In Reply to: Higher "Rez" Seems to Offer Lower Overall Quality posted by jaydacus on September 24, 2016 at 10:00:39:
It might help us appreciate your perspective if you let us know the specific albums you used in your comparisons, what you listened for as you auditioned them, and whatever you know of the provenance of your 24/192 tracks (derived from native 24/192 masters, downsampled transfers from DXD, upsampled Redbook, etc.).
My observations differ markedly from yours, based on comparisons done on two different systems here with Exact Audio Copy-ripped Redbook, one at extreme nearfield, the other at about eight feet from the speaker plane (in both cases, the result is the same). The program material ranges from classical to jazz to vocal standards, and the hi-rez sources encompass native DSD, DXD, 24/192, 24/96, and analog masters. I find that, overall, the hi-rez versions outpoint their Redbook counterparts in fleshing out detail, instrumental body, and spatial cues. I hear no perceptible difference in hi-rez transfers from 16/44.1 sources. And in no case do I hear the thinning out you allude to when listening to the hi-rez tracks.
Jim
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Higher "Rez" Seems to Offer Lower Overall Quality - Jim Treanor 11:14:06 09/26/16 (2)
- RE: Higher "Rez" Seems to Offer Lower Overall Quality - ahendler 11:46:40 09/26/16 (1)
- He'd already done that... - Jim Treanor 11:54:01 09/26/16 (0)