MQA•Foolish New Algorithm? Vote!


Vote please. Simply yes or no. Let’s get a handle on our collective thinking.
The discussions are getting nauseating. Intelligent(?) People are claiming that they can remove part of the music (digits), encode the result for transport over the net, then decode (reassemble) the digits remaining after transportation (reduced bits-only the unnecessary ones removed) to provide “Better” sound than the original recording.
If you feel this is truly about “better sound” - vote Yes.
If you feel this is just another effort by those involved to make money by helping the music industry milk it’s collection of music - vote no.
Lets know what we ‘goners’ think.
P.S. imho The “bandwidth” problem this is supposed to ‘help’ with will soon be nonexistent. Then this “process” will be a ‘solution’ to a non existing problem. I think it is truly a tempest in a teacup which a desperate industry would like to milk for all its worth, and forget once they can find a new way to dress the Emporer. Just my .02

ptss
MQA is a lossy format with at best 15 -17 bits dynamic range and leaky filters! See the discussions in Computer Audio (particularly FredericV's posts).
@roberjerman.

No sonic benefit?
To your ears possibly but you cannot make a broad damning statement like that when others here have stated they can hear a difference.
Not sure as I would go as far to state its a sonic benefit but I like what I hear in my system to my ears.
And that’s as far as you can take it.
EVERYONE will hear differently in their system, room, ears.
NO - It's tied to DRM versus bandwidth.
I can get the same effect using the Loudness function in JRiver.
I'm going to go out on a 50 foot long, 1 inch thick limb here.  I'm perfectly content listening to vinyl on my Denon DP-59L w/Stanton 881S cartridge into a Pioneer SX-1250 receiver, terminating in a pair of Bose 901 Series II speakers.  There, I said it.