Nice MQA discussion

Tidal is pretty nice even without MQA. :)

+1...and with MQA, it's even better with certain tracks.

I see MQA as a Jekyl/Hyde type of experience and codec. On one hand, it sounds fantastic and one can be exposed to the ever expanding library as the two or three major labels add record titles. On the other hand, I keep reading about the greedy hands behind the development. As more streaming companies jump on board it’s possible MQA will die it’s own death by sheer competition.
I agree with others about Tidal, I still like it (and Spotify). Even without MQA.

Ny only issue with MQA on Tidal is identifying it. My DAC doesn't do MQA or 24/96 often those selections will result in loud static so I avoid them. However when you search for an artist the albums you see don't identify the sampling rate or being MQA. So even though I avoid them I still end up playing them on occasion accidentally leading to loud static. Frustrating.

@jond,

May I know what app you’re using to browse albums on Tidal? My Aurender app clearly identify albums with MQA logo. 

And about loud static, I wonder why is that? I do not own MQA compatible DAC either but able to play most MQA albums in 24bit/48khz resolution. 

I use the Auralic Lightning DS app great app other than that but I don't see that designation on the Tidal app either. It does identify MQA and the sampling rate after I hit play just not before. The static I've been told is the DAC going back and and forth between sampling rates, it's older and just does 48 and 44.1, and unable to lock. It doesn't happen with every MQA title just most.