2. digital
  3. 1423589627

Does HiRez really sound better?

I came across this article from Goldmund Audio which I"m sure will raise some hackles. Don't think me a troll but I'd like to read some feedback on the supposed benefits of HiRez. Some of this has already been gone through but the blind listening test mentioned concluded that the ability to hear a difference between PCM and DSD was no better than the flipping of a coin.
http://attachments.goldmund.com.s3.amazonaws.com/2015/01/23/15/49/42/359/goldmund_does_high_resolution_audio_sound_better_white_paper.pdf.

All the best,
Nonoise
128x128nonoise
jon2020's avatar
jon2020
985 posts
 
To summarise, here's the question.
In descending order of resolution, please list the following recording techniques :-

1. Reel-to-reel analog master tape
2. PCM at hi-res, either DXD or DSD
3. Direct to disc(vinyl)

The thing is no-one knows the definitive answer. So, this debate can rage on till the cows come home. Homo sapiens are good at this sort of thing.
J. :)
audioengr
3,282 posts
 
Chrs - based on my experience about $20K is the starting point for a lifelike system resolving enough to tell the difference. Receivers are not in the system. A few integrated amps will work. Bass will not be as tight or loud as in more expensive systems. Treble will not be as extended or clear either.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
audioengr
3,282 posts
 
Raymonda - R-R can indeed be very good, but ultimately lacks the dynamic range possible with digital. There is also the artifacts caused by the Dolby noise reduction, which are audible. These filters are anything but perfect.

Direct to disk is also compelling. The problem is that so many recording studios are using sub-standard DSP codes for mixing. This software makes all the difference.

The best recordings I have heard to date were recorded on analog tape, mixed in an analog console and then A/D to hi-res digital. These came from Bluecoastrecords.com. They do a minimum amount of EQ because they tune the room acoustically. Also very little or no compression. This is a model for good recordings.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
chrshanl37
833 posts
 
If 20,000 is the number then for the average consumer high rez is dead in the water and will remain a cottage industry.
raymonda
855 posts
 
First off I'm not advocating one medium over the other. I record strictly in the digital domain at 96/24 or 48/24, which I modestly say with good results. However, if I could, I would love a top of the line Dolby SR multitrack system. It is high Rez and does many, many things well. It has a dynamic range of 95 dbs and is tomb quiet

I think 99.99 percent would not be able to tell whether they were listening to this or the best that digital has to offer and in some cases folks may prefer it over pure digital.
More to discover