I have been struggling with a similar problem–how to get mqa with my ND555. I just posted a potential solution on the “MQA not supported by Naim” forum. I have pasted that here. A similar idea might work for the NDS.
Well I am settling in on a plan. The idea of running the ND555 into a $2k Mytek bothered me a little, especially if it was using the Mytek dac, which is very good, but not sure if it would be a reasonable expectation to have it compete with the Naim. I don’t want to abandon the Naim and get something else which was MQA compliant.
So I am thinking to do the following: Get the upscale Mytek Manhattan II with network card. Its about 20% the cost of the ND555. I would then be able to stream Tidal Masters and others with mqa and hi rez. It also has a line level preamp analog input to which I would input the output of the ND555. Its preamp line level does have a volume control, that can be bypassed. I would use the Mytek to select the ND555 for CD/redbook/Unity Core/Naim Radio which would keep that channel pretty much in tact and give access to the material that I currently use. The other source I have is downloaded USB jump drives, which can still be plugged into the Naim Core or the ND555.
As a bonus, the Mytek does have a phono card option if I should ever go Vinyl. It also has a 6 watt head phone amp which might run my Stax headphones. I think this solution checks off all the boxes. I now have to talk to someone about how the Nucleus and Roon will play into this. The Mytek is Roon Ready.
If this reply is correct, then I think the answer is that it cannot be done. The NDS (or ND555) would need to be able to pass a ‘bit-perfect’ stream to the Brooklyn or Manhatten in order for the Mytek DAC to be able to detect an MQA stream.
If the Naim streamer cannot do this, then it simply won’t work.
In my (2nd) system, my sonore MicroRendu passes a bit-perfect stream to my Mytek Brooklyn+ DAC via USB.
Just to be a little up-beat, if you have access to Roon, then I think that both of you will be happy with the Roon 1st MQA unfold through your NDS or ND555 streamers.
This might work, but I am not absolutely sure. I still think you would be better off saving some money and living with the 1st MQA unfold from Roon for your ND555. It will be very good indeed!
I tend to agree with you about using only the first unfold with roon being the most cost effective solution. When it comes to audio, we don;t always take that path. I realize that the anolog outs from the ND555 will be slightly colored by the line stage of the Mytek. Should be fine.
The only other option is for Naim to do a full MQA firmware update of the ND555. I would prefer that, but I would not need to know when, but only a work from Naim that it was in the pipeline.
I don’t get why someone would choose to take one of the best (and maybe the best) digital sources and shove it through another device which ‘will be slightly coloured’ just to enable their system to use a lossy ‘hi-res’ format. It really doesn’t make sense to me.
I would think using Roon to do the first unfold and then send to the ND555 would achieve far better and consistent results.
Hi Bailyhill and everyone who has responded to my original question
Bailyhill - I think that this is an interesting option but I would have a problem with the (likely) degradation of the signal from the ND555 or NDS. Your wish for Naim to offer a software solution would only work for the first unfold (unless the necessary hardware is already in situ without our knowledge!). However I have tried this first unfold with Meridian equipment and it is very good, although not as detailed as the NDS playing Tidal non MQA tracks. Roon will also offer the first unfold but involves the use of a computer I believe and this is something I would like to avoid.
I have posed my original question to Mytek and am currently awaiting a response. If the digital output of the NDS will pass the bit perfect MQA signal then to input to a full MQA DAC would be another solution. I will need to pose this question to Naim too, but I will await the reply from Mytek first before I do. I will offer the reply here, when I get it.
Good question. As I understand it, the lossy hi rez signal sounds better. It corrects for errors made in the A to D converters in the record process among other things. These corrections necessarily make the output not bit bit perfect, but presumably more perfect with respect to the original music, which is what I care about. I expect the result to be more convincing.
Folks use “lossy” as a description of something bad. Its not that in my mind. If my bit perfect lossless system made me think that the performaces were all in the room, then I probably would not pursue this. So far, I cannot remember most who have tried the first mqa unfold saying that they did not perfer it. Not everyone will. Not all systems will hear the difference. But a lot seem to say that they do get better results. That is why I want to try it. I trust my ears. That is what its all about.
the internal dac of the nds will be disabled in that case. A bit waste of money. But the sound would be the transport of the nds feed by a brooklyn dac.
Some here use ndx with chord hugo, it’s the same logic.
however, as others pointed, i don’t know if it will decode entirely the mqa files. We will soon know i hope. I doubt also that the sound will be better than alone nds, even for mqa files vs 16/44.
It includes comments like this:
“I compared the analog and digital volume controls, and the vast majority of the time I preferred the analog control. When I switched between the two controls the digital control sounded less harmonically complex—the word “threadbare” kept appearing in my listening notes. I also spent a lot of time using analog sources with the Manhattan II. With its three analog inputs I was able to connect both my turntables and a tape deck. And how good is the Manhattan II as an analog preamplifier? Good enough that the sonic differences between my two turntables were obvious.”
I think the notion of a lossy high res signal somehow magically correcting for errors in the A to D conversion process during recording, with no possible way of knowing what those errors might be, is pure fantasy.
Of course someone may prefer the sound of a lossy signal, particularly if it’s a poor quality recording, but that’s a different matter entirely.
Best
You need to understand the definition of lossy. It the very fact that mqa is correcting the phase errors of the A to D that by definition makes it lossy since it is no longer bit perfect to the original recording. However it might be a lot more bit perfect to the original sound, which is what folks are claiming. I am going to let my ears do the deciding, what true audiophiles always do anyway. Oh yea, and I won’t be looking for poor quality recordings, I will be looking for excellent ones.
No doubt many of the denigrators of MQA will continue to use the term ‘lossy’ in a pejorative way to describe MQA.
I think that it is widely accepted that MQA cannot be described as truly lossless. However, I personally am of the opinion that a description of ‘not lossless’ would be a fairer one to apply to MQA rather than ‘lossy’, which in many cases is used to imply erroneously that MQA can be no better than MP3 and by some that it is worse.
The subtlety between “lossy” and “not lossless” strikes me as slightly and unnecessarily desperate. It reminds me of the saying “I may not always be right, but I am never wrong!”
If you prefer listening to a lossy coding format, fine! No one will try to stop you.
I simply enjoy listening to music that I like and that sounds ‘good’ to my ears and on my systems. The question of whether or not I am listening to a ‘lossy coding format’ does not come into it. Yes - I would be a little surprised if someone were to try to stop me, although there are some anti MQA zealots who would like nothing better than to stop streaming services from adopting MQA - I am very glad that you are not one of those.
However, I will claim that my position in respect of MQA is not particularly ‘desperate’ nor particularly contentious, given that I simply find MQA files (to my ears and on my systems) often to sound ‘subtly better’ than their 16bit equivalents on Tidal. I claim no more than that.
There are no absolutes in respect of the subjective nature of music, music reproduction and sound quality, and it always slightly amuses me when others feel differently and are absolutely sure of their points of view. And I really don’t think that I am ‘never wrong’ - I am very nearly infallible, but I recall that once in the very distant past …….
My wife claims (sometimes with a hollow laugh) that I am occasionally wrong, but I prefer to think of myself as diversely right (ie all qualities of rightness qualify as right) and it’s more a matter of perception amongst those who, like her, may from time to time hold a contrary view!
But getting back to HiFi, as my ears degraded, I long ago decided that it’s mostly about enjoying the music despite the imperfections in what you hear and if you can as well grab a bit of enjoying the sound as distinct from the music, so much the better.
As a case in point, we were at Sadler’s Wells a few days ago, sitting in the centre of the front stalls, one row back from the front, and the music played live by a very capable orchestra was Stravinsky’s Rite of Spring. The sound was excellent and at times exhilarating. The music is fantastic of course and the English National Ballet was amazing, but the rasp from a tuba off some feet to the right and the slam of the drums was truly hair-raising.
Best
Why cant you just download the MQA and transcode it to FLAC/PCM offline with a simple utility?
Is there some copy protection in the way? Or other legal suff?
What do you do if you bought MQA downloads and then upgade to a system with no MQA-support? Is it possible to at least get the original non-messed redbook 44/16 without the extra MQA-bulk?
How do I make MP3/AAC for my iPhone? Dealing with MQA on the device will surely be a drag on the battery?
