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
brianlucey's avatar
brianlucey
162 posts
 
I’m happy to read so many come to the truth 

1. Mastering and production are most of it. You’re playing in the margins for subjective enjoyment NOT for better quality with SRC 

2.  Modest to high end DAs are all very good.  Flavors of good to great.  Hardware matters more than SR.

3. 16/44.1 can be amazing. 24/44.1 is all any human can hear IF done well.  

4. The real issue in AD quality is not the SR it is the converter hardware.  Filters.  Analog path. Clocking. Power supply. Etc. These are the key.  

I master daily at 24/44.1 using Pacific Microsonics.  Would be a $70,000 AD today.  I can get a $200 AD for 192.  Which sounds better ?

5.  The NATIVE SAMPLE RATE of the mastering session is the BEST quality.  

Everything else is marketing and ego.  Period. 

www.magicgardenmastering.com
allane's avatar
allane
64 posts
 
@brianlucey

It’s great to get feedback from a mastering engineer on this.  Thank you!

Is Pacific Microsonics the company that did HDCD in the 90s, which later sold to Microsoft?  The Linn Sondek LP12 and Arcam FMJ23 (with Ring DAC) are the players I have that are HDCD compatible.

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!
cd318
2,636 posts
 
@brianlucey, 

Thanks for the input! Great to have someone with hands on experience chime in here.

"1. Mastering and production are most of it. You’re playing in the margins for subjective enjoyment NOT for better quality with SRC" (sample rate converters)

"5.  The NATIVE SAMPLE RATE of the mastering session is the BEST quality.

Everything else is marketing and ego. Period."

Hopefully these anti-business model comments wont get you thrown out of the mastering union.

Just joking. Great website. Wow!

http://magicgardenmastering.com/



jay23
210 posts
 
Pacific Microsystems would be $70k overpriced junk today. I never understood all of the hype lasting so long.
beetlemania
839 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.

More to discover