Redbook Keeps Surprising

Coming back to the OP, if I understand it correctly, cd recordings today which sound good are more likely to be sourced from 192/24 masters which are then downsampled to 44/16 in the disc or as downloads.

Many recording studios seem to be doing all-digital masters nowadays, either in hires pcm or dsd. A very good sounding cd like Patricia Barber's Cafe Blue, I have been told, is mastered in hires pcm.

My entire collection consists of redbook CDs (some vinyl) and I am very impressed with the sound I am getting from most.  Running a Audiophilleo USB/SPDUF converter (for computer) or Arcam DV-137 disc player (CDs and DVDs) into a Bryston DAC. Have not purchased hirez or DSD files. I buy CDs and rip to computer. Unlike mapman, I keep the CDs.

I own a lot of CDs, rip them into 44.1/16 AIFF files, transfer them to my music server from iTunes.  I also have a few SACDs and have purchased some 192/24 AIFF files from HD Tracks.

I must say, the music I have on both SACD & 192/24 sometimes does sound slightly better, the performers seem to have a little more "distinctness" with the sounds they make and they are more precisely positioned in the sound stage, but 1) the difference is not consistent and 2) those hi-res versions are the results of being remastered, so I'm not sure I'm comparing "apples to apples".

For nearly two years I've had the pleasure of enjoying a PS Audio DirectStream DAC, and that unit really impresses me, its ability to extract all sorts of detail from CD quality AIFF & FLAC files.

I'm guessing that the higher resolution of the distribution files might have some effect on the sound quality, but that most of the good sound quality might come from excellent engineering and mastering.

Sometimes I am just astounded by how good even 44.1/16 sounds on my system.