(02-26-2019, 03:55 AM)Tim Curtis Wrote: MQA is just proprietary DRM. It's not some sort of awesome new audio format.
Rustydoglim, (Jason Lim), who is behind a company that (IMO) produces "no BS" audiophile products, said this:
Quote:We don't want to get into the MQA debate so please take my comment as purely from engineering standpoint.
What we learned during the implementation of MQA is that a newer XMOS USB communication chip does the so called MQA unfolding (lets just call it decoding). I have done all sorts of programming in my early career from CPU level assembly code, firmware, C++, Java and client scripts. So, is there any difference between doing the decoding by the player on the computer versus on the USB chip ? I don't think so.
I will like you to compare decoding MQA from the computer versus decoding on Evo DAC whether you can hear any difference. My point is that if you like the sound characteristic of MQA, go ahead and subscribe to this compression streaming service. But I doubt MQA DAC is necessary.
The creator of MQA, Bob, said this
Quote:Full software decode is not possible because the DAC must be known and characterized.
So the conclusion - just a DRM wrapper. Because MQA is patented, commercial, and proprietary, MQA playback for any opensource players are highly unlikely. The PI no doubt have the horsepower to do the job... but commercial restrictions
With MQA you get the full sized file, but cant play the full quality unless you buy equipment that supports full MQA decoding
(controlled by Bob).
The master recording could be wrapped into another format, without the same restrictions.
FLAC can accomplish the same results - free…
just my 2cents - sorry for the rant -
