In Reply to: RE: Xiph Foundation Leader Calls High-Res Audio a Waste of Bandwidth posted by knewton on March 12, 2012 at 10:14:17:
>>Particularly, when so many have expressed misgivings about the perceived sound of CD quality digital.<<
Times have changed, and obviously, some truly excellent sounding 16/44 recordings have been well documented, suggest that the medium itself is not the issue, or at the very least, it's not the only issue effecting sound quality. In my travels, "hi-rez" by simple default, doesn't guarantee "hi-rez" sound.
tb1
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- he's not completely wrong ... - TBone 11:10:23 03/13/12 (16)
- RE: he's not completely wrong ... - knewton 11:49:42 03/13/12 (15)
- RE: he's not completely wrong ... - rick_m 13:59:43 03/13/12 (13)
- RE: he's not completely wrong ... - knewton 06:28:10 03/14/12 (12)
- RE: he's not completely wrong ... - rick_m 09:51:08 03/14/12 (11)
- RE: he's not completely wrong ... - knewton 10:35:20 03/14/12 (10)
- RE: he's not completely wrong ... - rick_m 13:47:35 03/14/12 (9)
- RE: he's not completely wrong ... - knewton 07:12:00 03/15/12 (8)
- RE: he's not completely wrong ... - rick_m 08:30:53 03/15/12 (7)
- RE: he's not completely wrong ... - knewton 12:20:47 03/15/12 (2)
- RE: he's not completely wrong ... - rick_m 16:32:51 03/15/12 (0)
- RE: he's not completely wrong ... - Tony Lauck 14:21:30 03/15/12 (0)
- RE: he's not completely wrong ... - tom.dennehy 09:06:04 03/15/12 (3)
- RE: he's not completely wrong ... - Tony Lauck 13:30:58 03/15/12 (2)
- RE: he's not completely wrong ... - tom.dennehy 17:25:34 03/15/12 (1)
- notice, but not attribute until confirmed - Tony Lauck 06:19:19 03/16/12 (0)
- mastering ... - TBone 12:23:34 03/13/12 (0)