2. digital
  3. 151421-10803

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
beetlemania
834 posts
 
16/44.1 can be amazing.
Agreed, @brainlucey
24/44.1 is all any human can hear IF done well.
Perhaps, but Charles Hansen noted that 4X sample rates greatly free filter options for playback.
Thanks for your post. I am still SMH at the Computer Audiophile knuckle heads that taunted and blocked your participation there. You had a lot of good stuff to share with the community.

georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 
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!
16/44 or 24/96 HDCD through a well sorted R2R multibit dac, is a hard act to beat, I've never heard it done.

Cheers George 
ishkabibil
422 posts
 
No.
junzhang10
252 posts
 
Yes, you need 92k/24bit. 192k/24bit would be even better, better with an R2R DAC. Or go with DSD 2.8Mhz/1bit sigma-delta DAC.
abraxalito
93 posts
 
No we don't. 20/88 would be more than sufficient. 16/44.1 when played on the right DAC still sounds awesome.
More to discover