PLACEBO DOMINGO!
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?
What are your thoughts on MQA and SACD?
- ...
- 83 posts total
There is most definitely an audible difference with MQA. Phase distortion causes the imaging to be less accurate. Apodizing changes the timbre of transients. Easiest thing to listen for is the hole in the middle of the soundstage. Second easiest thing to hear is the pluck of acoustic guitar strings. MQA has an unnatural sound. The pitch of the initial pluck of a stringed instrument sounds slightly lower. It is not as easy to hear unless you are trained. Some people can’t hear it - for example if you able to enjoy Michael Buble’s singing then you probably aren’t able to hear autotune pitch altering effects. Pitch sensitivity varies a lot among people but some can easily pick up as little as 5 cents.... |
From a technical pov MQA is quite some junk, but people like all kinds of distortions so why not make a buck on selling this junk. https://audiophilestyle.com/ca/reviews/mqa-a-review-of-controversies-concerns-and-cautions-r701/ |
- 83 posts total