A 'more objective' take for Rational Audiophiles. Among other topics!
X/Twitter: @Archimago
E-Mail: archimagosmusings(at)outlook.com
[Some items linked to affiliate accounts - I may receive gift certs from qualifying purchases.]
Showing posts with label Mytek. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mytek. Show all posts
Saturday, 8 July 2017
MEASUREMENTS: MQA Filters on Mytek Brooklyn & Thoughts on USB Doohickeys
Hey folks... It's summer and I'm in and out of town doing a bit of R&R mixed with the day job.
I sent my friend with the Mytek Brooklyn and Fireface ADC a package of the MQA "Render" tagged files for testing. As you can see above, that's what the MQA filters look like with the Mytek Brooklyn serving as "Renderer" for the impulse responses. If you look at the top row, we see that the Brooklyn's standard digital filter at 24/96 is the same as what MQA uses for playing back 96kHz "original" unfolded PCM. This is different from the Dragonfly Black DAC presented a couple weeks back where the standard filter at 24/96 is a much sharper one and would shift to the weaker MQA filter only when it detects the MQA Render tagged data.
Saturday, 4 February 2017
COMPARISON: Hardware-Decoded MQA (using Mytek Brooklyn DAC)
I don't have an MQA-capable DAC myself (and honestly owning one is not high on my list of priorities), but a friend does happen to have the Mytek Brooklyn which is fully MQA-native and has the ability to decode all the way to 24/384. Furthermore, he has the use of a professional ADC of fantastic quality - the RME Fireface to make some recordings of the output from the DAC.
![]() |
| Image from Mytek. Obviously very capable DAC! |
1. Can we show that hardware-decoded MQA is closer to an original signal beyond the 88/96kHz decoding already done in software?
2. Can we compare the hardware decoder with the output from the software decoder? How much difference is there between the two?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

