96kHz vs. 192kHz at 24 bit

[jimtranr]

What caught my eye in John Siau's commentary on stopband attenuation is the use of qualifiers like "usually" and "many," which leaves him more than a little wiggle room should he be challenged on his assertions.

To me his commentary is reminiscent of the naysaying I remember about SACD (and particularly the high-band noise level that had to be filtered out) 13 years ago when I contemplated whether or not to early-adopt (I took the plunge and never regretted it).

[ronenash]

In most cases I can not hear much difference between 92khz and 192khz files. 96 is good enough for me.

[HI-BIT]

The venue, recording equipment, mixing, and mastering determines the ultimate sonic quality IME. I have many good 16/44 recordings and of course excellent vinyl renderings. Some of my 16/48 FLAC files sound better than 24/96. Just wait for 32/512 recordings.

I cringe at the inferior ADCs and mixing boards with slews of opamps. It is wonder that recordings sound as good as they do.