CD sound quality is relatively independent of bit rate and sampling rate. For starters you’re not even getting 50% of what’s on the CD anyway. There are too many serious issues with CD Player performance, after all these years. The CDs themselves are great. Increasing the bit rate and sampling rate is kind of a scam to get more money. Not unlike overly compressing CDs. It’s all orchestrated so they can stay in business. Hel-loo!Aw come on, geoffkait. Its cute the way the kids buy into this stuff. Let 'em parrot their dogma, jive their jargon. Endlessly bantering misunderstood terms back and forth is after all mostly what makes the audio world go round. People start seeing the Emperor has no clothes, next thing you know there goes the neighborhood. Not to mention how much easier it is than having to learn how things actually, you know, work.
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?
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?