Any News on MQA Lately?

@ejr1953  If PS Audio wanted to I'm pretty sure they could implement it purely as a software solution for you as could Chord.

Cleeds,you sound spot on. Making MQA just another way to "repackage" music. What else is new?

I hope MQA never gets off the ground.   It's not that the format is flawed, just the people who created it.   

The original plan was to also allow streamers to unpack it and send high res to the DAC of your choice.  Since they now chosen to remove the ability Im no longer interested.  

MQA is bad for music lovers!  Let's let Warner bros know .  

@emailists

Well, read Benchmark's blog on the matter. To them it IS a seriously flawed system. Their points are accurate too, but I'm not sure about audibility.

Personally I was really excited about the "digital origami" idea, when I thought it was lossless.

The good news is that if this is a good idea, then undoubtedly some one will produce an open-source version of the same idea without the flaws or licensing requirements.  Personally I would love to have my music collection take 1/4th it's current size if it could be done without any loss of quality.

Best,

Erik

The "re-mastering" comment is (to my way of thinking), key.  If I understand the advantages of MQA, it's that the removal of "blur" requires that they go back to the "analog to digital" point in time and fix it at that point, so when the DAC does the "digital to analog" conversion, it's somehow "linked" to that earlier point in time...in the way the DAC does its job.
It would seem to me that the only way to do that would be to "re-master" the music.
I suspect that "re-mastering" is not cheap, so I wonder if the "business case" might preclude most labels from producing much MQA...especially since the majority of people of OK with MP3 on their phones, the hi-quality audio market is just a small sliver of the overall music consumption world.