Now that you’ve tried the 48kHz multiples, try the 44.1kHz multiples MQA instead, e.g. Magnificat album above, or other 2L albums. Check the signal paths.
It’s only logical you get the 16/44.1 MQA when you streamed a “Tidal Master” album and you set the setting to HiFi and there is no 16/44.1 Plain PCM available as a separate album.
You are basically telling the server to give me the CD Quality of this “Tidal Master” album, or in other words I want to listen to the undecoded version of the album because you set the setting to HiFi only.
But it isn’t CD though. It’s still 44.1/16 MQA. So MQA, but somehow even worse.
This is all academic when the debate was whether Hi-Fi tier subscribers were going to get lossless 44.1/16 PCM as the tier itself has been marketed as lossless. And it isn’t. So the user is not getting the choice they thought they were and all because the PCMs are gradually being removed by Tidal.
This is not a sound quality consideration, and neither should it be. It’s a consumer question and one that has grave implications on consumer choice and innovation across the future of the industry.
All else is moot.
The 16/44.1 MQA you get from a 24bit container is lossless.
…
Porsche sell the Taycan Turbo S. It is fully electric and does not have a turbo.
Look, if people are that aggrieved, why not make a legal challenge? [Moderated]
Off topic, but I looked at the Porsche site and got pretty excited by the “Build your own” section before realising I’d taken it far too literally…
It might indeed be entertaining and I’d guess it’s far from cut and dried. MQA’s position has moved from “lossless” to “audibly lossless” while still maintaining “use your ears to hear the difference”. If there’s an audible difference and MQA is formally “lossy”, (it is) then it might be interesting to see where the legal chips fall…
I already made the switch to Qobuz, like many Australian’s.
But more options are coming…
Spotify and now Apple…
What is there about audibly lossless that you fail to grasp? Surely all that matter is what is audible?
You are right and I hadn’t taken this into consideration when I made my earlier remark about not really caring. If TIDAL are deceiving or even misconstruing information to their customers I hope that they are taken to task over it.
My wife deals with journalists about the issues surrounding provenance in her role at the National Art Gallery everyday, it is a shame we can’t easily identify the provenance of the music files we purchase or stream.
Chris, this is where the use of standard terminology is so important. There is no definition of the term, and you must see that it depends on who’s doing the listening. What I fail to grasp is the precise meaning, and it’s the use of woolly terms without formal meaning that’s the issue. If you can hear a difference who’s to say that’s not the “loss” that you’re hearing…
Absolutely all of this.
So we make our choices… I know who I trust with regards to audio research and I’m loving what I am hearing…
IMHO this Development is toxic and unhealthy. When I bought CD back in the days I never questioned the format or quality that was pressed on it. Now that I stream and buy downloads I do sometimes fall into the trap and ask myself if I really got what I payed for (flac). IMHO this is unhealthy and a waste of time and energy. I decided to not take part in this mistrusting and doubting way of enjoying music. I only trust my ears. Just my 2c
My point is simply that by using loose terms MQA may have left a court with a decision to make. Using standard terminology accurately would leave no one in doubt as to what the format offers.
A judge might not share your faith 
Can you try the Taylor Swift - Fearless (Taylor’s Version)
Available in Tidal Master and Hifi one.