Originally Posted by erich6
The L2 label has published a "test bench" to do precisely the comparison you'd like to do. You have the master in very high resolution (DSD and 352.8 kHz PCM), 24/96 FLACs, 16/44 CD, and MQA files for comparison. You can download the files here: http://www.2l.no/hires/
I've seen that, but call me skeptical - the person creating the standard, selling the standard to mfgrs, and hawking the standard to the general public, also being the only source of supposedly critical information about the standard...
Originally Posted by erich6
Transport of audio signals got to quality levels that surpass our auditory senses much sooner than video signals. We are still literally seeing improvements in video because they haven't fully reached the limit of our visual acuity.
Let's leave that one alone.
That will plateau as well (as it has in portable displays) and why you are now seeing a push to 3D, VR, and other "dimensions."
And that one.
As for the price, an HD or Blue-Ray movie costs about $20. A DSD download, which is a very high fidelity version of the original master, costs just a bit more. High resolution versions of that master (better than CD) are easily less than $20. CD's average about $10. Streaming, depending on how much you listen to different albums, is much less. I think the costs are reasonable and I for one get more mileage (many more hours of listening and replaying) out of a single album than I do out of a single movie.
Anecdotally, most Blu-ray discs I buy are around $6, and most DVDs around $4. The actual per-disc cost for the media is significantly lower than that. And my point is/was, "high res downloads" (and you have all the icky-sticky questions over provenance and so forth) are relatively more expensive for something that, quite frankly, should've been standardized nearly twenty years ago. Whether or not its "better" in terms of some subjective sense is largely irrelevant to this point - the technology and infrastructure exists to do it, so it should be done, and done cheaply. Yes I really mean something like "DVD replaced every other format in every other venue, except the CD, and there's no good reason it didn't replace the CD too, and why we aren't all looking at 24/96 PCM off the disc whether or not its really "better" but simply because we can."
Streaming services I've seen range from like $10-20 a month, but that's far below CD quality (and remember the 600 lb pink gorilla in the room here: FM is still alive and kicking), to absolutely hilarious multi-hundred dollar packages where we can arrive at the debate we're having now over MQA or whatever other "can I get near or above CD quality." Honestly I don't see the value-add there, when they could be (and quite frankly are) doing physical distribution on a cheaper scale, and the infrastructure/gear exists to do physical distribution with orders of magnitude "more" than whatever strangled streaming service, and that's before we get into the icky-sticky questions of provenance and so forth.
And I get it - they're two different industries, that have taken entirely different approaches to how to address the information age, mediated largely by how they view their customers. On one hand, customers are regarded as repeat sales and good business, and on the other, as nothing but a pack of guilty, thieving criminals that just haven't been caught yet.