Wombat wrote: > I picked some info here and there but your summary is the most complete > i did read. Well done! > Funny is how the aliased HF crap from 'unfold' 2 by some is > misinterpreted as original content because of BS using cloudy wordings.
And that's an important observation about MQA, Wombat. I think the reason so many reasonable/rational audiophiles have been concerned about MQA is the nebulous way that it's being presented since late 2014. The strange burst of Q&A articles from Bob Stuart last year, the lack of A/B comparisons from the start. On the one hand, vague hints at "time domain" this and "origami" that. Combined with rather extreme superlatives about just how much better it is compared with everything else down to the micro/pico/nanoseconds... Replete with colorful graphs and impulse responses that on the surface might look enticing but is ultimately all about a sales job. Sure, who doesn't want it to be true? But there ways always that fishy smell and intellectual itch that seems "too good to be true". I don't know how much money Meridian/MQA/TIDAL/record industry want to burn with pushing MQA to keep this going... I won't be surprised if by this time next year, everyone will have moved on (including the aging audiophile mainstream press writers, their shills, and their "alternative facts"). Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective' audiophile blog. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=107118 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
