ku1185 t1_jd0lsk1 wrote on March 20, 2023 at 11:33 PM

Reply to comment by mmry404 in I blind tested Qobuz (HiRes bit perfect) vs Deezer (CD) by mmry404

Yeah I'm aware of the video. My understanding of the tech (or at least, what is claimed) is that it stores information under the noise floor or something, and MQA hardware can "unfold" that information to generate a more complete reconstruction. Whether there's any audible benefit, I have no clue. Given all of the different masters on Tidal, it makes it difficult to determine whether the codec is actually making any difference or if its the master itself. So I just gave up trying to see if there's any real sound quality differences for MQA itself.

I think the biggest issue with MQA is false marketing claims and the proprietary nature of the tech. If they made more accurate claims that were verifiable and improved the listening experience, I wouldn't mind it.

mmry404 OP t1_jd0mynl wrote on March 20, 2023 at 11:42 PM

Indeed. The thing with marketing claims is that people need a deep technical understanding of the subject to be able to discern false marketing from real marketing, and it is just not feasible, since said marketing is addressed to the masses. And even with that level of understanding there is still a chance that something could be dodgy under the hood where we can't see. With enough critical thinking/paranoia it gets impossible to consume and be happy about it, so maybe it's the case that "the less I know, the better". Simulacra and simulation, all that..