Do we really need anything greater than 24/96? Opinions?


It's really difficult to compare resolutions with different masterings, delivery methods, sources, etc. I have hundreds of HI-rez files (dsd, hi bit rate PCM, etc). I have to say that even 24/44 is probably revealing the best a recording has to offer. Obviously, recording formats, methods, etc all play a huge role. I'm not talking preferred sources like vinyl, sacd, etc. I'm talking about the recordings themselves. 

Plus, I really think the recording (studio-mastering) means more to sound quality than the actual output format/resolution. I've heard excellent recorded/mastered recordings sound killer on iTunes streaming and CD. 

Opinions?

aberyclark

Showing 2 responses by aberyclark

Comparing the Rolling Stones hybrid SACDs (Ludwig), I think the DSD/SACD sounds just a tad punchier and more airy mids. However, I'm not certain if the redbook layer is a straight downsample from the hi rez or each was mastered separately.
Here's a question.....If one were to make one final version of a master tape and store away that Master for many years. What method would capture everything the tape had to offer so future engineers could use that new source as the master?

1. Digital? 24/96/24/192?

2. Analog tape copy?