Seems like more vendors of hard and software that are not certified start to claim MQA sounds better as everything before with their own way of handling it.
Breaking news, there is proof ... at least it is "planned": https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/30381-mqa-is-vaporware/?do=findComment&comment=731942
Archimago provided some samples for MQA blind tests.http://archimago.blogspot.hk/2017/07/internet-blind-test-mqa-core-decoding.htmlBut I found some problems in the samples. Read the comment section, I posted under another nickname with an ABX log. Other members here can also download the samples to find potential problems in order to make the test more reliable.
I read some pages in the CA threads and it seems that some shills were banned.
“everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth”Confucius TysonActually, I think McGill will come through with a study
With MQA, we get mastering engineers back in control, we deliver the encoded songs so no streaming provider can spoil them with their compression
"If I want that distortion in the master I would’ve put it there in the first place. The results of MQA I would call fatal to the source material even as they are very subtle." - Brian Lucey
"we get mastering engineers back in control" - pure bullshit, and that's exactly the cause of loudness war.
Quote from: bennetng on 11 November, 2017, 01:41:20 PM"we get mastering engineers back in control" - pure bullshit, and that's exactly the cause of loudness war.well...not necessarily. Some report that they simple are doing what their client wants, when they pump up the loudness.
What is staggering is that Lucey really registered at CA to stand for his findings.