If the option to go to an MQA-inabled mastering lab and encode your own content (including test tones) was always available for reasonable money, how come it hasn't been done?
I don't think anyone expected people to have such strong feelings about MQA since it would affect so few anyways. Doesn't make sense to put so much effort into something that you don't expect so many to use.
On the hardware side, I think the arithmetic was simple for manufacturers. They decided slapping on this particular feature and paying the licensing fee would be better for their bottom line than not doing it. Some simple assumptions from manufacturer pov:
- MQA is backed by industry leaders (Merridian and Tidal are accomplished in their own rights)
- will only affect small number of consumers (a lot of whom buy into stuff like power conditioners and cables)
- cannot afford to gamble on being seen as not keeping up with the latest tech vs. competitors
From producer's pov, there's no financial incentive to test MQA. They can just let the market decide if its good or bad by themselves, and whether if people would be willing to pay more for the feature. They want: MQA on their boxes, they're willing to pay the cost of: licensing, implementing into their products. There's no risk of consumer backlash since basically everyone has slapped MQA onto something.
At one point I thought I "needed" a definitive good/bad assessment of MQA but have sobered to the realization I can just go back to doing what I've done for most of MQA's existence: ignoring it exists
(from end user pov).
Having said that, I really think this is interesting - and great to see many wanting to contribute to getting to the facts.
@amirm I'll chip in $100 for the cause.