MQA is Legit!

I am not sure that I understand the original point here.  Is the OP saying that MQA files tend to sound better because they have been carefully remastered, and not necessarily due to any technological improvement?  If that is the case, I don’t know how to assess the merits of that claim, although I haven’t been overly impressed by the MQA that I’ve heard

MQA is not a sound quality improvement over CD IMO.

Just different mastering!

SACD can be an improvement over CD, but many SACDs are just CD conversions to DSD, so buyer beware! 

@don_c55  
 
MQA is half lossy, half high-res lossless, and since I believe 16/44.1 is all we need (before the DAC), I agree that CD is better than MQA, and nothing is stopping you getting a CD copy of an album that’s offered in MQA.

I have been listening to MQA tracks since the first day they were available on Tidal.  So my only exposure has been on the streaming side of things, but I've spent A LOT of time listening and evaluating MQA.  Since Tidal has many tracks (well, of the music I listen to anyway) available as both regular Redbook CD and MQA, it's pretty easy to compare.

I have also had several different MQA DACs through here during this time.

I find "almost" without fault that the MQA tracks sound better than their standard CD counterparts.  Not all the time, but pretty much.  Is MQA perfect, hells no, but I sure do hear an improvement.

So for me, and as always, just my opinion, I like MQA...

+1 @mofimadness and in my case, that's with just the first MQA unfold in Roon.