I share this experience, I have heard Redbook recordings which sound as good as high resolution files.
However, many of us find high resolution files sound better than Redbook. If it is not a result of capturing higher frequencies, what is it? Certainly very few here hear over perhaps 15kHz in any event.
Remember when a 128kbs was CD quality? LOL. Talk about apples and oranges. I suspect the missing info out of our hearing range has some greater affect on the gestalt of our perception.
No, not at all. The bit depth tells you the dynamic range and the sample rate tells you how high the frequency rate encoded will be.
20 bits at 48kHz is all we really need and 24/96 is a good place to stop. 24/192 is a waste of time. Unless you think you need to hear frequencies from 48kHz to 96kHz.
Note: this has nothing to do with upsampling in DAC.
People need to realize when they get into pissing matches with each other it wastes our time. And it seems that neither Elk or speed-racer have facts, just feelings.
Iâve looked at your posts and you have no facts at all. Itâs ironic that you bitch about pissing matches and you start one here and have them in other discussions in this forum.
Please jump in at any time if you conclude something I post is unsupported and feel free to provide us with facts. Additional information is always good and we can all learn something.
It never occurred to me that pointing out MP3 and MQA employed similar marketing schemes would be so controversial - or so difficult to understand.
MP3 was always marketed as a lossy compression algorithm that greatly reduced file sizes while providing acceptable fidelity. This would allow music to be stored efficiently enough with enough fidelity to make compact portable music players feasible. It was never marketed as having the same fidelity as CDs. Some manufacturers may have marketed their players as equal to CD quality sound but the MP3 creators did not. MQA is marketed in an entirely different light. Heck, they donât even mention the format is lossy.
I think itâs no bad idea (and not at all meant offensive against ELK) to see him as a technical moderator with elsewise similar âproblemsâ as some of us. In my perception Paul is the only social moderator here and usually jumps in very late or not at all, especially when ELK is involved occasionally. Weâre all humans, letâs take it like that.