For me, the MQA adaptive filtering is what I think most "kills" the music. I notice it most on the decay of "sharp" notes, drums, some piano, etc. Given the typical recording chain today is 40+KHz (not 20KHz), and that most recordings are close microphoned, I think their claims w.r.t. "smearing" is highly questionable. Even with older material, you don't know the recording chain, so any "filtering" is a guess.
Maybe one day there will be sophisticated AI algorithms that can sift through music, pick out specific instruments, and "fix" whatever needs to be fixed (if it does), but MQA, even though adaptive, is brute force, and appears always on.
I do think the initiative to pick the best masters and ensure some sort of pedigree for them is good, but recording engineers who mastered the record have said flat out they were not involved in the approval of the MQA master, so what does that even mean?
Maybe one day there will be sophisticated AI algorithms that can sift through music, pick out specific instruments, and "fix" whatever needs to be fixed (if it does), but MQA, even though adaptive, is brute force, and appears always on.
I do think the initiative to pick the best masters and ensure some sort of pedigree for them is good, but recording engineers who mastered the record have said flat out they were not involved in the approval of the MQA master, so what does that even mean?