MQA is Legit!


Ok, there is something special about MQA.  Here is my theory:  MQA=SACD.  What do I mean by this?  I mean that since there might be the "perception" it sounds better, then there is way more care put into the mastering and the recording.   Of course I have Redbook CD's that sound just as good (although they tend to be "HDCD" lol)... Bottom line:  a great recording sounds great.  I wish more labels and artists put more time into this--it's great to hear a song for the 1000th time and discover something new.  

What are your thoughts on MQA and SACD?
waltertexas
MQA is not a sound quality improvement over CD IMO.

Just different mastering!

SACD can be an improvement over CD, but many SACDs are just CD conversions to DSD, so buyer beware! 
@don_c55  
 
MQA is half lossy, half high-res lossless, and since I believe 16/44.1 is all we need (before the DAC), I agree that CD is better than MQA, and nothing is stopping you getting a CD copy of an album that’s offered in MQA.
I have been listening to MQA tracks since the first day they were available on Tidal.  So my only exposure has been on the streaming side of things, but I've spent A LOT of time listening and evaluating MQA.  Since Tidal has many tracks (well, of the music I listen to anyway) available as both regular Redbook CD and MQA, it's pretty easy to compare.

I have also had several different MQA DACs through here during this time.

I find "almost" without fault that the MQA tracks sound better than their standard CD counterparts.  Not all the time, but pretty much.  Is MQA perfect, hells no, but I sure do hear an improvement.

So for me, and as always, just my opinion, I like MQA...
+1 @mofimadness and in my case, that's with just the first MQA unfold in Roon.
Big fan of mqa. I compare with the same artist on disc v. Mqa and mqa wins everyone. Even my 16 yr old son agrees and I’m sure his hearing is better than mine.