radiorog said:
I only made it to page two on this thread as it all seems to be what I have read in other threads before, but nobody apparently need me to be mentioning this
http://www.whathifi.com/news/new-formal-definition-for-high-resolution-audio-agreed
Doesn't this article show that hi res will be better because it is coming from better than CD sources,and not just a case of up sampling. I not very techy so probably wrong.
Cheers.
Hi radiorog. The argument is moving on, to sum up.
All modern recording produce 'better' than cd standard masters. 'Better' in this context means a higher sampling rate and greater bit depth, typically, but not always, 24/96.
The argument centers around whether this master can be downsampled to cd standard, 16/44.1 without compromising fidelity.
Scientific theory and blind testing shows that this can be done if the processing is to the required standard, in other words, all things being equal, 16/44.1 will sound exactly the same as 24/96.
Many enthusiasts believe that that 24/96 sounds better because the extra information produced at 24/96 gives more accurate playback and that this is audible as a clear improvement in sound quality.
You are now ready to join in....... :dance:
Upsampling CD standard to hi-res is
nonsense, and was dealt with very early in the thread.