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
That reminds me. I have a bunch of the Abkco 2002 DSD Rolling Stones CDs. Are they really DSD mastering or something else? They do sound very good, I’ll say that.
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.
Hi @cheeg


I had an ARC DAC 8 - It absolutely needed hi rez files to sound less than murky.

The Mytek Brooklyn I have now does a really great job with Redbook and Internet radio.
But since then a number of DAC’s, if not most, no longer have such a disaprity between redbook and hi rez files.

Best,
Erik