Tracker Hi Res

[ds1984]

Even worse, blind audio test showed that even a good encoded MP3@320 can fool the human ear.

That means that our ear is so imperfect that it is really unable to hear some low levelled sound in the audible spectrum if this sound comes immediately after a quite louder one, like a shadows effect, just as human eye is unable to adapt without delay from complete dark to heavy light environment. This is perfectly known from F1 driver in Monaco that have to deal with a short blind time when entering and leaving the tunnel part.

[herlock]

Even worse, blind audio test showed that even a good encoded MP3@320 can fool the human ear.

That means that our ear is so imperfect that it is really unable to hear some low levelled sound in the audible spectrum if this sound comes immediately after a quite louder one, like a shadows effect, just as human eye is unable to adapt without delay from complete dark to heavy light environment. This is perfectly known from F1 driver in Monaco that have to deal with a short blind time when entering and leaving the tunnel part.

Absolutely.
I suggest that we do ABX testing, on the best possible audio hardware, between the FLAC (high-res) and 320 kbs MP3 on the future tracker your sticks (provided of course we get confirmation that they were encoded from the same source, so that we don't compare Apple to oranges).
I am ready to offer a full box of the best champagne to the one who will pass the test

[binone]

Great to know almost everything is Marketing here. Very interesting if we can get into it.

[goon525]

I'll grant you that I struggle to tell the difference between 192/24 and 96/24, but there's a clear improvement from 44/16 to either of these. And that improvement is especially worthwhile when the recording artists - as on 'Thacker' - take real trouble with the sound.

Complete BS.
192/24 is even worse than Placebo, the high horizontal résolution is even damageable to the quality of the sound.
Again, this excellent paper says it all:

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

Oh dear, that 'excellent paper' has been comprehensively discredited in too many places to bother quoting. But if you're happy with low res MP3s, go ahead and enjoy them.

[foma]

I'm fine with all that. Again, I listen this not because I actually want badly to differ it from mp3 or something.

It's just really maximum quality for digital music, and that basically means that it's a closest thing to the 'real deal', that is to hear it live.

With such a format, you can constantly upgrade your music equipment, getting more joy out of it. Vinyl is whole another story. It's all about music.

[ds1984]

I'll grant you that I struggle to tell the difference between 192/24 and 96/24, but there's a clear improvement from 44/16 to either of these. And that improvement is especially worthwhile when the recording artists - as on 'Thacker' - take real trouble with the sound.

Complete BS.
192/24 is even worse than Placebo, the high horizontal résolution is even damageable to the quality of the sound.
Again, this excellent paper says it all:

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

Oh dear, that 'excellent paper' has been comprehensively discredited in too many places to bother quoting. But if you're happy with low res MP3s, go ahead and enjoy them.

Discredited? Where?

Since technology reached a level of achievement in the 70's and 80's, HiFi can not really improve anymore, it goes beyond our audible capacity. So to keep on selling material both hardware manufacturers and music editors are still in search to a way to sell us something "new". But when you have basic knowledge in electricity science you can easily understand that a wire that use good component will transport electric efficiently enough and that you don't need to spend 20 times the price to get better wire, the sound will be exactly the same. If you are NOT a pro working with high distortion source you don't need XLR connection nor cryo cable. But just that if you have spend 20 times the price of the other cable your brain won't easily admit that it isn't better otherwise you would never had bought it... Placebo effect is powerful.

And that funny to always treat mp3 as a shitty thing and denying the fact that the latest encoder have reach a level of quality that human ear nearly can't do the difference. If you still use a 15 years old generation and encode @128, yes degradation will be high but this is old story.

[herlock]

I'll grant you that I struggle to tell the difference between 192/24 and 96/24, but there's a clear improvement from 44/16 to either of these. And that improvement is especially worthwhile when the recording artists - as on 'Thacker' - take real trouble with the sound.

Complete BS.
192/24 is even worse than Placebo, the high horizontal résolution is even damageable to the quality of the sound.
Again, this excellent paper says it all:

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

Oh dear, that 'excellent paper' has been comprehensively discredited in too many places to bother quoting. But if you're happy with low res MP3s, go ahead and enjoy them.

Discredited? Where?

Since technology reached a level of achievement in the 70's and 80's, HiFi can not really improve anymore, it goes beyond our audible capacity. So to keep on selling material both hardware manufacturers and music editors are still in search to a way to sell us something "new". But when you have basic knowledge in electricity science you can easily understand that a wire that use good component will transport electric efficiently enough and that you don't need to spend 20 times the price to get better wire, the sound will be exactly the same. If you are NOT a pro working with high distortion source you don't need XLR connection nor cryo cable. But just that if you have spend 20 times the price of the other cable your brain won't easily admit that it isn't better otherwise you would never had bought it... Placebo effect is powerful.

And that funny to always treat mp3 as a shitty thing and denying the fact that the latest encoder have reach a level of quality that human ear nearly can't do the difference. If you still use a 15 years old generation and encode @128, yes degradation will be high but this is old story.

+1000 ds1984.
I'm glad to see that there are still people  who can think about sound technically and not religiously.