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


It's really difficult to compare resolutions with different masterings, delivery methods, sources, etc. I have hundreds of HI-rez files (dsd, hi bit rate PCM, etc). I have to say that even 24/44 is probably revealing the best a recording has to offer. Obviously, recording formats, methods, etc all play a huge role. I'm not talking preferred sources like vinyl, sacd, etc. I'm talking about the recordings themselves. 

Plus, I really think the recording (studio-mastering) means more to sound quality than the actual output format/resolution. I've heard excellent recorded/mastered recordings sound killer on iTunes streaming and CD. 

Opinions?

aberyclark
Whereas hi-res recordings bring little advantage over well recorded and mastered redbook, upsampling redbook to higher sampling rates has real advantages in digital to analogue conversion. This applies obviously only to delta sigma dacs. R2R dacs conversely have to contend with euphonic distortion which is often referred to as analogue sounding.
@antigrunge2 - my ARC Ref 9SE can upsample redbook playback to 176.4kHz.  I tried it several times and cannot say it really sounds better overall than native sampling of 16Bit/44.1kHz.

You did mentioned that upsampling works best with delta sigma DACs.  Sorry for not being digitally technical, but is a delta sigma DAC refer to a type electronic architecture used in PCM DACs like Burr BrownDACs?   
Here's a question.....If one were to make one final version of a master tape and store away that Master for many years. What method would capture everything the tape had to offer so future engineers could use that new source as the master?

1. Digital? 24/96/24/192?

2. Analog tape copy?
@bifwynne 
I am surprised that you have no benefit from upsampling. Have you tried inserting an Insulator into your USB connection? Does your DAC have a BNC input for a master clock? Both of these might help in making it more audible.