Home Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Critic's Corner ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

RE: Many reasons...

Just one clarification: MQA wasn't designed as an archival format but as a transmission/dissemination format. If they're aiming to archive, there's not much wrong with the 192/24 they already had (for much of their catalog). If we're talking historic preservation, DSD is better because it's closer to music (i.e., a future alien race could make sense of it more easily). But there's no archival advantage to creating MQA files from 192/24 files. It's also worth pointing out that this MQA project apparently got them to finally digitize the rest of their analog archives. They could have done that at any time. Considering that MQA is not an archival format, why now?

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  K&K Audio / Lundahl Transformers   [ K&K Audio / Lundahl Transformers Forum ]

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
FAQ

Post a Message!

 Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]