Depends on where the high sample rates occur in my experience. I run all my audio through computers and find that upsampling to very high rates for the processing phase (equalizer, crossover, expander etc.) produces much cleaner results, even though the output is downsampled somewhat for the soundcard. But as far as actual source material goes I've compared 88.2k or 96k recordings with 44.1k or 48k and I don't hear much difference at all. 16 vs. 24 bit depth isn't all that obvious either. The quality of the recording process seems to be the dominant factor.
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?