Any News on MQA Lately?

I've been communicating with Robert Harley from The Absolute Sound.  The "MQA's unexpected twist" means that the MQA company has loosened up the requirement that the "unfolding" be done in the DAC hardware.  So, if you uncheck the "MQA passthru" option on Tidal, the desktop app will "unfold" the MQA files and present an up to 94/24 file to your conventional DAC.

But apparently that will not provide you with all the benefits of MQA, specifically the reduction in digital "blur", which seems to only be able to be done in the (MQA certified) DAC.

In my case, when I've compared albums on Tidal which are offered in MQA and "regular" FLAC versions, playing thru my PS Audio DirectStream DAC, the MQA versions which are "unfolded" by Tidal sound a bit "dull" compared to the "regular" FLAC versions.  I've tried that with about a half dozen albums, same result.  I wonder if there's something with the FPGA design that causes that?

So, with the news that Universal has joined Warner and Tidal, I'm wondering if that's the news the DAC manufacturers were waiting for, to incorporate MQA into their future hardware designs....or, could it be that DAC chipset companies like ESS will put that feature into their future offerings?

I'm not surprised that virtually all music providers or transmitters will jump in. 
They are forever looking for some 'magic' to boost sales.
 DVD-A, SACD, were supposedly leaps better than CD. They had a run. Now it's this new 'thing'. I  admit to being cynical about this process.
"Ultra refinement" when most consumers listen on $20 'buds' ???

On CA:

MQA: A Review of controversies, concerns, and cautions

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/ca/reviews/mqa-a-review-of-controversies-concerns-and-cautions-r7...

P.S.:

"Editor's Note 1: MQA ltd was sent a copy of this article several days prior to the scheduled publication date. The company requested a phone conversation, which took place earlier this week. MQA was encouraged to write a response for inclusion with the article below, but it respectfully decline to submit a formal response.

 

Editor's Note 2: The author of this article is writing under a pseudonym. While he is unknown to the readers, his identity has been verified  by Computer Audiophile. He has no vested interest in the audio business, other than being a consumer of music.

 

Editor's Note 3: The technical assertions made in this article have been thoroughly checked by independent engineers, both in and out of the audio industry. To the best of our knowledge everything technical in this article is factually correct and may be duplicated at any time by anyone with the requisite skills."

 

- Chris Connaker