The OP’s head rises from the lake in the moonlight
I am the OP who started the “MQA disappointing…” topic a year ago or so that has brought over 2,000 responses. Hence the (now) head rising from the lake… I’m writing this out of a sense of responsibility only to complete the thought in that first post, since it was clearly tentative.
At the time I stated clearly that I’d only listened to the “first unfold” done by Tidal, and so had only an initial impression, not a final opinion. Since then I’ve gotten a fully MQA-capable DAC (the dCS Rossini, reportedly the most capable DAC in MQA terms) and listened enough to have a real opinion.
Which is that, in my system in my room, I like MQA. Is it a seismic shift in audio as the mags seemed to say? In terms of sound quality, it doesn’t take me that far, but to me it is clearly superior to the good sound I’d had previously (and still do with non-MQA), and I will always choose it as a Version if it’s available. Makes me think that at the level of high end audio, there are no seismic shifts, only incremental improvements, albeit some really nice.
How does it compare to hi-res recordings? 24/192 I tend to think is comparable, but this isn’t a firm opinion.
I have no interest in (or ability to discuss, for that matter) the “lossy vs. lossless” or any other argument about MQA. I just like the way it sounds.
And now will again submerge my head…
Jim Heckman