Choosing Best Sample Rate

[o0OBillO0o]

Originally Posted by crwilli

For me, yes based on what I can and cannot hear balanced with the extra cost of the +96 files... It is not an absolute scientific analysis or opiniion.

Cool- of course there are no absolutes!

[jdandy]

Originally Posted by o0OBillO0o

Hi there- You three all agree that 24/96 is all you need? I would say you do. Because if I had to pin you down , I would read your comments as such. This is an interesting take on high resolution audio.

Bill.......To be perfectly honest, I have quite a few 16/44.1 CD's that have been recorded so well and sound so good they give 24/96 a serious run for the money. It has been my experience that when emphasis is placed on exceedingly high quality recording, mixing, mastering and pressing of a great performance a 16Bit/44.1kHz Redbook CD quality data stream can sound exemplary.

I don't pretend to be some golden eared connoisseur of high-end sound but I do know what type of reproduced audio performances capture my complete and undivided attention without reservation. I have enough experience and long term exposure to many premium sound systems to be able to note and identify differences that others often fail to recognize. I have also learned that it does not matter what others think of my experiences, nor does it matter what my opinions are of other people's experiences. Individual perception of an audio event is a solo activity even when shared with others. Why else do we close our eyes when we truly want to focus on the music at hand? It is because we wish to shut out all external associations and distractions that stand between us and the performance. In those moments we seek the comfort of solitude so that we may best focus on the auditory illusion at hand.

Whether it is analog vinyl, digital at 16/44.1, 24/44.1, 24/96, 24/192, or master tapes, I can be thrilled by all of it providing the recordings create a pristine illusion of the original event. I'm not silly enough to believe any recording is an exact replication of an actual live event but an accurate facsimile can be extremely satisfying. I am wise enough to be at peace in the knowledge that my personal experiences do not have to parallel anyone else's in order for me to be happy. That's all that really matters to me.

[o0OBillO0o]

Originally Posted by jdandy

Bill.......To be perfectly honest, I have quite a few 16/44.1 CD's that have been recorded so well and sound so good they give 24/96 a serious run for the money. It has been my experience that when emphasis is placed on exceedingly high quality recording, mixing, mastering and pressing of a great performance a 16Bit/44.1kHz Redbook CD quality data stream can sound exemplary.

snip

Whether it is analog vinyl, digital at 16/44.1, 24/44.1, 24/96, 24/192, or master tapes, I can be thrilled by all of it providing the recordings create a pristine illusion of the original event. I'm not silly enough to believe any recording is an exact replication of an actual live event but an accurate facsimile can be extremely satisfying. I am wise enough to be at peace in the knowledge that my personal experiences do not have to parallel anyone else's in order for me to be happy. That's all that really matters to me.

Dan......... I enjoy your personal approach and commentary.

I think the facts today are that 16 Bit/44.1 kHz Redbook standard compact disc (CD) quality data and The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) equalized standard of analog vinyl records can sound wonderful. It's a fact that these mediums represent recordings and artists very well- Most of all 99% of my music listening is done in this manner.

The other fact is that we cannot completely convince ourselves let alone the masses that something like a sample rate of 192Khz or 2.8224 mHz is a worthwhile investment. Sure, it's a bigger number, but anecdotally, and from the sample size, in this thread the difference is tough to prove with a high level of confidence.

Originally Posted by jdandy

I don't pretend to be some golden eared connoisseur of high-end sound but I do know what type of reproduced audio performances capture my complete and undivided attention without reservation. I have enough experience and long term exposure to many premium sound systems to be able to note and identify differences that others often fail to recognize. I have also learned that it does not matter what others think of my experiences, nor does it matter what my opinions are of other people's experiences. Individual perception of an audio event is a solo activity even when shared with others. Why else do we close our eyes when we truly want to focus on the music at hand? It is because we wish to shut out all external associations and distractions that stand between us and the performance. In those moments we seek the comfort of solitude so that we may best focus on the auditory illusion at hand.

Dan, I cannot refute things that are unfalsifiable elements, such as moral opinions. Never the less, this is well written.

I'm merely an amatuer or novice to all of this, but I sure love music and audio. I do look forward to some level of progress, with regards to sample rate, that will undoubtedly improve my listening experience should I not make it to the concert or show.

Best,
Bill