MQA is for chumps

When I was in the market to try streaming, I bought a Mytek Brooklyn Bridge because it came with MQA capability. I gave the process a fair shot and, yes, it did improve sound quality a bit over Tidal's bread-and-butter streaming. The trouble was that Qobuz, without MQA, gave me better fidelity than Tidal whether Tidal was MQA-ing or not. Long story short -- I dropped Tidal and have never given MQA another thought.

edcyn.  
Well and good except for the MQA has your money in the form of the license fee. They have mine too and I’ve never even tried it, even during a crappy Tidal trial.
Calls for a revolt.

Watching this video you’d have to conclude that MQA is a fraud!

How did the industry fall for it?  I think Stereophile's John Atkinson was in MQA's pocket.

Possibly of interest: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cy58d5Y4J_s&ab_channel=TheHansBeekhuyzenChannel

Didn't MQA start back when bandwidth was a bit less, and it allowed data transfer with less loss than mp3s?  It had a real reason initially.  Might even be a little valid today with many mobile and internet providers returning to limited data allowances.

I finally broke down and subscribed to Tidal last month, with a decision to set up one or two systems with streaming capability.  I'm still sorting through streamer/ DAC options.  I suspect MQA will not remain a big Tidal item for much longer, so I may get a mix of DACs with and without MQA.  I rarely listen 'critically' these days as others are always home so I cannot really turn it up to a realistic volume.  My son and my wife are enjoying the overall selections, but the music my wife is listening to does not have anything in MQA.

But is there still a place for MQA when bandwidth/ data is limited?  My view is from the US, and I know data can vary around the world.  At my mother-in-law's house in Russia she does not get a reliable enough connection for video calls.  MQA might allow places like that to get higher quality music than otherwise feasible.