MQA DAC or Not?

I would like to add my experience with audio gear into the mix. I have always had to be a budget minded audiophile. Starting in the 80s I had one of the first CD players on the market by Sony. Later I bought a Betamax and a PCM recorder and made audio tapes on the Betamax video recorder using the Sony PCM recorder. I bought CDs and have stayed in digital since that time. I did not often spend over $500 on any new audio component. Later I added a DAC that I paid $1000 to get. In all that time, digital sound would get better by small increments since I was a budget minded buyer. That changed with the last $500 component I purchased.
I bought a Bluesound Node 2 to consolidate all my AIFF files to a single hard drive and bypass Itunes on my computer. It was not until I played streamed MQA files on the Node 2 that I realized the best sound I had gotten from my budget sound system. I don’t know if MQA will be around long, much might depend on how it is marketed. But to my ears, many of the albums I have heard on Tidal have been stunning in clarity, separation of instruments and distinct sounds, deep bass and true natural tonality. One should listen to at least a half dozen albums before making snap judgements. Many albums sound okay, many sound great.

I don't honestly know if MQA will sustain there are lots of variables in the mix.Here is a link I found that gives some of the latest content.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1T0xnOzPQZai32L7R7e_uzxfBqhXrPuXh3USOjvuztYg/edit#gid=1599853...


I do also agree with what many others have said regarding the playback of red book.With the very good gear we have today and the high quality sound I hear with my red book recordings,which is the majority of my owned and streamed from tidal collection,is the high res stuff really needed.

I quess time will tell.

Kenny.

So far, I'm leaning toward liking MQA. I have a streamer/dac that does the MQA thing and so far results have been pretty good. What I have been listening to  is the MQA on Tidal. And a lot of it sounds very good. Could these be nothing more than very good recordings or is MQA working its (subjective) magic? Time will tell. I for one, hope its the real deal as my results have been very encouraging to say the least.
Cheers,
Tim

I don’t have equipment that unfolds MQA but can still often hear differences due to the remastering of the Tidal MQA files and perhaps the effect of 24bit vs 16 bit on some MQA titles.

Some of Tidal’s MQA versions are sonic stinkers, IME. I listened to the Tidal MQA version of Linda Ronstadt’s "What’s New" last night. Oh my, the glare on her voice. The non-vocal sound of the MQA mastering is very nice indeed. I then listened to the ordinary non-MQA Tidal version and Linda’s voice was much more pleasing to my ears. This title has been one of my long-time references for detecting glare and brightness with equipment/cables. The MQA version sounds like when the VTA on my tonearm is adjusted "too high" with the vinyl version.

I am tending to agree with some others, even those with full unfolding capability, that the superiority of Tidal MQA depends on the title and the quality of the remastering, but could it be that full unfolding somehow tames these gremlins and, if so, is it sufficient to warrant investing in MQA-capable equipment? One can buy a lot of hi-rez downloads (wonderful sound) for that money, yet the selection is already much broader with Tidal and it seems that this will grow more pronounced over time.

Dave