cdmackay wrote: > I dunno. It sounds like you are saying: "there's a desire to sort things > out, and create useful standards, and that's good. The result was MQA, > which isn't good, but still, the intention was good". Is that what > you're saying? > > I fear that the intention was nothing of the sort. I believe the > intention was nothing more than an attempt to hood-wink people into > spending money on something they don't need, to solve a problem that > doesn't exist, using a mixture of pseudo-science, unscientific tests, > and corrupt mass-media. I don't believe there was any good intention > behind it. > > I would be happy if you were right, though. Yes. Basically. I would too. I suspect you are right, to some extent. The truth is usually somewhere between the two obvious extremes.
Didn't know they owned dvd-a. Perhaps that's why that, too, has failed spectacularly. What exactly was wrong with just providing pcm audio on a DVD!? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ drmatt's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59498 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105070 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
