Zp 24/96

A good reason to keep this thread alive...

It's been 3 months. The thread was about to come alive again on its own anyway 😛

Interesting link at the bottom of the page. Sony had its hand slapped for misleading advertising. Trying to demonstrate that "hirez" audio is superior to CD by using a very misleading stair-step graphic. Shame on you, Sony! You were once a great engineering company. You now appear to be led by marketeers, like so many others.

https://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2014/3/Sony-Europe-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_244516.aspx

It's been 3 months. The thread was about to come alive again on its own anyway :p
LOL.
There are even more sensible comments in that section, I was surprised to read them.
Here is a good one:
Quote
The existing resolution/quality is perfectly adequate.
The quality of the content, not its reproduction, is so much more of an issue - it also cannot be solved by technical evolution. It is the creative, artistic aspect of the work. It requires different (i.e. artistic) skills, and ability. It also doesn't sell new hardware based on new technology - equipment from the last couple of decades is perfectly good enough.
If you are really looking at supposedly higher quality reproduction, you'll likely want a completely acoustically isolated and perfect listening room. You'll probably have to treat it as a clean room as any dust particles will play merry hell with the whole affair. And you'll spend your energy trying to discern whether it was a Northern or Central line tube that you think you could hear for 1.34 seconds after the 3 cymbal crash, rather than whether it was a jolly fine piece of music or spoken word or whatever.
Good original content, produced well, is what the consumers want. Not fancy technology.
Unquote
Applies equally well to hardware. Though the comment talks to recording, kit AND performance quality.

Sony had its hand slapped for misleading advertising.
What is more surprising to me is that the adjudicator knew enough of the subject to slap Sony's hand.

So, anyway, aside from the flamewars that seem to have ensued in the 8 years since someone asked for this, I am a user of Sonos and would like it if I could play back 96khz/24 bit FLAC files on it.

I normally only have 44.1khz/16bit FLACs from ripped CDs, but I recently bought the 2014 3-disk re-release of Emerson, Lake & Palmer's Brain Salad Surgery and I was so happy that I could just copy the included FLACs off the third disc. Clearly a music release for people like me! But no, Sonos won't play them. The other things I use to play FLAC (usually play or mpv on Linux) have no trouble with these files.

(Obviously I can rip the included CDs or do sample-rate and bit-depth conversion on these in an automated manner, but it would be nice if Sonos would eat these, even if the hardware product's DACs are 44.1/16 and it has to just convert the data on the fly.)

Sonos has repeatedly stated they are not doing 24/96 audio. They recently restated this fact in October, in this interview with various Sonos dignitaries, including co-founder Tom Cullen, who seems to agree with the scientists in this thread:

Hi-res numbers don't add up

While we’re talking about the competition, we can’t help but ask Sonos about its feelings on hi-res music. No matter who we asked, the answer was the same – don’t hold your breath.

“We’ve looked really hard at it”, says Tom. “Of course we want to make sure we’re not missing anything and we feel pretty good that we’re not. There are arguments you could make about deeper bit depth, but we are unable to make a meaningful argument on sample rate. We tried, we can’t – the math just isn’t there.”

http://www.whathifi.com/news/sonos-plans-brighter-and-brighter-wireless-music-future

In the same interview, Sonos also said this:
Quote: We ask about downsampling, which Sonos currently doesn’t offer - meaning any high-res music you own is completely unplayable on Sonos unless you downsample it yourself.

Jon Reilly admits: “We want to play everything, so we should do and that’s fair feedback. It’s something we’re considering.” Unquote

So maybe they will do something that allows hi res to be played in some manner.

In the same interview, Sonos also said this:
Quote: We ask about downsampling, which Sonos currently doesn’t offer - meaning any high-res music you own is completely unplayable on Sonos unless you downsample it yourself.

Jon Reilly admits: “We want to play everything, so we should do and that’s fair feedback. It’s something we’re considering.” Unquote

So maybe they will do something that allows hi res to be played in some manner.

I'm not sure if that wasn't softening the blow from Cullen's sledge hammer shoot down. PR is PR. 😃

Perhaps, and of no interest to me.

But like I wrote elsewhere, this hi res clamour may be getting to be a perception is reality thing that Sonos may have to accommodate in some manner like they did the "why do we need to wire anything to the router" noise. Another thing that was of no interest to me.

Hesitate to revive this epic thread, but has anyone read the new AES study (literature review more accurate?) that purports to show that "perceived fidelity of an audio recording and playback chain can be affected by operating beyond conventional resolution"? (at a rate slightly higher than flipping a coin). You can download it for free http://www.aes.org/journal/