adamdea;635406 Wrote: > There are people out there who say that the improvement from 96 to 192 > > exceeds that from 44 to 96: It's the final step where veils are lifted, > music takes on an analogue-like ease and flow etc. > I am not really sure that there is any need to go over 44 kHz (take a > look over on hydrogen audio if you dare). I'm not even sure that there > exists any program material which has information recorded in the > frequency range 96-192. There seem to be frequent exposees of the > shortage of over 44kHz program material > Why stop at 192kHz- why not 384 (which some DACs can handle).
I havent really heard this big outcry for the higher resolutions. I'm still getting more out of 16/44.1. The last chapter has not bet written for redbook. I'm not saying that PCM should be played "as is" off the disk. Much to the contrary. With that said, the solution is not going to higher and higher resolutions. I'm with the reasonable camp that looks more at the numbers and keeps things within sane expectations. -- earwaxer9 System: modified Winsome Labs Mouse, modified Maggie MMG's, Transporter, HSU sub 12, MSB DAC to 500 watt sub slave amp, JPS labs power cords, Silver audio interconnect, Audioquest Granite speaker cable. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ earwaxer9's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39527 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=88056 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
