Most people who disparage Atmos Music have not heard it properly set up end of story
That's fanciful speculation.
I believe MQA was developed years ago because internet speeds were too slow to transfer data. This said, should we switch to QOBUZZ. I like the layout of Tidal and I think they have a much larger library. I wonder what percentage of members use Tidal VS QOBUZZ. I had a rep demo Tidal and QOBUZZ in a blind test a nd I think QOBUZZ sounded better. Maybe the folding and unfolding of files using MQA affects timing.
i didn’t know Tidal was in chapter 11. Maybe I should transfer my library to QOBUZZ to play it safe.
MQA never was welcomed in this house of stereo. I also dropped Stereophile and TAS subscriptions in part because of their sales pitch for it. Don't mess with music signals, lesson learned.
Wait a minute! Most of the CD’s were recorded in 44.1 so bumping the signal to 192, isn’t that messing with the signal?? I have a highe end streaming device and I still say CD sounds better than streaming, albums sound better than CD’s and Reel to Reel sounds better than all of them. Sounds like DSD processing and HiRes is still messing with the signal.
can someone explain this?? A 1988-1996 car CD Player that sounded better than all of the 24 bit processor CD Players: The Alpine 7909. With regards to home audio, I’m sure there are older CD Players that sound better than some of the newer expensive units. Just playing the devils advocate. Please comment if you feel like you have been bitten not once but twice.here is the link to the article.
People can think what they want of MQA sound. The most objectionable part was the end to end equipment requirement. This grand patent licensing scheme and you know the record companies wanted that for DRM. Those end to end schemes always leave folks with issues trying to play media they paid for…My Project S2 glitches out with MQA tracks and it’s a common issue.