cleeds—Re. "Hi-Rez Audio Distinguished in Blind Testing": Any findings derived from an experiment involving 7 testers (average age 22) in a anechoic test chamber listening to test signals (not music) just doesn't convey much of material significance, at least not to me.
Today, it seems apparent that redbook resolution serves as an effective and sufficient means to preserve and recreate recorded music, and that higher rez alternatives convey no appreciable audible advantage. This conclusion does not exclude unique or unusual tests wherein some difference between redbook and higher rez might be perceived (e.g., 22 kids listening to test signals in a anechoic chamber), nor do those exceptions affect the validity of this general conclusion.
Today, it seems apparent that redbook resolution serves as an effective and sufficient means to preserve and recreate recorded music, and that higher rez alternatives convey no appreciable audible advantage. This conclusion does not exclude unique or unusual tests wherein some difference between redbook and higher rez might be perceived (e.g., 22 kids listening to test signals in a anechoic chamber), nor do those exceptions affect the validity of this general conclusion.