Is this MQA news a big deal?

"I am not sure I'd say that either DSD or PCM versions per se "sound better". If I were to make a "generalization", in my setup it seems that the SACDs sound a little less "digital". But I must say that some CDs I have (to me) sound better than the SACD versions, when I have both."

Add this to the fact that it also depends on when the CD was mastered and produced. I have early 80's CDs that sound much better (when ripped to FLAC) than re-masters issued within the last few years. I think that is because early 80's CDs used late 70's master tapes which are now almost 40 years old and have degraded. When these are hauled out of the vaults for a remaster or re-issue, no amount of modern day digital magic can recover the loss of the aged medium.
  

Besides bankrupt TIDAL, where are all the MQA sources? I’ve been hearing about HDTracks streaming for the last year....nothing yet. I keep hearing its coming...its now taking hold......WHERE IS IT?

@erik_squires . Hello again. Don’t wish to argue but I believe your statement “will playback at full resolution is in error. I think the MQA process simply will not play back “bit perfect” due to the nature of the algorithms. Are you sure of your comment. Could you educate me? Thanks

@ptss

My statement:

2 - DRM prevents copying. MQA does not do this. I can make copies and send them to others. If they have an MQA capable player, it will play at full resolution.

Was specifically about Digital Rights Management, which MQA has nothing to do with. Any MQA file may be copied by any file copy method. Those copies all retain the same qualities of the original MQA file and therefore it is not DRM.

It is closer to "Dolby Surround" in that any stereo can pay back "Dolby Surround" but only Dolby branded decoders will enable the full 4 channel playback. But Dolby Surround does not in anyway prevent copying.

Best,
Erik