Originally Posted by Ripvanlink
Ah, so you tend to disagree with those in Head-fi who think there's no difference between hi-def and, say, cd quality or flac, right? I don't have the money right now to spend on hi-def recordings b/c I'm saving up for November's K10 purchase. I tried to download from a free samples hi-def website that a member offered, but for some reason, can't at all get the X5 to recognize it. So...I'll have to wait on that so I can gain my own comparisons, Oh well.
I never even entertained the possibility that the K10 could be sibilant. What I just wonder about is, whether it could cure the sibilants I hear with my UM-modTF10. Also, I fully realize the diff between a well-mastered recording and the usual drip one gets from these fancy and complicated consoles that egomaniacal engineers like to foist on the public, lol. And... sometimes, it's also a matter of humidity and other conditions which would adversely affect the sound quality.
I know you are right about the K10, sq3rjick, we are destined to become a mutual admiration society, hee hee.
I wouldn't go quite that far. If pressed, I don't think I could honestly double blind pick between hi resolution and the equivalent FLAC or CD rip, given that they came from the same master recording. However, I am a firm believer that storage is cheap and will continue to get cheaper, and I would rather get the best possible version, even if I can't hear a difference. It is the same reason that I ripped all of my CDs to FLAC and not MP3, even though the file sizes were much larger. I would rather feed my equipment with the best possible source files, even if I am not going to necessarily be able to tell a difference.
Now, I will say that as far as 192K vs 96K, there is not going to appreciably be a difference, and in fact the 192 can sometimes be worse than the 96. For example, the ADC that was used for the HDTracks 192 rip of The Eagles collection actually throws out the least significant bits (they are all 0) in 192K mode, while it doesn't in 96K mode, so the 96K rip of those files actually have more information in them than the 19K rip.
I can also say that the SACD rip of Norah Jones' "Come Away With Me" sounds immensively better than theregular CD, as it comes from a better master recording. The SACD isn't sibilant, whereas the CD version is piercingly so (to the point that I can't listen to the opening track on headphones due to the painfulness of the harsh S in TLR recording). I could double blind pick out the SACD of that particular album every single time, by listening to that one opening track.
I also don't quite believe that there is infinite information in the analog grooves of a vinyl album, but I do really like the overall analog sound of a good vinyl setup. But I believe it is perfectly possible for digital music to sound just as good, and maybe even better.
As for the TF10 vs K10, I do think the K10 will solve the harshness issue, provided the harshness isn't simply inherent in the recording.