TBC: True HDCD encoded disks needs to be properly decoded somewhere, either in software (either storage or playback) or in the DAC. There are also a number of false HDCD marked recordings which while using the digital signature, did not actually take advantage of any of the advanced features of HDCD. Still, storage and compute is
cheap. Personally I scanned all my FLAC and decoded those that were marked to 24/44.
The next part of this is how DAC’s sound now. They sound much much better with Redbook than they did 15 years ago. It’s much harder to hear a difference between 16/44 and 24/96 with the best DACs, but oversampling and upsampling to 88 kHz and above still show promise. Of course, some DACs sound very different at 16/44 but my point is that it’s no longer justified. I mean it’s almost as if they want to prove they are high end by maintaining a delta between 16/44 and 24/96. Much of this probably has to do with hyper-accurate clocks becoming cheap.
Another positive outcome that has happened is asynchronous USB. Letting the DAC control the rate of data coming to it instead of say, a CD spinner with all the mechanical issues that can cause jitter, has really levelled the playing field. On the one hand, the input is more jitter resistant, on the other, USB is now asynchronous, so for the audiophile things have continued to improve regardless of your source.
The main lesson I want to say about all of this is that you may be splitting hairs that don’t matter as much as the convenience of access and playback. If you aren’t blown away by Tidal, or CD playback or a High rez version being clearly superior, maybe it’s’ best to just sit back and enjoy what you have without attempting to find the best?
- E