OP
Galliardist
Major Contributor
- Thread Starter
- #141
If you run Qobuz (and increasingly Tidal through the PC or Mac apps) you'll find 44.1/24 is becoming a kind of de facto format for big name releases and now spreading to most new releases. This is also the format that people cutting LPs from digital like to use, and (despite those big DR differences that get reported) they are often the same files.It‘s clear that the term hi-res was born out of a misunderstanding of the technology by the people who coined it. It invokes the coarse vs fine stair steps simile that seems so hard to get rid of. If anything, formats using >44.1kHz or >16bit samples should be called hi-bandwidth or hi-SNR, respectively. That of course would put the spotlight on the actual SNR and bandwidth of the material, which would then likely reveal that the choice of digital format isn’t the bottleneck here.
I personally would choose formats like 96/24 over 44.1/16, simply because I like the added SNR headroom for digital processing on the playback side. After volume levelling and digital volume control, DSP or Dirac I can easily be -20 to -30dB down from the original signal level.
I think the higher bandwidth of 96kHz can be beneficial for the selection of less intrusive anti-aliasing filters, but at my age I don’t care about anything above 16kHz, so 44.1 is fine for me. It’s just that 44.1/24 material is not so common.