Quote:
Originally Posted by JSWolf
I'm going to disagree that 16/44 is better then vinyl in every way. It's not. It's better in some way, but I've heard plenty on LP that sounds better then CD.
|
Some LPs do sound better than some CDs, true, but that's not because of the format, it's just because of the way some (particularly early) CDs were mastered. It took a while for audio engineers to work out how best to make use of all that extra dynamic range, signal-to-noise ratio, stereo separation etc. that CD has - many got carried away with the opportunities and produced some very bad masters (e.g. the 'Loudness Wars'). That's in no way a reflection on the CD medium itself, though, just the way it has sometimes been used.
By every possible measure I can think of, CDs are technically superior to vinyl. If you can think of an objective measure where that's not the case, please point it out.
Note that by 'superior', I mean in terms of objective accuracy. If you're talking about 'sounds nice' in a subjective sense, then I'm happy to accept that some people find the distortions and imperfections of vinyl pleasant sounding.
Quote:
|
24/96 is better then 16/44. I have a number of 24/96 recordings and some do sound really good.
|
I suspect that'll be down to the way they were mastered. I'd be very surprised if one of those good 24/96 recordings sounded any different to human ears when competently downsampled to 16/44.