Tidal / MQA - Update - Heading 2.12

[PeterSt]

All,

Not the update yet, but an update on the status.

Quite some people have complained about the Search function not working any more in Tidal. Also, MQA albums suddenly cut prior to their end.

Both issues have been solved, although the MQA problems require some more "live" testing.
When this has been done, a first update will be posted (expect this somewhere this week). Right after that I will continue with some more functionality, especially in the Tidal Search department. And for example, Tidal Playlist are broken too, for a while now, so that should be solved in a later update as well.

The MQA thing appeared to be a tricky one, as these new(er) 16/44.1 MQA's seem to be quite the same as the 24/44.1, *but* with the "extension" of those being presented as 16/44.1 now, which expand to 24/44.1.
Can anyone follow ? ... maybe not. It took me many weeks (throughput) to finally see what is going on. Btw :

Nobody elsewhere will really notice (have noticed) because I think XXHighEnd is the only player which shows all the native data from various angles (like the 44 and 48 blue icon) as well as the bit depth before decoding, the expanded bit rate after decoding and some more which does not show elsewhere (including the possibility to not upsample by default so a 16/44.1 seems to be a 24/88.2 natively) ... but it was exactly these features which let things go wrong because they were not anticipated. Thus, if it is the assumption that MQA is always 24 bits in the delivered file, things go downhill fast when this is not the case any more, like today.

Notice that I assume that the 16/44.1 delivered file is in the end the exact same as any file which is - or previously was delivered as 24/44.1 and thus the decoding of MQA is justified (sounds better than leaving them undecoded).
However, it is to be kept in mind that normal Redbook CDs from before, have now turned into 16/44.1-delivered MQA and this is not the same at all as the original Redbook (I checked). And it is up to you which of the two (original vs 16/44.1 MQA) sounds better.

The upcoming update will have a provision to enable the Preparation of the new 16/44.1 MQA while your old 24/44.1 is left untouched; the file name of the 16/44.1 MQA will contain something like {MQA16} instead of {MQA} - I must decide on the definitive format of it.

When talking about MQA anyway, I noticed that previously existing decoded 24/88.2 and 24/96 largely disappeared from Tidal and changed to 16/44.1 (blue icon) versions. I have no idea why that is. Here too, your formerly Prepared 88.2 and 96 (or 176.4 and 192) versions, differentiate from the others, at least by means of again the {MQA16} tag, but possibly they also differentiate by a new Tidal Album ID - the large number between {}.

If I have more to say about this first upcoming upgrade, I will add new posts in this topic.
Questions ? shoot.

Peter

[dsm]

Hi Peter,

I noticed that one album with a blank, white MQA label on XXHighend plays at 48khz 24 bits, but that exact same album file on Roon is listed as FLAC 48khz 24 bit, MQA 96khz.

When played, it is decoded by Roon's MQA decoder at the 96khz rate. I don't know if this gives you any clue to what is going on though...

[PeterSt]

Hi David,

Do you have the Album ID of that for me ?
(or just share (copy/paste) the link from Tidal)

I could show you how it shows today (all tests OK so far).

Thanks !
Peter

[dsm]

Hi Peter,

This is the album I double checked before posting but I am pretty sure I have seen it with others.

https://tidal.com/browse/album/186513969

Silfur, Dustin O'Halloran

[PeterSt]

David,

This shows as normal as can be with my current version here (2.11b, due 2.12).

First screenshot is how it shows after search (with the link you gave). Second is with playing a track (no explicit Prepare, but that won't matter).

I noticed that one album with a blank, white MQA label

Do you mean nothing like the "96" shows ? just blank, that little area ? If that is so, XXHighEnd could not hand the album to the decoder for some specifics which is caused by some authorization problem. But, it should give a message about that. This could be the message "this only impacts the Coverart Icon" or something similar.

If we can not get hold of this specific issue, then we better wait until I uploaded 2.12. But I don't think it can make a difference regarding this specific issue. However, notice that your rights over there (USA) can be different from mine here (Netherlands). But ... this should just be Tidal rights and not specifically MQA related.

Best regards,
Peter

[dsm]

This is the image I get and what I mean by the blank one.

I don't get any errors when preparing this album. My MQAData in the prepared folder is -

AudioQuality : HI_RES
MQARate : -

[PeterSt]

All right, thank you David.
Quite some things have changed, and let's hope that the upgrade solves this. If not, we'll definitely work it out.

Thank you again,
Peter

[coliny]

Hi Peter

I have some MQA albums which are 24bit/48K but don't play with MQA decoding switch on. I Just get blank screen with message 'device allocated but can't play
2/24/384000/2304000/6'

It should be 192000 for my DAC and is if I switch off MQA Decoding and then it plays OK.

Example:-
https://tidal.com/browse/album/194761739

Regards, Colin

[PeterSt]

Thank you very much, Colin.
I currently can not test that anymore because all has been realised / finished by now months ago. But because there's a huge make-over for the search engine for Tidal, I can not upgrade without finishing that. The mere point is : it is difficult to cope with the sh*t Tidal throws at us, because if they keep on changing, I better wait until they finished their changes (if ever).

Anecdotal : More than 10 years ago I stopped the support for Amazon (which was used for obtaining coverart) because they kept on changing things, leaving the developer with a week of work each 6 months or so. With Tidal it is worse because Tidal just "does" it without notification and without documentation. Unbelievable but true.
Modern times, I suppose.

Kind regards,
Peter