|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
|
|
|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
|
In Reply to: Raise your hands... posted by mkuller on December 13, 2017 at 08:22:15:
for not answering the question you posed.
But I'm confused. What's the primary benefit of MQA claimed by its proponents? Reduced file size without compromising sound quality?
Or better sound, without regard to file size (i.e. better than DSD, 16/44 PCM, "hi-rez" PCM, etc.?
If MQA offers reduced file size (as compered even to 16/44 PCM) and better sound quality then that's a winner, at least today. Tomorrow, probably not, as the cost of moving and storing bits keeps going down. For the same reason, if MQA offers reduced file size as compared to 16/44 PCM but sounds no better, that's a big yawn.
Conversely, if the justification for MQA is that it sounds better than 16/44 PCM, then the question becomes, does it sound better than all the other existing digital formats that claim to sound better than 16/44 PCM? If it doesn't, clearly and obviously, then what's the point, from the consumer perspective?
Those of us of a certain age have all seen this -- 17 years ago with SACD and DVD-A. At the time, with the suite of patents surrounding RBCD about to expire and with the lather over unauthorized copying of digital recordings and various sonically degrading forms of copy protection, the claim by The Resistance was that SACD was just a money grab by Sony and a ploy by the record labels to re-sell, yet again, their back catalog.
At least, on the equipment of the time, it seemed that SACD sounded better than RBCD, and there was general agreement that RBCD had significant sound quality issues.
Nevertheless, the sonic improvements of SACD (leave alone DVD-A) were not so great that a critical mass of buyers supported the format. So there are a number of folks like I am, who have a dying SACD player and a collection of discs that will either be unplayable, or will be downgraded to premium-priced CDs.
For that reason, it's hard for me, at least, to get too excited about another "fantastic" new digital format.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Hands Up! So, shoot me - Bruce from DC 13:52:31 12/14/17 (5)
- OK, shot. :-) - josh358 20:41:24 01/01/18 (0)
- He's been out of bullets for years... - regmac 15:18:52 12/14/17 (3)
- Have quite a number of 'obsolete' SACDs... - Ivan303 07:38:58 12/15/17 (1)
- My listening to SACD I like CD better. SACD have a failed HF frequency response.. all 'smoothed over' and not - pffft? 14:04:54 12/15/17 (0)
- Yeah, Dolby B was a godsend - Bruce from DC 15:44:47 12/14/17 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
