Can you let me know why do you care if someone likes MQA? I never understood why it bothered people that someone likes things they don't.
Do you believe if someone likes MQA they cant hear? Or maybe you can hear better than them?
I have heard music in many different formats that sound good and bad. I've always said that if I don't like something I don't listen to it. If you don't like MQA music don't listen to it. There is so much music available that I'm sure you can find non MQA music to listen to.
I think you miss the point of MQA and what the format genuinely offered or did not offer. The format was released in later 2014 and all the buzz primarily spearheaded in the U.S. by two editors-in-chief claiming that performance-wise MQA was the equivalent to flying to Mars or perhaps cows were now jumping over the moon. So long as that little green light was on, we were guaranteed to hear exactly what the engineers heard in the studio. Apparently nothing else mattered - not even our equipment - so long as it was MQA and the little green light was on.
With that, many were convinced the MQA format was superior.
High-end audio is supposedly all about performance and MQA's intro to the market was all about performance. But once some started putting MQA under the microscope and questioning its performance many came back saying MQA's performance was inferior. What did MQA promoters do? They pushed back as hard as they could but near as I could tell eventually they quietly stepped back from the cows now jumping over the moon propaganda and then claimed other things just to keep the MQA train moving forward,
Why do people care or take offense when somebody promotes MQA as a performance contender? Because there was no truth to such MQA performance claims. But also because if you search the forums you'll probably see that there were perhaps an incaluculable number (think millions) of minutes and hours spent infighting for over 9 years now arguing the validity of MQA's existence and intentions. Not to mention that this is supposedly a performance-oriented industry where supposedly performance means everything.
MQA came this close to hood-winking the entire music industry with its inferior technology they promoted as superior - even equating it to experiencing the birth of a new planet (John Atkinson). Whatever the hell that means. Had MQA succeeded, I've no doubt those who consider performance paramount would have suffered most for decades to come.
Personally, I suspect MQA was nothing but a licensing scheme to generate much revenue and to introduce it they hedged their bets on the fact that the majority possess untrained ears and would just go along for the ride. All they needed were a couple of editors-in-chief of the most popular rags to say wonderful things and then MQA could tell the world that even the most discriminating ears in the music industry i.e. the high-end audio sector blessed it.
In the end, MQA did very little other than expose who's willing to sell out the industry the most and who lacks critical thinking skills and/or the ability to discern / interpret what they hear - which was sorely needed. So I'm guessing even the dark MQA cloud had a silver lining.
