Do we really need anything greater than 24/96? Opinions?

Hi @cheeg


I had an ARC DAC 8 - It absolutely needed hi rez files to sound less than murky.

The Mytek Brooklyn I have now does a really great job with Redbook and Internet radio.
But since then a number of DAC’s, if not most, no longer have such a disaprity between redbook and hi rez files.

Best,
Erik

I note your question relates only to bit rate and not bit depth.  My answer is that no we do not need anything above 96Khz.  In fact it may be slightly deleterious - increased processing power and disc space.  
The main point is that there is no musical information beyond about 30Khz - the overtones of the highest notes music are now very low.  Also to be practical there are limitations on (1) recording microphones picking up this extra information; (2) tweeters being able to reproduce these frequencies accurately, if at all; to say nothing of (3) the limitations of our ears.

I pretty much agree with much of what has been said--except.  I have a  very high revealing system, Apogee Scintillas/Krell KSA80B and a Meridian Ultra Dac.  I find in general, as the sample rate goes up, the sound does get better.  The best material seems to be classical at 352.  Its the spacial info about the hall and the air around the instruments thats a little better.  I also in general find that MQA on top of good material is the best--and once again I find poor stuff at 44.1 and I find great stuff at 44.1.  For my ears, listening for the music to be in the room, the artist, the sound engineer, higher bit rate, higher bit depth, and MQA all improve the sound.  

No in fact you need to go to 16 44.1

Its way better sounding with more Jam and Soul.

Nothing wrong with Red Book CD using a half decent player;  once again Audiophiles, going in those ever tightening circles, have shot themselves in the foot in search of the Holy Grail, and better Magic Mushrooms.