The Modern DAC killed High Resolution Music - has Stereophile proven it?

Hi,

Cheapo guy here...but even with a couple of stages of de-jitter, using an Allo Digione going to a Schiit Modi Uber, you can hear the difference between redbook and high res. But the red book sounds so good anyway, that your ears adjust to the difference, maybe? It’s almost as if there’s more of a kind of sound signature distinction occurring than necessarily one being so much better than the other, as it relates to one’s ears? Of course, (in my case) there’s the Allo upsampling when you ask it to (which also sounds a bit nicer) plus all the variables that go into any given studio recording. Some recordings are so dynamic in nature, that they only get marginally more compelling through a quality dac and set up when high res vs red book. Then there’s that weird slight improvement in soundstage and depth I get when playing a red book cd through a DVD player hooked up to the same chain? Extra de-jitter?!?

But overall super impressed with the clarity/quality/depth/dynamic/detail from even this cheapo rig.

I don’t really understand this statement .  The recording that I was referring to, the Shostakovich Tenth Symphony with Nelsons  and the Boston SO, is a recent recording, issued as a CD and then a few weeks later as a download in 3 resolutions.  I would presume that it was only “mastered” once, and never “remastered”,

Hi mahler123
Unfortunately, I know this is an unreliable inference. It has been shown over time that releases on different formats are mastered differently. Even different releases of the same recording on the same medium may have a different profile, including changes in:

• Compression
• Spectral balance (i.e. EQ)
  
• Channel separation.
  

It is possible to take a high resolution recording and down sample it, and put that on a CD, but without actually talking to the engineers responsible, I have no idea what happened.

Again, I don’t understand the point here.  The original focus of the thread was on modern DACs , the thesis being that current DACs enhance Redbook so much that High Rez is irrelevant.

 
I think "irrelevant" is too strong a term, and if I said that I should correct it. My apologies. I meant, "a lot less desirable" .  Saying modern DACs killed High rez was hyperbolic, which is kind of my brand. :)

Modern DACs bring out the best in everything, all resolutions.  IMO they do a better job of showing the distance between High Rez and Redbook.    

Ok, but what if this isn't that High rez is better, but Redbook playback is bad?  I mean, we have this bias that poor CD playback prooves high resolution is better data. What if it just poor CD performance?

Here is the experience I had comparing redbook and high resolution music and what got me thinking of this. I had an ARC DAC 8 and Mytek at the same time, so I got to hear how they played each.

• ARC DAC 8 Redbook: 80%
• ARC DAC 8 High Resolution: 95%
• Mytek Redbook: 95%
• Mytek High Resolution: 97%
  

What was also interesting is that while the ARC benefited from a Wyred4Sound resampler, the Mytek did not. It played the same.

Of course, buy the music you like, but if what I heard was true and a trend, this reduces the value gap.

Best,
E

I have a Brooklyn+ with an S-Booster external power supply.  It certainly improves Redbook playback.  Thing is that I have a closet full of Redbook CD’s that I like and their is no way I would consider replacing these with high res files.  The difference in musical enjoyment does not justify the cost.

There is argument between DSD and PCM through a resistor ladder DAC. WHich is better? I have been using an MSB Platinum with an upgrade buffer circuit to get rid of jitter. MSB thinks this is better than DSD. But PS Audio makes a DAC which converts PCM to DSD before converting it to analog. We need some discussion of which is better or what are the pros and cons of each.