RE: Could you be so kind

Posted by Dave_K on August 18, 2016 at 15:00:30

In Reply to: RE: Could you be so kind posted by Tony Lauck on August 18, 2016 at 09:08:52:

My experience has been that record labels offering the highest quality recordings offer their downloads at 192/24 as well as 96/24. This is a clue that their engineers are trying for the best possible quality and that they are marketing to audiophiles looking for the best possible reproduction.

More likely they are offering 96k and 192k to maximize their profit by selling at two different price tiers. Those of us who suffer from audiophilia nervousa can be baited into spending another 7 bucks or so, just so we don't feel like we might be missing out on something if we buy the cheaper 24/96 version. Meanwhile the labels still have something they can sell to the more price conscious shoppers who won't shell out $25+ for an album.

I haven't really compared the 96k and 192k downloads of the same album because I haven't wanted to buy twice. But I've downsampled a few of my 192k albums to 96k for experiment's sake, and I'll be damned if I can consistently tell a difference. Occasionally the 192k sounds a hair different, usually smoother, but these moments are fleeting and not very repeatable.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Benchmark weighs in on MQA - Jeff Starr 21:49:47 08/16/16 (25)

Methinks Benchmark doth protest too much - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 11:17:09 08/17/16 (2)

i did a quick A-B at a show - G Squared 15:46:17 08/17/16 (1)

RE: i did a quick A-B at a show - ahendler 11:40:17 08/19/16 (0)

RE: Benchmark weighs in on MQA - Mr_Steady 08:28:48 08/17/16 (21)

RE: Benchmark weighs in on MQA - Fitzcaraldo215 10:30:25 08/17/16 (20)

RE: Benchmark weighs in on MQA - Mr_Steady 12:17:43 08/17/16 (19)

RE: Benchmark weighs in on MQA - ahendler 11:41:34 08/19/16 (0)

RE: Benchmark weighs in on MQA - Archimago 01:28:41 08/19/16 (5)

RE: Benchmark weighs in on MQA - Dave_K 11:15:54 08/19/16 (1)

RE: Benchmark weighs in on MQA - Fitzcaraldo215 14:21:51 08/19/16 (0)

"The audiophile press seems to have a hard time being critical of something which is so obviously flawed!" - Beetlemania 08:16:55 08/19/16 (0)

RE: Benchmark weighs in on MQA - Mr_Steady 03:27:56 08/19/16 (1)

RE: Benchmark weighs in on MQA - ahendler 11:45:58 08/19/16 (0)

There is no DRM in MQA (nt) - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 12:00:59 08/18/16 (1)

RE: There is no DRM in MQA (nt) - Mr_Steady 13:15:18 08/18/16 (0)

Could you be so kind - Jaundiced Ear 02:27:15 08/18/16 (9)

RE: Could you be so kind - Mr_Steady 05:21:33 08/18/16 (5)

RE: Could you be so kind - Jaundiced Ear 18:59:49 08/18/16 (0)

RE: Could you be so kind - Tony Lauck 09:08:52 08/18/16 (3)

RE: Could you be so kind - ahendler 11:53:07 08/19/16 (1)

Digital audio has already eclipsed the ability of humans to perceive a difference - Chris from Lafayette 12:06:24 08/19/16 (0)

RE: Could you be so kind - Dave_K 15:00:30 08/18/16 (0)

You need a DAC, Computer, Software player and some files. - oldmkvi 03:42:47 08/18/16 (2)

Beetlemania's report - Beetlemania 07:29:33 08/18/16 (1)

RE: Beetlemania's report - ahendler 11:55:23 08/19/16 (0)

Follow Ups

RE: Could you be so kind - Dave_K 15:00:30 08/18/16 (0)

RE: Could you be so kind

Post a Message!