MQA?

MQA just adds distortion. The original full resolution version of any digital file (same master) always sounds better because they are lossless. MQA claims are entirely false.

@vinylfan62 my favorite is the people like you...Are you really that bored in your mom's basement that you feel that need to chime into a discussion you have no part in?? You're lucky I'm giving you the time of day....dork....what else do you have to say???

@shadorne do you guys both share a room together? 

I confess I have no idea whether MQA itself is good or bad, but my only music source on all of my systems is Tidal streaming, and so therefore the only way I can hear music above FLAC quality is via Tidal Masters which necessarily involves MQA. 

So I guess technically I should amend my comments in this thread that what really sounds good to me on my reference system is Tidal Masters via MQA, whether or not the MQA itself plays a positive or negative role in the music rendering.  Either way, definitely better than straight up Tidal 16/44 flac for me on my main system.

@justjames72    

You can’t dismiss the facts by attacking the messenger. MQA adds distortion. This is a fact. Only the original lossless file has the full bit depth and correct phase preserved. MQA is both lossy and adds phase distortion (high frequencies delayed with respect to lower frequency content). These are facts.

If you prefer MQA over lossless files then so be it. There is no accounting for preference - it is entirely a subjective evaluation.