Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

I Guess I Must Be Deaf......

Posted by Todd Krieger on September 11, 2007 at 12:38:08:
And lacking in diligence, in being able to find these claims and anecdotes.....

"Claims both published and anecdotal are regularly made for audibly superior sound quality for two-channel audio encoded with longer word lengths and/or at higher sampling rates than the 16-bit/44.1-kHz CD standard."

Funny, I've been claiming the contrary..... I've almost never preferred 24/96 or SACD playback over 16/44 CD.....

And what I've read recently, and discovered first-hand, a lot of people have even been wondering if anything beyond 320 kbps MP3 is overkill..... I personally think not, but when it comes to resolution in digital audio playback, until "fatiguing high rez" is addressed and fixed, I wouldn't go beyond CD.