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 3 responses by allane

I can confirm that 16/44 mastered and played back properly sounds awesome.  Nyquist–Shannon had some things figured out, but it took awhile for the mastering and hardware to catch up.
@erik_squires 
@electroslacker 
@plga

I totally agreed, 16/44 is awesome when mastered and played back properly.
@brianlucey

It’s great to get feedback from a mastering engineer on this.  Thank you!

Is Pacific Microsonics the company that did HDCD in the 90s, which later sold to Microsoft?  The Linn Sondek LP12 and Arcam FMJ23 (with Ring DAC) are the players I have that are HDCD compatible.

Some of my favorite sounding albums have been HDCD.  “Wrecking Ball” by Emmylou Harris and “Sea Change” by Beck are two that come to mind.  Amazing music and excellent recordings!