MQA•Foolish New Algorithm? Vote!


Vote please. Simply yes or no. Let’s get a handle on our collective thinking.
The discussions are getting nauseating. Intelligent(?) People are claiming that they can remove part of the music (digits), encode the result for transport over the net, then decode (reassemble) the digits remaining after transportation (reduced bits-only the unnecessary ones removed) to provide “Better” sound than the original recording.
If you feel this is truly about “better sound” - vote Yes.
If you feel this is just another effort by those involved to make money by helping the music industry milk it’s collection of music - vote no.
Lets know what we ‘goners’ think.
P.S. imho The “bandwidth” problem this is supposed to ‘help’ with will soon be nonexistent. Then this “process” will be a ‘solution’ to a non existing problem. I think it is truly a tempest in a teacup which a desperate industry would like to milk for all its worth, and forget once they can find a new way to dress the Emporer. Just my .02

ptss

Showing 2 responses by randyhat

@mapman 

Exactly.  EVERYTHING in the audio reproduction chain is lossless.  We pick our favorite flavors.
MQA is the Cubic Zirconia of hi-res audio. To many it sounds as good as the real thing, so what’s the big deal? To others it will never matter how good it sounds, it’s still not the "real" thing. There is a lot written about MQA in the audio forums. Most of the discussion revolves around what MQA is and very little is written about how it sounds. I listen to it on TIDAL and for the most part enjoy the MQA albums. I’m glad I have a system that can take advantage of MQA and that I have the choices of MQA or non-MQA versions of many albums.