|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
|
|
|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
|
In Reply to: RE: Uhm.. posted by Michael Lavorgna on August 21, 2017 at 12:20:52:
>> With my DAC (and your AX-5), the difference between CD-quality and high-rez if of no real consequence. <<
That is generally my experience as well. If there is something available that is one of my "top 100" favorite recordings of all time and it is available in high res, I often will pay the extra money to have the very best version possible.
Given that and given that (in my experience, at least) that the original high-res file sounds at least as good (and usually noticeably better) then the lossy-compressed MQA version of that same high-res file (which only makes sense), why the push by Stereohile writers in general to promote MQA?
Is it simply a case of the magazines promoting "equipment churn" so that there are new products to review, new products to receive ad revenue, and new things to write articles about?
If I were a journalist, I would write it from the point of view of giving advice (based on the benefit of my vastly larger experience) to a good friend or family member looking to upgrade their music system. In that scenario, MQA wouldn't deserve so much as a mention. Certainly nothing whatsoever to base a purchasing decision on. I think this is why there seems to be so much suspicion regarding the motives of both TAS and Stereophile when they go out of their way to promote MQA.
Herb Reichert's recent review of the Manhattan DAC had him recommend it over the Yggsdrasil (at half the price) apparently pretty much based on the fact that it could do a full decode of a few hundred titles on a streaming service to which the potential buyer may not even subscribe. This gives the appearance of a hidden agenda, as it makes no logical sense.
At the very most, it would have deserved a separate section aimed at those who already subscribe to Tidal, and even then he should have conducted a head-to-head of the Manhattan doing the full MQA decode versus the Yggdrasil using the software unfold available through the Tidal application. And even then noting that the MQA represents less than 1% of Tidal's catalog.
Are you starting to see why people a losing faith in the magazines? In the case of TAS, I think that most know that they will print whatever they are paid to print so that comes as no surprise. I myself am mystified as to Stereophile's constant beating of the MQA drum - as if it were bigger than HDCD, SACD, and DVD-Audio put together. And look what happened to those. Even Bob Stuart makes a compelling case for not investing in MQA. (See link below.)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
