DSD vs. PCM vs. MQA - Group listening experiment

The question with MQA is it's staying power, not its technical excellence.  It has a very tall hill too climb to become relevant.  IMHO the only genre that really merits it is acoustic music, most of which is classical, and that genre is increasingly going to either hi bit rate PCM or 5.1 96Khz / 24 bit MCH (Blu-Ray). Many industry observers think it has already missed the window.  I also agree with Erik, in that whatever MQA brings to the party, it is still a secondary factor to the quality of the recording and the mastering itself.

BTW, I like SACD and DSD, but the absolute best digital I have heard is Reference Recordings DXD which is 352 kHz/24 bit PCM.  In addition, if your processor / DAC uses DSP's for room corrections or even digital reconstruction filtering, it will convert DSD to PCM before it converts it to analog.  This is a buyer beware issue "pure DSD" DAC's which use only analog low pass filters for reconstruction are rare birds.

No matter the format medium is the production is bad the sonics will be bad. The only way to improve is to go back and remix. A great recording sounds good on vinyl and CD if mastering was done with care. MQA will never change that and I take this even further improve your room and that will do more from a sonic stand point then any piece of gear, cables or new format. They keep chasing their tail. The really only way to judge digital is a Prue digital recording, tapes age and deteriorate, that was and will be the challenge of taking old recordings and making them sound good at times, want the best sonics then look for a 1st pressing LP then buying  a new reissue, or find a CD that been remastered, at times also remixed with care. MQA not a factor for great sonics same issue for vinyl and CD. It all starts with recording quality and always has.
Keep in mind the audio magazines now days are about working with manufactures and promoting sales more so then honest reviewing. They will say MQA is the second coming if they will Get you to buy the same recordings over and over, and new gear. Nothing is ever night and better if something is already of high quality. Can it sound different yes, does that mean better always? We all know that answer. Our hobby is the endless goal of believing a holy grail exists and the audio mags always promotes this myth. Like I say theory must have had poor ears if the product they raved about is now so inferior to the new model. Do things improve sure but most of the time your splitting hairs or you like a fresh sound, cables are the cheapest way to do this by the way then buying new gear.

I have both a PS Audio DirectStream DAC and a Mytek Brooklyn DAC as well, both fed with the identical brand/model Wireworld USB cable.

When I compare the exact same PCM file on both DACs, the Brooklyn sounds very good, but I'd say it sounds somewhat "dry" compared with the DirectStream DAC.

I've done this comparison on quite a few of my 44.1/16-192/24 AIFF files, using Roon on a nice Windows 10 Pro laptop.

We need to be careful when criticising hi-fi gear. Sometimes suppirier component build to reproduce the most neutral/natural sound can be mistakenly consider to be 'dry', while a component that design to make a manipulation on the sound might mistakenly consider to be more 'warm' and 'interesting'. 

Remastered anything will sound better than a poorly mastered CD or vinyl.