24-192 a scam?

Posted by: JSH on 17 January 2015

I came across this article this morning. It's fascinating though takes some time to read

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmo...l-young.html#toc_1ch

The basis of his hypothesis is basically that whatever we do to recording and playback we are ultimately limited by our ears,which seems logical. Moreover, although these differ from person to person, the technical ability of 16/44 exceeds the abiltiy of our ears to discriminate so anything beyond that is merely a scam to get us to buy the same recordings yet agin or buy now kit or subscriptions. I particularly like the Caveat Lector paragraph

I shall try the downloaded tests this afternoon.

What do others think?

Posted on: 23 January 2015 by Huge

George, you sound like the lone voice crying in the wilderness (again).

But yes you are so absolutely right:

Performance and interpretation trump all.

And recording technique and mastering trump storage format.

The music should be the intent and the objective, rather than listening to the technical details.

Posted on: 23 January 2015 by Huge

Originally Posted by George J:

Unproven means that we must release the prisoner in the dock!

ATB from George

Hey I'm dyslexic, if that's a matter of a doubled letter (is it?) then I don't stand a chance!

Posted on: 23 January 2015 by feeling_zen

Originally Posted by George J:

Question:

Which would you rather listen to? A great musical performance on a 78 recording, or dull as ditch-water music in a technically perfect recording?

If you are happy to listen to eat music on a 78 rpm recording then you probably do not need to worry about high resolution compared to the CD standard.

If the music is so dull that it sounds dull on a dull old CD, then it will not sound less dull on a high resolution release! But it may sound more hifi-isn. I'll explain that one if you fail to grasp the point.

I would also advise that you do some investigating with someone who has some high resolution music recordings and the same recordings in CD releases. If you find yourself enjoying the hi-res versions better then go for it. There are no guarantees, one way or the other!

Only a thought! ATB from George

Bear in mind the objective is to enjoy music I wouldn't let the argument for or against hi-res get in the way. Given that the cost of hi-res audio is not significantly different, why don't you just buy whatever music you want and check if it is available in hi-res on the various download stores - if so, great. If not, just get the CD and rip it and don't lose any sleep or deter you from building the music collection you want.

Posted on: 23 January 2015 by George J

I sort of can agree to see the point, but not quite agree with it as such.

If you can enjoy great music at a certain level of quality, then what is the point of more quality and paying more?

On this logic I avoided any hi-res recordings for myself as I cannot see the point. CD standard is far better already than I want for musical enjoyment. Mind you I used to use a crustal set that I made for listening to Radio Three live concerts back in the 1970s. It made glorious music and could not have been simpler. Just one crystal [germanium] and as silver wisker, with a single coil and a pair of headphones. High impedance type from the 1920s.

Also a big single wire aerial and a good earth is al that powers it. amazing.

Another way that is simple is a 78 turntable and a cone of paper made from a foolscap sheet with a needle through the little end. Your insert your one ear into the end of the paper cone, and play 78s in sonic splendour! That was almost as good as the crystal set on 464 metre Medium Wave Radio Three!

ATB from George