Is High Resolution Audio Making a Comeback?

[admin]

We work pretty closely with CEDIA, and lately, they've been taking a good hard look at some signals that indicate high resolution audio may be making a comeback. For years, MP3s and compressed digital files have been growing in popularity and dominance, but a taste for fidelity seems to be creeping back into the market now that the flat panel craze is winding down. It's not winding down because people no longer like flat panel TVs - it's just that everyone now has one... or two or three - in their home. Even vinyl has experienced a revival among the hardcore purists (although we don't believe vinyl is necessarily "pure" given the nature of the recording process). In any case, and awakening into the world of high fidelity audio means that consumers are waking up to realize there is more out there for them to experience and enjoy.

Discuss "Is High Resolution Audio Making a Comeback?" here. Read the article.

 

[bikdav]

I'm all for that. Yet, for those - like myself - who are loosing interest in physical media [LPs, cassettes, and CDs] the challenge is up to the desktop, laptop, and tablet makers to design computers that can easily handle high resolution files . I am one of the many who love tablets and ipods. Many of these devices are pretty close to excellent already. But, it shouldn't be impossible or cost way too much to make high resolution audio standard issue.

 

[westcott]

The abysmal lack of FLAC support across the board for most car stereos and other media players really does limit its use and who wants to go through converting their whole audio library more than once?

 

[corey]

Facts First

It would seem to me that the first thing necessary would be some double blind tests that show a difference between high res audio and standard CD's. There have been tests done, but none that found a difference.

Pursue the truth.

 

[Frans]

I'd take that Queen DVD with 5.1, DTS 24 bit 96khz over anything else I've heard so far. Come and blind test at my place, Corey... I'm buying.

 

[corey]

Frans.... I'm way up for that. I appreciate your offer to buy, but you don't even need to buy the whole ticket. As long as you pick up the HNL to Schiphol fare, I'll take care of getting from Schiphol to Nijmegen.

 

[jonnythan]

It would seem to me that the first thing necessary would be some double blind tests that show a difference between high res audio and standard CD's. There have been tests done, but none that found a difference.

Pursue the truth.

Yeah but what about a difference between a CD and a 128 kbps MP3?

 

[Irvrobinson]

It would seem to me that the first thing necessary would be some double blind tests that show a difference between high res audio and standard CD's. There have been tests done, but none that found a difference.

Pursue the truth.

+1. I've downloaded some test tunes from HD Tracks, and while they sound good they still fall into the range of sound quality I've heard from CDs. 24bit word length is great for recording to provide headroom, but I'm not convinced I can hear any difference in my own test recordings of my wife on the drums.

 

[corey]

Yeah but what about a difference between a CD and a 128 kbps MP3?

Any sighted person will see an enormous difference between a 10 dpi image and a 100 dpi image, and will very likely see a difference between the 100 dpi image and a 1,000 dpi image. It does not follow that anyone, with unaided vision, can see a difference between a 100,000 dpi image and a 1,000,000 dpi image.

 

[stratocaster68]

I like the point on vinyl. Just upgraded the speakers, pulled out the turntable and LPs and still mostly like CDs. The LPs sounded muffled and compressed as compared to CDs. But some early CDs seemed to have been just straight transfers from LP master tapes which does not seem to work to well either.

By the way, the Neil Young box set on DVD has some of the best sound I've ever heard. The early live recordings sound like they were made yesterday.

 

[Ken]

Two things need to happen for a good comeback

There are two things that need to happen for HD audio to come back big.

1) As far as discs are concerned the industry should call it Blu-ray Audio so that the consumers can relate it to a player that they most likely own. Of coarse that means that the artists and record companies have to provide music in the Blu-ray formats which I can't imagine why they would not. It is another way for them to sell something.

2) For HD audio to make it big in the streaming world there is really only one company that can do it because too few consumers pay attention to any small companies in this field. That one company is Apple. Apple is who made the MP3 format big when they introduced the iPod. If they promote a high-def audio format for use with the iPod, iPhone and iPad then consumers will jump on it. I like to put it this way: why would anyone want to go to HD audio? Because Apple told them to.

 

[jonnythan]

Apple already has I think 256 Kbps AAC. Virtually no one has the equipment and ear to tell the difference between that and any superior format.

 

[bread29]

Doesn't Apple have a Lossless format (ALAC) at 500-900 kbps? There are no advantages of using this option??