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
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
CD sound quality is relatively independent of bit rate and sampling rate. For starters you’re not even getting 50% of what’s on the CD anyway. There are too many serious issues with CD Player performance, after all these years. The CDs themselves are great. Increasing the bit rate and sampling rate is kind of a scam to get more money. Not unlike overly compressing CDs. It’s all orchestrated so they can stay in business. Hel-loo!
koestner
670 posts
 
+1 for Geoff
I was able to compare the same recording from HD tracks. One in 24/96 and the other 24/192 and I couldn't hear any difference at all.
welcher's avatar
welcher
114 posts
 
A little off topic: I bought a Korg MR-2000S studio recorder to digitize my vinyl collection. I made several test recording all PCM 24 bit: 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4 and 192 kHz. I then compared the recordings to the original vinyl and each other. I could not hear a discernible difference between the 24 bit 96 khz recordings and the original vinyl. I also could not hear a difference between the 96, 176.4 and 192 khz recordings. I could hear a difference between the 44.1, 48, 88.2 and 96 khz recordings. So I recorded all my vinyl in PCM 24 bit 96kHz. So for me 24/96 is fine.
More to discover