In Reply to: RE: Gasp! More Jaws Dropping over MQA in Los Angeles! posted by ahendler on June 11, 2017 at 17:28:10:
>> It costs him nothing extra. <<
Very true - for now. Which is puzzling to me. Clearly MQA files are more expensive than Redbook CD files, both to create (encoding costs), to store (larger file size), and to stream (roughly double the bandwidth of Redbook CD). Who is absorbing these added costs, and how long do you expect them to continue doing so?
>> I have done a lot of comparisons on the 2L site. When you compare the same master file in different resolutions including MQA the differences are very small. Certainly no jaw dropping experience. <<
Am I correct in inferring that "the differences were very small" not only applies to MQA, but also between extreme resolutions (eg, DXD) and "normal" high-resolution (eg, 96/24)?
Thanks!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Gasp! More Jaws Dropping over MQA in Los Angeles! - Charles Hansen 17:41:50 06/11/17 (6)
- RE: Gasp! More Jaws Dropping over MQA in Los Angeles! - Ivan303 08:04:53 06/12/17 (0)
- RE: Gasp! More Jaws Dropping over MQA in Los Angeles! - ahendler 19:16:31 06/11/17 (4)
- RE: Gasp! More Jaws Dropping over MQA in Los Angeles! - Charles Hansen 15:38:58 06/12/17 (0)
- They will ask for their money eventually. - jusbe 08:54:45 06/12/17 (2)
- Depends on who 'they' is.... - Ivan303 09:48:30 06/12/17 (1)
- RE: Depends on who 'they' is.... - Isaak J. Garvey 09:59:39 06/12/17 (0)