One thing not really worth noting but I thought interesting is that the top side of the discs are the same green color as the markers that 80s CD audiophiles used to mark up their discs.

Wrong, the ones that sound better are because of the new mastering so they will sound good on any player. Some will not sound better, it depends on the mastering quality.

I bought John Barleycorn, it sounds amazing, no OPPO 205 here.

As I've said, I haven't heard it. There are a number of articles that pop up by Googling that concern me.

The majority of these new discs are based on a previous mastering but some are newly mastered in 2018 and might be worth adding if you are a fan. As for the ones based on a previous mastering, caveat emptor.

Lossy "24 BIT": Listening Test MQA & Streaming

I had an interesting experience today. I got to compare an MQA 24 bit edition of the new David Crosby with the CD & also a "24 bit" version of the Bowie box that was said to be a "24 bit" Tidal Stream with the standard 16 bit version. Played all on my hi-end system through my non MQA Oppo 95.

I first checked both 24 bit files with Trader's Little Helper, to make sure they weren't mislabeled PCM files. They weren't. Both came back as "Unknown file format or corrupt". VLC does show both as being 24 bit.

I didn't necessarily hear what I expected.

First the Crosby: Though Lossy, the MQA simply destroyed the cd as far as sound quality goes. I really didn't expect this; if anything I expected the opposite; both because MQA is lossy & because I don't have a decoder (It did just dawn on me that because I acquired the MQA as a file, it may already be decoded; that would at least partially explain why it sounds so much better than cd without a decoder.). Compared to the cd, the MQA had way more depth, definition & a smoother tone. In fact, it shows up as 44/24 (lossy) & 44/24 (lossless) doesn't usually sound this good.

I noticed that HDT is going to have the DC also. If there's is a true PCM 24, it will be very interesting to compare that with the MQA version. What is also interesting is a 45 minute MQA version of the cd was 684 mb (as .wav files), compared to the PCM 16 bit version at 456 mb.

The apparent problem there is the point of MQA as I understand it is to fit a 24 bit file onto a physical cd. Unless there are other variables I'm not aware of, it looks like just over 45 minutes is the limit.

The Bowie (said to be a Tidal stream; I don't know that for a fact) was the opposite.

Ironically what I preferred in the cd version is what I usually prefer in 24 bit over 16: the cd version had more depth, sound staging & was smoother. I guess I expected some sort of a negative outcome on the stream; though not necessarily this one. Basically, the "24 bit" stream sucked (& the cd set is not highly regarded sonically either; but the stream was definitely worse).

Again, if anything I'm somewhat shocked by the MQA; that any lossy file sounds better than a cd from the same master.

Adding to the above:

I also was able to pick up a true 88/24 LPCM version of the Crosby:

Quick comparison between the 88/24 & the 44/24 MQA: Despite having the same lousy DR8 compression numbers, I prefer the LPCM 88/24 on quieter parts, while the MQA is smoother sounding on louder sections. I don't know enough about the technology to explain any of this; but it is odd.

Again, both 24 bit versions destroy the cd by comparison.

This is going to be my last comment (I promise) I think there's something in the MQA that smooths out the harshness from the pretty extreme compression used on the entire album (what a shame they did that).

One sign of quality digital is really hearing subtle reverb. Another is hearing the voices sound almost 3 dimensional on a well recorded album. The 88/24 totally wins there; but it is a bit harsh, which the MQA seems to smooth out a bit. As far as depth, the 24 bit PCM is as big of a step up from the MQA as the MQA was from the cd. One other thing I don't like on the MQA is the upper & mid bass. It just doesn't sound natural.

Now I'm curious to do a similar comparison on an MQA that isn't compressed to death.

Just a little to add, but with the caveat that I haven't done near the critical listening that Geff has....

I have the Oppo 205 & before I upgraded the firmware to encode MQA, I listened to Steely Dan's MQA version of "The Royal Scam" a couple times. Upon the 2nd listen, I was highly impressed. To my ears it was a big upgrade over the latest US-CD remaster of that album. Then I upgraded the firmware, and while I think I heard even more improvement, it wasn't to the extent I'd expected, but still great. I really have no idea if what I'm hearing is due to an updated remaster that I like vs. MQA (or a little of both). I also bought the MQA version of the Beach Boys' "Endless Summer", and while good, and seemingly better bass than I'd heard on the gold DCC CD I have, it just sounds a bit "off" to me, not sure why. Will have to do more critical listening to that one too. For some reason, the 2nd time around with "Royal Scam" sounded way better than the first time, even without changing anything. May be just that getting used to a bit different sound out of an album I've heard a 100 times, my mood at the time, or whatever...??

The one I heard was the new Crosby. I also heard an improvement from straight cd to decoded MQA; but to my ears true lossless 24 bit sounded better than decoded MQA. I have not yet heard encoded but not decoded MQA in a "shoot out".