We've listened at the shop to MQA samples as well as MQA vs non MQA files downloaded off of the Norwegian recording label 2L. There was not universal agreement that the MQA files sounded better - though there was agreement that the MQA files sounded different.
I liked the idea of MQA - i.e. authenticating the provenance of HD files and offering a way to stream that with lower bandwidth to make it more financially feasible for Tidal and other services.
Nonetheless I worry about what this MQA processing is doing to potentially harm the sound - I just doesn't make sense that you can break up and "fold" the higher frequencies below the noise floor, then reconstruct it again, without some detrimental effect.
I'd also be worried that its going to make compliant DAC's doing MQA sound to much like Meridien. Meridien digital products are good - but I don't want all my DAC's to be be made to sound more Meridien-like.
Apparently a number of manufacturers have these doubts as well - not to speak of handing over intellectual property to a competitor to certify their products as MQA compliant.
And as a hi fi retailer I think ultimately it creates more harm - i.e some customers on the fence about a digital purchase until it supports MQA - or MQA is abandoned. Sales are tough enough without giving people another reason to hold off on a purchase.
Ultimately I think the MQA issues distracts from more important ones, even just in the sound quality camp. Ultimately there are many more important issues to address to optimize sound quality than trying to develop a new high definition audio format. "Good old fashioned" red book digital has potentially many more things that can be done to it to make it better, whether its pulled off a CD or streamed over a home network or internet.
