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
You don't have to accept it since there is lots of data on CD error rates, and certainly 25% is not "errors" or missing.  Unfortunately some people have a disconnect from reality.  One can only assume that a person who makes such a statement does not truly understand CDs, and hence does not realize that 25% of the data on a CD is error correction, but confuses this (or tries to confuse others) that it is "missing" data.


porscheracer123 posts11-28-2019 1:53pmNo, I will not accept that 25% of the data is missing. You are so wrong on this I don't even know where to begin. You are spreading lies and misinformation.

At David, please don’t get the demonic gingerbread man wound up, he might get abusive 🙄
I have a DCS Vivaldi stack, which includes the upsampler with suitable other equipment. Anyone who cannot tell the differences on upsampling between normal cd and 192 and at each between level, either needs new ears, or better equipment. Stating 24/44.1 is all any human can hear if done well is just nonsense, from someone who has not heard the difference. As per usual. If you haven't heard what is possible - don't state ridiculous facts.