Zp 24/96

You love the :rolleyes:. Thank you! I'm seriously happy my investment in red books will carry down many generations. I've started a treasure trove of audio that my daughters and their children can only build upon! Probably the first time in the history of humanity a technology hasn't been improved upon. Errm...crap...fire is probably the same as it was when it was discovered...

Still no answers? Just more childish, flippant comments containing nothing of substance? Just as I thought.

You didn't answer the question (actually, you haven't answered any questions - typical of audiophiles). I'll ask again: If all you have in response is another flippant dog comment, you can save it. We all know you have no answer which refutes my position, no need to crack dumb jokes to try and cover up that fact.

Sorry, I'm incredulous. You really think blu ray sounds on par or worse than red books? Movies are not sounding better to you at home over the past 10 years than they did in the DVD era? Really?

Best to simply ignore those who Monty calls the willfully ignorant. Their hubris simply doesn't allow them to educate themselves. They always "know better", despite overwhelming evidence, and refuse to admit that they're subject to the well-known power of the placebo effect.

Sorry lot, they will forever be chasing "better", never accepting that digital audio is a long-solved problem, and they'd be far better off simply buying good speakers.

Sorry, I'm incredulous. You really think blu ray sounds on par or worse than red books? Movies are not sounding better to you at home over the past 10 years than they did in the DVD era? Really?

First off, learn some facts/history about DVD/Blu-ray based movie soundtracks. DVD exclusively used lossy codecs (DD and DTS), Blu-ray mostly uses DTS-HD/MA and DolbyTrueHD, both of which are lossless. DTS-HD/MA and Dolby TrueHD are also mainly coded in CD resolutions (although some are actual hi-res 24/92/192). So any differences between DVD and Blu-ray can be chalked up to lossy vs lossless codecs, which not many dispute have real, if subtle, sonic differences. So in short, when discussing DVD vs Blu-ray, you are talking lossy vs. lossless, not hi-res vs Redbook. In other words, it is apples vs oranges.

So while an interesting tangent, the above says nothing about 16/44.1 audio vs. 24/96 audio. There have been extensive tests which show that when coming from the same masters, even "golden eared" trained listeners are unable to distinguish 16/44.1 audio vs. 24/96 2-channel audio in a properly conducted ABX test. Because of this, it is concluded that all of the audible differences between 16/44.1 and 24/96 2-channel tracks can be chalked up to differences in the mastering. So it is not whether I "believe" it or not, the science says that nobody hears a difference when bias is ruled out. And once again; if you show us a rigorous, reproducible, peer-reviewed experiment that proves this wrong, then science will have evolved, and we will all start believing that there is a difference. Good luck in your quest!

First off, learn some facts/history about DVD/Blu-ray based movie soundtracks. DVD exclusively used lossy codecs (DD and DTS), Blu-ray mostly uses DTS-HD/MA and DolbyTrueHD, both of which are lossless. DTS-HD/MA and Dolby TrueHD are also mainly coded in CD resolutions (although some are actual hi-res 24/92/192). So any differences between DVD and Blu-ray can be chalked up to lossy vs lossless codecs, which not many dispute have real, if subtle, sonic differences. So in short, when discussing DVD vs Blu-ray, you are talking lossy vs. lossless, not hi-res vs Redbook. In other words, it is apples vs oranges.

So while an interesting tangent, the above says nothing about 16/44.1 audio vs. 24/96 audio. There have been extensive tests which show that when coming from the same masters, even "golden eared" trained listeners are unable to distinguish 16/44.1 audio vs. 24/96 2-channel audio in a properly conducted ABX test. Because of this, it is concluded that all of the audible differences between 16/44.1 and 24/96 2-channel tracks can be chalked up to differences in the mastering. So it is not whether I "believe" it or not, the science says that nobody hears a difference when bias is ruled out. And once again; if you show us a rigorous, reproducible, peer-reviewed experiment that proves this wrong, then science will have evolved, and we will all start believing that there is a difference. Good luck in your quest!

I'm going to go have some wine and celebrate a human victory over audio. I'm 34 years late but what the heck! This is one piece of technology I will boldly mark done! Thank you.

I'm going to go have some wine and celebrate a human victory over audio. I'm 34 years late but what the heck! This is one piece of technology I will boldly mark done! Thank you.

Again, no answers to my questions, no refutation of facts, no reliable scientific data to back your assertions, nothing except flippant remarks. I think we can all easily discern where the "victory" occurred in this little exchange.

There is no point in arguing over these types of issues especially with those here that are master debaters..

It's very much like the folks on Corvette forums that argue that a Vette is every bit as good as a Ferrari because all the Vette's performance parameters are as good or better than the Ferrari. When in truth the Vette guy just wishes he had the coin to be able to own the Ferrari, and is just simply jealous..

Again, no answers to my questions, no refutation of facts, no reliable scientific data to back your assertions, nothing except flippant remarks. I think we can all easily discern where the "victory" occurred in this little exchange.

Easily won by you, jgatie! Acknowledged!

Crockett: Knowing the answers doesn't make it any easier, does it?
Tubbs: In this job you're lucky if it doesn't make it any harder.

It's very much like the folks on Corvette forums that argue that a Vette is every bit as good as a Ferrari because all the Vette's performance parameters are as good or better than the Ferrari. When in truth the Vette guy just wishes he had the coin to be able to own the Ferrari, and is just simply jealous..
Not a good analogy. Blindfold the ordinary car driver on the street, put him in the passenger seat of both cars and take him for a spin, even on a normal road. It would be quite easy for him the identify the car he is in, where such a difference is concerned. Probably even if you plugged his ears. Indeed, it would take a driver of some skill to drive the two in a way that they don't feel different to said passenger.
But this raises an interesting point. Every hobby has in it the seeds of over the top, even OCD behaviour. A lot easier to justify for cars because the car is the way you interface with the road, for every minute of the driving experience. Change your suspension set up enough, and the difference comes through all the time, as one example, even it may not be for the better. Something similar can be said for cameras - one actively interfaces with it to take every picture. Two of the same spec, but with one that is more of a pleasure to use to take pictures will see more use, and more good pictures over time.
What does the poor audiophile do? Once the music is playing what is there to do, other than gaze at the one block of aluminium milled cabinet, see the dancing VU meters backlit in amber colour and other such stuff? Even the volume control that is high on tactile feel, milled on CNC machines is used occasionally. Human nature then leaves one with no other way out but to insist that it sounds better, controlled DBT evidence notwithstanding. It has to. The complete lack of science while coming to such conclusions is what makes this a unique hobby compared to cars, cameras and others.
Women seem exempt - on the other hand, they have shoes and handbags.

Is this really what you think? Once the music starts playing I freaking LISTEN! I absorb It, I let it move me.. Better sounding equipment enables me to understand the music better. Better sounding equipment allows more of the artists intent to come through, better gear allows the recoded music to create more emotional involvement in the listener.. That's what good audio equipment is supposed to do.. Listening to music is a subjective experience.. When one starts applying objective standards to the hobby of listening to music the whole point is lost..

"What does the poor audiophile do? Once the music is playing what is there to do, other than gaze at the one block of aluminium milled cabinet, see the dancing VU meters backlit in amber colour and other such stuff? Even the volume control that is high on tactile feel, milled on CNC machines is used occasionally"