Conclusive "Proof" that higher resolution audio sounds different

[jkeny]

Anybody else here try the test?
I did on my laptop - up to 16/32 is easy but 16/44 not so
I'll try on my DAC when I get over my hatred of jangling keys.
BTW, I would love to hear what Amir has picked up on before I give a link to where this same test has been done before & the conclusions

[amirm]

You're the lucky coin Amir. Now where's James Randi when you need him? Tell the difference between cables and make some serious coin.

Ah, I had forgotten about making a million dollars that way . Had he ever put forward a challenge against high-res audio?

[amirm]

Anybody else here try the test?
I did on my laptop - up to 16/32 is easy but 16/44 not so
I'll try on my DAC when I get over my hatred of jangling keys.
BTW, I would love to hear what Amir has picked up on before I give a link to where this same test has been done before & the conclusions

Let's not dig into the details for now and let folks run the test.

I will of course at some point elaborate more on what I heard.

[MylesBAstor]

Ah, I had forgotten about making a million dollars that way . Had he ever put forward a challenge against high-res audio?

No but I'm sure we can get Randi stirred up enough he would. We'll keep you in our back pocket and just like happens in those TV "pool" games, have you as our ringer! As long as you're willing to split the pot!

[jkeny]

Let's not dig into the details for now and let folks run the test.

I will of course at some point elaborate more on what I heard.

OK, you deserve to bask in some glory for a while

[amirm]

No but I'm sure we can get Randi stirred up enough he would. We'll keep you in our back pocket and just like happens in those TV "pool" games, have you as our ringer! As long as you're willing to split the pot!

No worries. We will set up a fund for anyone who has suffered in the hands of Randi and crew and hire a lawyer to decide how much they deserve!

[TBone]

Arguments about value of sampling rate > 44.1 Khz and bit depth > 16 bits has filled thousands upon thousands of pages on various audio forums.

Amirm ... in the grand scheme of things, these test only deflect the real issues concerning the problems of digital reproduction. In my books, although it's obvious higher# may offer potentially superior SQ, the entire sampling rate/bits debate is chalk-full of audiophile hypocrisy.

Digital done right or wrong, isn't simply a sampling-rate/bit depth issue, so many examples exist ...

tb1

[c1ferrari]

I am actually thinking of proposing a paper and get some of this data on record.

Splendid proposition, Amir

It is remarkable how our leading engineering/research organization has done so little to bring light to this issue.

I would sincerely expect, if the science is grounded in basic research, then scientists would be receptive to conflicting data/analysis/conclusion.

[Orb]

Amirm ... in the grand scheme of things, these test only deflect the real issues concerning the problems of digital reproduction. In my books, although it's obvious higher# may offer potentially superior SQ, the entire sampling rate/bits debate is chalk-full of audiophile hypocrisy.

Digital done right or wrong, isn't simply a sampling-rate/bit depth issue, so many examples exist ...

tb1

You are right, but sample rate and bit depth IS an issue in the context of ideal filter and studio processes involved, including the application of how often/when TPDF dither is used as an example (remember music is from a big chain-process when considering mic-recording-mixing-mastering-etc).

Cheers
Orb

[amirm]

Amirm ... in the grand scheme of things, these test only deflect the real issues concerning the problems of digital reproduction.

Those issues are dismissed out of hand though. My tests pull that back in the realm of possibility and now, expecting a different explanation than "it can't happen."