Redbook vs. High Resolution Tests Are Clickbait

[The Computer Audiophile]

I recently read about another Redbook vs. High Resolution listening test supposedly coming up soon. It made me think, why have such a test? Ah ha, it may drive traffic. 

 

Think about it, what other reason is there for a test like this? Every DAC now plays high resolution and every album available for purchase in high resolution is also available for streaming in high resolution. 

 

Thus, nobody is saving money by finding out they can’t hear a difference between the two versions.

 

What could possibly be gained from a conclusive test result for or against high resolution? Nothing. 

 

I’m all ears and willing to change my mind if anyone wishes to provide evidence that a Redbook vs. High Resolution test has any value. 

 

Note: This has zero to do with one’s belief in or disbelief in high resolution. That doesn’t matter in the least either, especially for purposes of this post. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Too difficult for my Dutch. Can't this be moved to the non-sense thread ? from there I will get it (but won't click).

Back in the day I could understand people wanting to know if they could identify differences between Redbook and high resolution. They could spend less money on a DAC that didn’t support 192 or something or they could purchase the Redbook CD rather than the high res download. Now, all that stuff is included. All DACs support high res and all high res is streamable. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

7 hours ago, psjug said:

Hi-res music purchases cost more.  Hi-res streaming costs more. Am I not understanding something?

I believe the price is negligible compared to everything else in this hobby, but I see your point. 

 

However, would any test cause you to purchase the Redbook version, given that such test can only prove valid for the recording under examination and the exact playback chain used?

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, miguelito said:

Slightly off topic... I find there's little analysis of how well a DAC plays red book (16/44). I think this is actually very important, not all DACs do a great job playing red book,  even when they support massively high resolutions.

100% true. Good filters can make all the difference in the world. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Off topic posts cleaned up. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Mark Waldrep is unhappy that his readers couldn't tell the difference. He is a believer in hi-res. He is using his sabbatical this fall to figure out why people can't hear a difference. He and I talked about this at t.h.e. Show in June. 

 

If you look at John Siau's comments in Highly Resolving Redux, June 5, 2019 on Mark's site you will see the math surrounding the audibility of resolutions greater than 16 bits. 

 

I have always found the math for what is audible interesting because I refuse to listen to even a momentary peak over 102 dB. 

 

As an academic pursuit into “why,” I’m unsure that finding the “what” again will help. I could be wrong. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

7 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Depends on what you mean by help. 

Help as in help him find out why.