[WAmadeusM]

I can hear difference of mp3 to flac with some tracks but only heard once I used higher end IEM's.

A 24/48 vs 24/192 track then no.

When I first heard Thriller DSD on a Mojo in native DSD (white) my jaw dropped! Only the Sony came close to the Mojo/Hugo2 playback of DSD's for me.

Still considering a Mojo2!

192k is snakekoil. Put any track at 192 into audacity. There is no information above 30k.
96k is more than enough to allow a long tail roll off filter to take care of any digital clock aliasing.

All hearing deteriorates with age. 40 + you will be very lucky to hear anything over 14khz.

The fact it will be older listeners with money to be able to indulge but not have the ears to hear is classics level irony.

 

[rlw6534]

192k is snakekoil. Put any track at 192 into audacity. There is no information above 30k.
96k is more than enough to allow a long tail roll off filter to take care of any digital clock aliasing.

All hearing deteriorates with age. 40 + you will be very lucky to hear anything over 14khz.

The fact it will be older listeners with money to be able to indulge but not have the ears to hear is classics level irony.

I don't believe hi-res audio was ever about reproducing 96 kHz sound frequencies. Just saying.

 

[nc8000]

I don't believe hi-res audio was ever about reproducing 96 kHz sound frequencies. Just saying.

When they introduced super tweeters for speaker rigs one of the arguments were that the body, especially the eyes could receive and process super high frequences to enhance the listening experience even though it clearly is not audible

 

[WAmadeusM]

I don't believe hi-res audio was ever about reproducing 96 kHz sound frequencies. Just saying.

The higher freq in digitized music reproduction is to allow more gradual roll off filters to remove noise. Implicitly created in the dac / digital clock process.

Any analogue recording pre 1980 was not able to record frequencies above 30khz let alone 48 96 or 192.

The non audible infasounds arguments which ropes in elephant low rumble noise communication into the selling pitch of GDP size priced high end audio is...well....just creative huxterism.

If you are over 25 your hearing will by laws of biological physics be struggling to hear anything above a 16khz sine wave.

 

[nc8000]

The higher freq in digitized music reproduction is to allow more gradual roll off filters to remove noise. Implicitly created in the dac / digital clock process.

Any analogue recording pre 1980 was not able to record frequencies above 30khz let alone 48 96 or 192.

The non audible infasounds arguments which ropes in elephant low rumble noise communication into the selling pitch of GDP size priced high end audio is...well....just creative huxterism.

If you are over 25 your hearing will by laws of biological physics be struggling to hear anything above a 16khz sine wave.

At 60 I level out just under 16kHz

 

[Skullar]

Junk food? Respectfully, sir, all I see is a nutritious and well balanced breakfast.

Never said its not tasty!

 

[Bosk]

Hang on a second..... can we justifiably call ourselves audiophiles without comparing strap materials?

Natural leather vs neoprene vs nylon - difference in bass response & soundstage expansion, k go.

 

[TheEldestBoy]

I see many of you saying that the WM1A/Z aren't powerful enough to properly drive high impedance headphones (such as the HD6XX series).

So... are there any full size headphones that can be properly driven by the WM1A/Z?

For example, the Focal Clear seems to be relative efficient.

I guess I'm asking if there are any full size dynamic and/or planar headphones that are efficient enough to be properly driven by these daps?

 

[Steve1976]

I see many of you saying that the WM1A/Z aren't powerful enough to properly drive high impedance headphones (such as the HD6XX series).

So... are there any full size headphones that can be properly driven by the WM1A/Z?

For example, the Focal Clear seems to be relative efficient.

I guess I'm asking if there are any full size dynamic and/or planar headphones that are efficient enough to be properly driven by these daps?

My D9200 works pretty well with the first gen 1Z.

 

[Quadfather]

Most of the time yes

Ditto.

 

[hoofman]

I see many of you saying that the WM1A/Z aren't powerful enough to properly drive high impedance headphones (such as the HD6XX series).

So... are there any full size headphones that can be properly driven by the WM1A/Z?

For example, the Focal Clear seems to be relative efficient.

I guess I'm asking if there are any full size dynamic and/or planar headphones that are efficient enough to be properly driven by these daps?

My Hifiman Ananda sounds great with the 1A/Z

 

[Quadfather]

I see many of you saying that the WM1A/Z aren't powerful enough to properly drive high impedance headphones (such as the HD6XX series).

So... are there any full size headphones that can be properly driven by the WM1A/Z?

For example, the Focal Clear seems to be relative efficient.

I guess I'm asking if there are any full size dynamic and/or planar headphones that are efficient enough to be properly driven by these daps?

My Shure SRH1540 headphones with Lqi balanced cables with the WM1Z or WM1A is SUBLIME.

 

[Quadfather]

At 60 I level out just under 16kHz

Me too...58

 

[TheEldestBoy]

My Hifiman Ananda sounds great with the 1A/Z

Is the Ananda harder to drive than the HE4XX? And Sundara?

 

[hoofman]

Is the Ananda harder to drive than the HE4XX? And Sundara?

I only own 1 Hifiman headphone so I don't know much about other models but the Ananda is so easy to drive I've never had any issue with any source before (btw I tried the Sundara with my PHA1A before and it sounded great so may be that too?).