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
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.
No we don't. 20/88 would be more than sufficient. 16/44.1 when played on the right DAC still sounds awesome.
Abraxalito , I agree though my suggestion a few comments back was ignored , lol , regarding Tonian Labs recordings which are by far the most realistic sounding percussion recordings I’ve heard to date ,
Hi-res streaming , DVD audio , HDCD and what have you , ive listened to countless excellent recordings, with some of the very best talked about in audio media and online that come close to Tonian labs 16/44 recordings but so far no equals .
Borrow or buy a copy and listen for yourself.
https://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

44.1/16 is enough for any stage in the signal chain, even more so at the playback. Some oversampling at the mastering/AD/DA conversion -sure. 24 bit is because of lazy/sloppy engineers. Good recording/mastering is key. The above article by good old Monty still holds. Human ears and the the sampling theorem haven’t evolved over the past couple of years.