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.
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?
- ...
- 169 posts total
Geoff, If the problem was lasers and optical discs, wouldn’t downloads and streamed music sound obviously better than CDs and SACDs? That is not the case in my personal experience and what I’ve read on forums. For example: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/why-does-my-old-cd-player-sound-so-much-better-than-my-new-streamer?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=website&utm_source=sendgrid |
tomcy6 Geoff, If the problem was lasers and optical discs, wouldn’t downloads and streamed music sound obviously better than CDs and SACDs? >>>>Good question. I don’t know. I am only addressing CD players. |
- 169 posts total