Does Qobuz sounds better?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the What HiFi community: the world's leading independent guide to buying and owning hi-fi and home entertainment products.

Tinman1952

Well-known member
May 19, 2021
1,497
920
3,070
If we are talking theory, thanks to its unique deblurring process, Tidal Masters (MQA) should sound more natural.
😂😂😂😂 that’s a good one!
Throw audio information away and completely remaster the original recording…….. 😂😂😂😂 and call it ‘deblurring’ …. what a load of rubbish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveR750

bartrik

Well-known member
Jun 4, 2021
38
26
45
My dealer, who has become a friend, is co-owner of the trptk label (magnificent recordings by the way).
Their albums are also on Tidal and Qobuz.
While both services sound good (Tidal) to excellent (Qobuz), he had some remarks.
When they controlled the streams with their equipment, they found out Tidal had altered the 16/44.1 files while Qobuz offered unaltered 24/96 files.
I don't see the benefit of that, I prefer what the sound engineer originally intended, especially when they're good (like Brendon Heinst from trptk is).
Of course, ymmv.
 
Last edited:

Tinman1952

Well-known member
May 19, 2021
1,497
920
3,070
My dealer, who has become a friend, is co-owner of the trptk label (magnificent recordings by the way).
Their albums are also on Tidal and Qobuz.
While both services sound good (Tidal) to excellent (Qobuz), he had some remarks.
When they controlled the streams with their equipment, they found out Tidal had altered the 16/44.1 files while Qobuz offered unaltered 24/96 files.
I don't see the use of that, I prefer what the sound engineer originally intended, especially when they're good (like Brendon Heinst from trptk is).
Of course, ymmv.
Tidal should definitely be more transparent about what they are doing to the files they are given. I hope that everything is not going through some ‘MQA’ process……
 

Sliced Bread

Well-known member
Jul 28, 2010
510
92
18,970
Yes the services can definitely sound different. I’ve yet to try Qobuz (but this thread has inspired me to try it), but my Apple and Tidal subscriptions are certainly different. From a quality standpoint I’d say they’re on par, but Apple lossless is a touch more vibrant and punchy, while Tidal MQA feels a touch more natural.
 

djh1697

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2008
171
30
18,620
I have Qobuz, Tidal and use Roon. To my ears Qobuz has the edge, but there isn't that much in it for files of similar resolutions. Tidal master smears the music with MQA, however, I convert all my music to DSD256, if it is below 96/16 resolution. I tried an MQA DAC, not my music! Google "neil young mqa"

I note that dBpoweramp will now rip a CD to DSD256, a whole CD taking 2Gb, probably the same as 6 CD's in FLAC format. Is there a difference? Not a massive one, but then if I had a Top Naim system, and masses of SSD hard disk storage then I might hear something.

My Roon server is based around an Intel i3, maybe changing it to some higher spec, might make the FLAC to DSD conversion more amicable.

It is worth noting that my #Cymbiosis serviced and upgraded Pink Triangle still has the edge.
 

The Matrix X

Well-known member
Sep 26, 2021
3
2
520
Qobuz is the better one. Take the album "bridge over troubled water", track "the only living boy in N.Y".
24/192. The mqa version sounds really bad. There's simply too much bass, and all other frequencies are blurred... details gone forever. Yet, they gave the mqa one a studio dot. The Qobuz version sounds 100x better. The studio engineer must be deaf, or he plays bingo for deciding when to grant a studio dot. Last year not a single 16/44 mqa was given that dot, and this year all are granted one. This shows how mqa is trying to convince people it must be sounding okay, because look...there the blue dot. Not buying it.
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts