• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

CD vs hi-res

David Harper

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2019
Messages
359
Likes
418
I know this subject has been debated, ad nauseum, before here but I would like to see a vote on this here. How many here believe they hear a sound quality difference between CD and "hi res"?
 

muslhead

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
1,147
Likes
1,109
Define hi res. Without it a vote is useless
 

Jimbob54

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
8,813
Likes
11,066
I know this subject has been debated, ad nauseum, before here but I would like to see a vote on this here. How many here believe they hear a sound quality difference between CD and "hi res"?

Yup- per that poll, unscientfic as it is, the vast majority of responders say they cant discern a difference between CD and "Hi-res" Which accords with my take on the overall tone of the posts I have read on here the past few years from established members.

A different take but the one I think that really matters to most members , is along the lines of "give me a good recording/ master/ version in pretty much any format over a hi-res "bad" recording.
 

cany89

Active Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2020
Messages
250
Likes
125
It depends on the recording. I especially like to see if there is difference between a CD that I have vs 24/96 or 24/192 of the same published mastering. I got some idea. Most of the time they are the same or the tiny bit of difference is just masked in my listening room - as would in any average room…

Considering the scandal of hdtracks (most of the high-res material is just upsampled…) and maybe the other 1/3 of material doesn’t have any difference other than the filter, there is no way to hear any difference in most of the songs…

But I will give you one album that 24/192 really shines as it’s a recent record. Bruno Mars - 24 Magic. Although it’s highly compressed, the resolution of synths, effects, bass, etc. all are amazing. More noticeable on headphones, less so in my room. I wouldn’t die to listen high-res version but since Qobuz already have it I’m happy that I’m listening it :)
 
OP
D

David Harper

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2019
Messages
359
Likes
418
My experience has been that there are two possibilities;
either there is no difference or
any difference there is so subtle as to render it irrelevant

perhaps with the best electrostatic headphones and the hearing ability of a 10 year old or my dog there might be a small difference. But what difference would that make?
 

Frgirard

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 2, 2021
Messages
1,477
Likes
860
My experience has been that there are two possibilities;
either there is no difference or
any difference there is so subtle as to render it irrelevant

perhaps with the best electrostatic headphones and the hearing ability of an 10 year old or my dog there might be a small difference. But what difference would that make?
24 bit. What the age come do here?
 

GXAlan

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
880
Likes
1,172
@amirm likes to talk about the roll off performance of a DAC, whether it is sharp or slow. (Denon vs. Marantz). High resolution (and DSD) puts the roll off outside of the area of audibility.

Dr. Aix, who SELLS high resolution audio, has explained that there is actually very little difference.

IN PRACTICE, when you buy or stream CDs versus buy or stream High-Res, the HIGH RES SOUNDS BETTER BECAUSE IT IS A DIFFERENT MIX. It can have more dynamic range and less dynamic range compression to boost the subjective volume. If you took that high res downloaded file and converted it to 16/44.1 it would still sound really good. But you can only get that higher quality mix from the high resolution purchase.
 

Roland68

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2020
Messages
452
Likes
299
Location
Cologne, Germany
I know this subject has been debated, ad nauseum, before here but I would like to see a vote on this here. How many here believe they hear a sound quality difference between CD and "hi res"?
One thing is always forgotten in all of these debates.
If the original source material was not in a resolution above CD quality, it doesn't matter what Hi-Res format / resolution you listen to or compare it in, there can be no difference.
This of course also applies to analog source material. You can compare it to analog recordings in photography. Digitize a 35mm negative or a slide with 20 and 50 megapixels, you will not see any difference.
 

Everett T

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
438
Likes
309
If it is a well produced mix, both sound great. When I field record live music I use 24/48 as I've never found that anything higher was noticeable other then taking up more size.
 

Wes

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 5, 2019
Messages
3,851
Likes
3,696
of course, there are those who believe in the efficacy of "upsampling" ...

I wonder if that is correlated with being an anti-vaxer?

OTOH, there are some AI based fill in the dots products for post-processing in photography coming out - I think Adobe has one. One could certainly do that in audio - and maybe has already been done for tics, pops, etc.

But, in general, the best study on this is the meta-analysis conducted by Reiss. While imperfect, he found only a marginal improvement.

A study using very high res vs. Redbook or even mp3 with young musicians might be illuminating.

I suggest sticking to speakers/room, the best masterings, and finally maybe power amps for better SQ.
 

Frgirard

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 2, 2021
Messages
1,477
Likes
860
One thing is always forgotten in all of these debates.
If the original source material was not in a resolution above CD quality, it doesn't matter what Hi-Res format / resolution you listen to or compare it in, there can be no difference.
This of course also applies to analog source material. You can compare it to analog recordings in photography. Digitize a 35mm negative or a slide with 20 and 50 megapixels, you will not see any difference.
The comparison with a screen resolution does not make sense.
Show us 24bit with a dynamic amplitude over 60 dB.
 

Frgirard

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 2, 2021
Messages
1,477
Likes
860
of course, there are those who believe in the efficacy of "upsampling" ...

I wonder if that is correlated with being an anti-vaxer?

OTOH, there are some AI based fill in the dots products for post-processing in photography coming out - I think Adobe has one. One could certainly do that in audio - and maybe has already been done for tics, pops, etc.

But, in general, the best study on this is the meta-analysis conducted by Reiss. While imperfect, he found only a marginal improvement.

A study using very high res vs. Redbook or even mp3 with young musicians might be illuminating.

I suggest sticking to speakers/room, the best masterings, and finally maybe power amps for better SQ.
The best mastering? In my world, the ancient world where you find music lovers, the mastering is the picture that the producer want to give to the public.
There can only be one Master..
And producers deliberately degrades the sound quality between different resolutions is a ruffian: Boycott

The remastering is a betrayal.
 

Frgirard

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 2, 2021
Messages
1,477
Likes
860
No one was able to detect the scam on hdtrack with a Beck track 24/96 in reality a mp3 upsampled.
24 bit is 8 bit of nothing except the seller
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom