Are high sample rates making your music sound worse?


ishkabibil
Where is the evidence Snopes is nothing more than a bunch of mud-raking know-nothings? What would they know about the Green Pen? I’m guessing about as much as you do. No offense to you personally.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's no one around to hear it, does it make a sound?  and if so is it 44.1, 192 or 16bit? 

My 2 cents;

I spent a lot of time using Adobe Audition and evaluating what was the best conversion of my 33/LP album collection to MP3s. I've been doing it now for more than a decade and ended up with Audition capturing at 32-bit/44Khz Windows-compatible wave files. I also edit in 32-bit. When the WAV file is complete, I use LAME to convert directly from the WAV file to MP3 at 128/variable. The result is roughly about 1Mb per minute of MP3 music file(s). I have had multiple people say the MP3s are the best they have ever heard. (from LP) Audition can 'Analyze' the WAV and the resulting MP3, and the resulting dynamic range is usually better than CDs, even though the source is from LPs. With that result, I have not changed my conversion process in more than a decade, as I see no reason to change it. Please don't flame me, maybe it can be done better, this just how I did it with modest gear. (I am not Bill Gates)

@lvrooman54 
 
the resulting dynamic range is usually better than CDs, even though the source is from LPs.
 
Vinyl is reported to have a noise floor of roughly -65dBFS, so I don’t see how any ADC or conversion technique can make it better than CD at -96dBFS, unless you are adding noise-shaped dither, in which case the same can be done for 16/44.1.
@tatyana69 -

 The Ultravox tracks 'Vienna' and 'All Stood Still' sound good to my ears, so my answer to your question is "No" Ultravox do not make poor recordings. These are the only two tracks I have that are digital. My personal views only.