Qobuz Users Update?

 you are asking the key question ...do Qobuz and perhaps Tidal introduce low levels of compression even in their premium services?  Btw, I rip my files to my NAS with dbpoweramp, using an Apple Optical Drive and the aforementioned MacAir, and rip and store in FLAC
  it would be great to see one of the Audiomags, such as Stereophile or Hi Fi News, or someone on this Forum, could measure the streams and compare to CD rips to answer the question 

Mahler, that's what I was thinking. You've been in this hobby a long time so I don't doubt your ability to rip a bit perfect file. It's the other guys that I question.  

Well, after one week of using Qobuz, I am cancelling Tidal. IMO, the Qobuz GUI is much easier to use and I also enjoy the "booklets." Much of what I listen to regularly is on Qobuz and a lot is higher resolution, which I can actually hear. I also found "downloading" so I can listen off line in my car (from my phone connection) is much easier and quicker to download as well. I like the Qobuz entry portal much more than Tidal. I really disliked all the JayZ type stuff that's pushed at you. Finally, I didn't care for MQA sound. Maybe it was my imagination but it felt like I was missing some of the music. Comparing the two versions of the newest Springsteen on Tidal MQA or Qobuz hi res, Qobuz was the clear winner for me. Total yearly cost with Qobuz will be less than $10 per annum.

Realize that Master Quality Authenticated (MQA) is an audio codec using lossy compression...  Nuff said...

IMO, MQA is no longer relevant. You can now stream high resolution files from Qobuz and that’s pretty much ends any ongoing debate about MQA merits.

I am glad that we now have a choice and one doesn’t need to pursue or depend on MQA compatible hardware (DAC’s). 

Nuff said....Case closed!