Zp 24/96

where would science be if they didn't explore outside the box ? If they didn't experiment ?
True, but you need to also add reference to the rigour that scientific experimenting is done with, before existing hypotheses are discarded in favour of newer ones.

Closed minds frequently require proof in written form. Open minds tend to try things for themselves without others opinions or reading stuff on the internet.

Since you bring up science so often, where would science be if they didn't explore outside the box ? If they didn't experiment ? That's the road to discovery my friend, experiment....you may find some of your closely held opinions may be mute.

Science always "explores outside the box", that is how it advances. Someone hypothesizes a new idea (i.e. People can hear something different/better from 24/96 recordings from the same master). Then that hypothesis is put to rigorous, peer-reviewed testing, and if it proves true, science accepts the new theory and there is much rejoicing!!

One problem . . . there has been rigorous, peer-reviewed testing of your hypothesis, and so far, it has been found to be false. Even more telling, the companies/patrons who would benefit most from this hypothesis being true (audiophile manufacturers/writers/aficionados) could very easily perform experiments to prove the hypothesis, and yet they stay away from these experiments like Superman from Kryptonite. Instead they, like you, critique the validity of 200 years of established biological, mathematical, and physical science. It is truly a case of believing in fairy tales.

And so I ask again, who exactly has the closed mind here?

PS - Let me address this again:

That's the road to discovery my friend, experiment....you may find some of your closely held opinions may be mute.

Here's an experiment for YOU to try. Take any of your precious 24/96 recordings and use a quality downconverter to make a 16/44.1 copy. Then load up any of the ABX programs that were suggested many times in the thread (foobar2000 or Lacinato for PC, ABXTester for Mac). Load up the software with the two copies of each file, use any quality USB DAC into your choice of headphones/amp/speakers, and test away!! Post screenshots of your results. But be careful, you may find some of your closely held opinions may be mute . . . errrm . . . moot.

We'll be waiting for the results! (Hell, we're still waiting for Erik's results!!!)

Someone who starts with a belief and then clings to that belief no matter what; who seeks out stories and hypotheses, however whacky or unsubstantiated which fit with that belief whilst ignoring the vast weight of knowledge and evidence that leave their beliefs in tatters...

... that is the person that is closed minded.

Cheers,

Keith

Monty Montgomery calls it "willful ignorance". These types populate way too many forums, often as moderators. They're annoying no end, simply refuse to accept facts. They "know better". :rolleyes:

So happy to have educated, knowledgeable mods here.

Take any of your precious 24/96 recordings and use a quality downconverter to make a 16/44.1 copy.
This, I suspect, is the source of this issue - the probability that much of hi res music is remastered and therefore sounds better on quality systems in a quiet environment. How many listeners would go further to understand that it is the mastering that is the variable making all the impact? Of these, how many would be ok to do the down converting?
If Sonos made a player that did this on the fly, the same sound quality would be heard without any user intervention. The down converted music should then be ok for streaming to other Sonos units without sync/bandwidth issues.
One way for Sonos to check the hi res box and stop all the chatter - like they have done for the wifi box. A better product idea than the blue play 1, imo.

This, I suspect, is the source of this issue - the probability that much of hi res music is remastered and therefore sounds better on quality systems in a quiet environment. How many listeners would go further to understand that it is the mastering that is the variable making all the impact? Of these, how many would be ok to do the down converting?
If Sonos made a player that did this on the fly, the same sound quality would be heard without any user intervention. The down converted music should then be ok for streaming to other Sonos units without sync/bandwidth issues.
One way for Sonos to check the hi res box and stop all the chatter - like they have done for the wifi box. A better product idea than the blue play 1, imo.

IMHO, the "I just want Sonos to play my files!" lament is just a ruse. When faced with the overwhelming evidence that hires audio is snake oil, this is the fallback position for those who cannot argue the science, yet still believe they are correct. So they use the "I just want Sonos to play my files!" argument as a substitute for that which they cannot reasonably argue otherwise. When push comes to shove and you ask them if they'd accept no Sonos hires unit, and have every Sonos device downconvert instead, you would soon see their true colors.

Hires is largely a proxy for "better mastering".

IMO this is largely an easy way to convince people to pay a premium for better music. I suspect they would have a problem selling the same music at a premium in (say) lossless 16/44.1 format as it then becomes "just another remaster".

The people wishing to play these formats have mostly been convinced by this bogus association between format and quality, and have paid a premium based on this belief. Of course they're not going to want to downsample them as the implication is that the resulting file will not longer be the premium product they paid for. That is human nature.

Cheers,

Keith

When push comes to shove and you ask them if they'd accept no Sonos hires unit, and have every Sonos device downconvert instead, you would soon see their true colors.
Perhaps. Being charitable though, there may be a few that would be happy if Sonos were to play these files on the fly, even if as I suggested it would mean buying a Sonos Hi Res play capable player that would do the down converting and stream the results across to other non capable Sonos units. I am assuming here that current units may not have the grunt to do this on the fly converting given their hardware capability.
Of course they're not going to want to downsample them as the implication is that the resulting file will not longer be the premium product they paid for. That is human nature.

Some may be happy to let Sonos do this for them! I have no idea of the market size for such a solution of course, but it would be a way to address hi res play without obsoleting the installed user base.

Some may be happy to let Sonos do this for them! I have no idea of the market size for such a solution of course, but it would be a way to address hi res play without obsoleting the installed user base.

I agree it would be an interesting solution.

However, there are some possible technical challenges. For a start it would break the "any room, any music" ethos as certain music would only work when streamed via this specific player.

I also don't think these people wouldn't be satisfied. If downsampling hires was acceptable to them, they would already have done it, and wouldn't be getting involved in these discussions (I've yet to hear a rational argument for not batch downsampling). I believe they would then just shift their demands for full hires support.

Cheers,

Keith

A good reason to keep this thread alive:
See - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/06/25/high_resolution_audio_engineers_to_agree_new_production_guidelines/

Surprisingly sensible for the most part. One suggested way to sell hi res: "packaging hi-res files with “high quality digital liner notes, credits, and other descriptive metadata”."