What “slander”? So now one is gonna litigate in order to “cancel” criticism against a certain music file format? Not a very wise strategy, though totally understandable in this current moronic context of wokeism.
Wim’s points are legitimate and we should all be free to discuss them.
Only people who “attempt to understand the algorithm” can have an opinion on MQA?
Not to mention that a clear explanation on the implementation of the so-called “algorithm” is nowhere to be found.
When an “opinion” constitutes a word salad drawn from published materials but making no sense and, importantly, not intended to, just intended to sound as insulting as possible so that the writer looks “cool” or “smart (alec)” in print, then no, that is not an opinion.
Opinions based on listening are a different category.
Prove us wrong, then - what is your explanation for that spectrum analysis and how can it be “defended” other than resorting to his “psychoacoustics” argument?
A category perhaps best described as “feckless”. Human hearing is so variable, so influenced by the wildest of extraneous things, so fallible, that to even talk about what one thinks one hears as if it is in some way a representation of reality seems wildly irresponsible.
Are we to assume, Bill, that you advocate a process of choosing equipment entirely based on measurements, as if subjective experience is worthless? You seem to be implying the human condition is one of such fluctuation, one would barely know who one is each morning, on waking?
My take would be no, just more than any other factor “YMMV” between ears. Put another way, given the listening experience is so variable for an individual (mood, health, intoxication, etc.) it’s foolish to make assumptions across different listeners.
What, your mornings aren’t like that? 
But let’s not put words in my mouth. I listen, as well, but it’s an entirely subjective experience which does indeed vary from day to day, from hour to hour sometimes, and which I’d not adduce as indicative of any other person’s experience with the same equipment.
Sadly not, Bill, and not least during COVID…it would be very nice to awake with little memory of what has just passed. Sadly when I wake up it is always me, though I find MQA just as splendid each morning, once I have considered the runes/spectrum analyses… 
Totally agree; personal preference is pretty much a human right, and not something to trample upon. But given that, like others, I find something positive in the MQA tracks that I listen to (‘tunefulness’ is a hard one to measure, yet a core musical value, as Ivor Tiefenbrun espoused a long time ago) should I just accept that there are those that wish to cancel it, and just watch?
What I hear with my own ears is ALL THAT MATTERS. I couldn’t care less about measurements. I listen to music.
Good for you! Others care more about measurements. I’m from the latter.
What is audio then, The Human Perception of sound in the real world or a series of measurements? Surely perception is everything?
You would certainly think so, but evidently, some don’t care about how it sounds. It’s just a political thing.
Yep, I get that…
We could all learn a lot from the video you posted Chris regarding the deaf man. His pleasure was humbling.
Can you say how this works in action; what measurements influenced a decision? We live in a world of adverts, disinformation and social proof, so it would be good to understand what is better than your own ears?
Yes, I thought that might be grounding to see a man take such pleasure from music…
I’m like a broken record but I keep harking back to ghetto blasters and cassettes. It sounded fab back then.