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

You totally don’t get it. There are relatively few instances in over 100,000 entries where the dynamic range of the same issue of CD is higher than the vinyl issue. That’s just the way things are. You lose again. Einstein has the same affliction, arguing wrongly until he was blue in the face. 🥶 So you’re in good company. 😬

I never said vinyl was immune from over-compression. That’s putting words in my mouth I did not say. However, vinyl over the years has fared much better than digital. Just look at the data. Hel-loo!

Whack a mole! The sport of kings. I’m thankful for this opportunity to play Whack-a-mole, in the future there are no more audio forums.

To someone who actually understands this data, and understands how it is calculated, then no, it is not an assertion, no more than my claim that 1+1 = 2.  You probably don't even know that while dynamic range is in the title, it is not even really a measure of dynamic range, but crest factor, from the average sound level, to the peak sound level over an arbitrary 3 second interval. The average, peak, min, are for the songs themselves, so that lists the average of all songs on the album, the minimum for the album, and the maximum for the album on a song by song basis.

The peak is more representative of the format, as it shows what is possible. Digital has no issues with playing loud all the time. Vinyl doesn't as there is not enough track space.

But that all said, this databases is not and was never intended to be an indication of what is possible in any format, but to push the industry to stop compressing CDs (and vinyl) so much, something that has been happening since the 70's, before CD existed.

That VI (or you) brings this up at all, really distracts from and adds nothing to the discussion of whether 24/96 is enough.

cleeds2,593 posts11-29-2019 4:05pmI’m not sure that’s even remotely true. It’s just another of your "opinion stated as fact" assertions.

... virtually all the top peak dynamic range albums are download, or CD (or unknown).

Gosh, atdavid just found that out AND is trying to make us believe he’s the only one who knows. To think, people accuse me of shooting fish in a barrel. The funny thing is the data in the dynamic range database tracks (no pun intended) perfectly with listening results. But atdavid would rather fight than listen.

No, VI, it actually does not. It tracks with a group of people, particularly with audiophiles, but anyone who has rented a car, invariably to find the bass cranked, knows that all musical tastes are not the same, nor are all listening environments the same.  All the database reveals, for the 4th time is decisions made at recording, NOT the format, not even what the preference of the majority of the populace likes.


Do you have anything relevant to add to the discussion of whether 24/96 is enough?  Do you even understand that that is what this thread is about?

I think we can all assume that since one of the great "proponents" of subjective evaluation can't offer anything in this area that refutes 24/96 being enough, then we can assume it is.  Thanks for clarifying that VI.

geoffkait18,612 posts11-29-2019 5:27pmThe funny thing is the data in the dynamic range database tracks (no pun intended) perfectly with listening results. But atdavid would rather fight than listen.