Proven: Good Old Redbook CD Sounds the Same as the Hi-Rez Formats

[ashok]

Anyone read this article ?
http://theaudiocritic.com/blog/index...Id=41&blogId=1

[BudP]

Actually, I didn't read the paper at the end of the link. but do regard the premise as correct, with one caveat. The red book player or dac must have a full, poured, instrumentation ground plane or it cannot compete.

If you have this rarity, or the foolish Electron Pools in it's place, the difference between Red Book, SACD,very well done vinyl and 1/4 track tape is only a matter of the degree of "ease" in performance. That "ease" is related to how much information is still attached to transient impulse, such as information content supporting, low level coherent gain riders, such as the sound of instrument bodies as they accept and release information, in attack and decay conditions. Tonality, detail, and dynamic color are all so close as to be indistinguishable. But only if the ground plane is taken care of.

Bud

[Cloth Ears]

Originally posted by ashok
Proven: Good Old Redbook CD Sounds the Same as the Hi-Rez Formats

Not quite. They said:
"the new hi-rez formats generally sound better than standard CDs, but not because the processing technology is superior. The hi-rez discs are aimed at a more sophisticated market, and therefore the recording sessions and production techniques tend to be more sophisticated, more puristic, in terms of microphoning, compression, editing, etc. "

From the article:
"Meyer and Moran do not say that 14 or 15 bits in a truncated CD are just as good as 20. What they say is that spot-on 16-bit/44.1-kHz processing is as good as it gets, audibly."

I mean, what microphone out there is able to pickup >22kHz sound and is used for recording? I know of precisely zero...