Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: MQA Damage Control (Read 5904 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: MQA Damage Control

Reply #25 –
Using the "MQA Lossless" logo because, y'know, MQA have never lied about losslessness, that's why MQA had to change their FAQs and hope that nobody knows the Internet Archive.

There must have been an answer in this thread, and I have probably read it too, but if these top frequencies are so important, what is even the case for MQA over going double sample rate and higher bit depth?
 

Re: MQA Damage Control

Reply #26 –
Quote from: Porcus on
There must have been an answer in this thread, and I have probably read it too, but if these top frequencies are so important, what is even the case for MQA over going double sample rate and higher bit depth?

Asking the question is answering it as well. MQA has become first and foremost a business model. It's all about licensing and controlling as much of the software and hardware chain as possible. Technically it is a solution in search of a problem to solve.