4 ms·
Just to add to this comment, the video breakdowns I've watched on MQA are interesting listens even as someone who doesn't use Tidal. https://www.youtube.com/wa
by throw_nbvc1234 5y ago
Just to add to this comment, the video breakdowns I've watched on MQA are interesting listens even as someone who doesn't use Tidal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRjsu9-Vznc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRjsu9-Vznc -- Critque of MQA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwZ5hDzQ5Jg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwZ5hDzQ5Jg -- in defense of MQA
At the end of the day, people should listen to what they think sounds good (is this an opinion?). If a placebo makes someone enjoy something more, is it really a placebo? If someone can't tell the difference between low quality recordings and high quality recordings, why should they go through the trouble of sourcing the high quality stuff.
It's so easy to lose track of the subjective nature of audio in all of the objective details.
- formerly_proven 5y agoThat's not really the point here - if someone says "I like how this sounds with (MQA artifacts | tube distortions | +20 dB bass)", that's perfectly fine and not something many if any people would argue with.
- ivraatiems 5y agoThat's fine, but it's not fine to claim MQA is lossless or represents the original lossless file.