Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads|
In Reply to: RE: Ok posted by E-Stat on February 16, 2017 at 07:05:02
I learned from my days in IT: Never be an early adopter!
what we find is vaporware . The Emperor truly is naked.
Allegedly, the entire Warner Brothers catalog is MQA enabled. It's just that you can't buy it anywhere. Oh.
This is like a Kickstarter project. :)
First, if MQA does not sound noticeably superior to standard lossless 16/44 or higher recordings then what is the point? Storage and bandwidth for audiophile are not really an issue. I have been listening to MQA Tidal (with a high end but not an MQA enabled DAC) and some recordings sound great, some sound bad so overall I am somewhat ambivalent as to the value of any sonic improvements. Call it a tie.
Secondly, I have an inherent dislike of any proprietary product that will capture entire music catalogues. I don't like all my eggs in one basket. Negative.
Thirdly, as I understand MQA, it is lossy in some sense although the parts that are lost can be easily be argued to be sonically invisible. Negative.
Finally, the MQA chain could be used as some form of DRM if desired. Not saying it will but it certainly has the ability built in. Negative.
So overall, I don't see this as some revolutionary advance and it possibly could become a big pain in the ass. I would be perfectly happy with well recorded lossless 24/96 or higher PCM.
LOL! Yes, software is particularly notorious in that regard.
I've always loved the old software vendor joke; "It's not a bug, it's a feature!"
Post a Followup:
Post a Message!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: