MQA actually tested

For the "beginner"?  Approach with caution.  It is tough in the day and age of COVID if you are in a location where you might not be able to listen to equipment or specific music before laying your money down.  Measurements do matter when they translate to clear distinctions in music quality...that's where it all goes sideways--people swear to clear distinctions for all kinds of stuff.  So basically, don't buy into the hype...listen and buy what you like.  If you hear something you like better, sell what you have an buy the new thing if it is worth the difference.  In the case of the vid I referenced in the start of this thread, the measurements were more of a verification of what I was hearing when comparing FLAC vs MQA.

I'm still looking for a good high-end Elcasette...

So we’re better off setting the sound quality to “HiFi” instead of “Master” within the Tidal app?

I don't think it's as black and white as everyone wants it to be. MQA is not lossless and the filtering adds distortion, I don't think anyone other than MQA would argue with that. That doesn't mean someone won't like the way it sounds.  The part that bothers me most with MQA is the marketing statements that don't align with reality and how they go out of the way to make it hard to test any marketing claims that are made. If MQA did what it said I don't see what harm there is in letting 3rd party testers validate that.

In regards to why companies are adding MQA support to devices I think Paul McGowan from PS Audio hit the nail on the head. Customers are asking for it. It's a business move. 

Like most things in this hobby, listen for yourself and decide what you like. I have a non MQA DAC and find that letting my Aurender do the first unfold on MQA tracks tends to sound pretty good to me. So that's how I listen to Tidal. Comparing that first unfold on Tidal to anything Hi-Res on Qobuz I find I tend to like the Qobuz offering better. So when available I always listen to the Qobuz Hi-Res version. 

mqa can sound very good

it is just inconsistent and variable in a way the user cannot really control, not to say some recordings based on great master versions aren’t excellent

same deal for non mqa recordings... recording/mastering quality is the dominant driver of sound quality

thing with mqa is it makes the user do somersaults and spend $ on gear that may not be otherwise necessary, adds a layer of complexity cost and worry that doesn’t really consistently deliver the goods as the marketing would lead you to believe and desire

thus my advice/conclusion from having been through it is to make your digital front end sound great without mqa (basically targeted at redbook res and/or quboz hi res flac) -- these standards encompass most recordings out there that one would care about