MQA new kid on the block

I shall not be rushing to audition Meridian's MQA sytem even though there is now a lot of interest in this new method of encoding digital music files.

https://www.meridian-audio.com/news-events/meridian-audio-launches-mqa-master-quality-authenticated/


We now have "temporal blurring of transients" to deal with in our calculations. MQA is based on some scientific research which suggests that human beings can detect time differences of around 5 micro seconds and use this time difference to locate exactly where sounds are coming from. A time difference of 5 micro seconds is a very short time for an electro-chemical nerve transmission system to deal with, so I am very sceptical of the neuroscience and I would need to see absolute proof of such a claim.

I am not sure that my ears are capable of handling the extra resolution that MQA claims to provide.

I cannot for the life of me recognise any difference between between a CD music file and a "HIRES" one. Neither can any of my friends or family. I have always wanted to believe that "HIRES" improves on CD  but the placebo effect and confirmation bias have failed me. My £24 spent on the HIRES download of "Band On The Run" was a waste of money because when I converted the "HIRES" version to 16/44.1  to make a CD for the car I could hear no difference. The music itself sounds great.

I am not going to try and do a double blind comparison of the 256 kbps MP3 that I made of the same album for fear of failing. The "HIRES" version of the album does not sound better to my ears than the "LORES" versions.

I have got a 24/96 "HIRES" blu-ray version of Supertramp's "Breakfast in America"  this came along  with free a 320 kbps MP3. Once again I am reluctant to do a double blind ABX comparison for fear of failing. I have also got the vinyl LP version which has remained in very good condition with few clicks and pops and not much record hiss etc. The digital versions sound better to my ears, in a technical sense". The LP sounds slightly different but not so much different that I prefer the LP version to the digital one. This music sounds great too.

Before I buy an album digitised to MQA standards I shall need proof from a measurement point of view that this form of digital conversion is superior to CD. I will then need to satisfy myself that it sounds superior to my ears.

Many of us have heard "Time" on Pink Floyd's  "Dark Side of the Moon"  and it sounds very realistic to me either in digital or analogue form. The sound of the mechanical alarm clock always gives me a shock and it sounds exactly like the clock I used to have on my bedside table.  And what is more to the point, why should I pay thousands more for equipment and newly re-mastered recordings that can only sound very marginally better to my compromised ears? If , they sound better at all!