I really don't understand the difference between sample rate and # of bits.
Interesting. That would mean that there is no reason for HDTracks.com to offer a CD in a so-called higher definition format than the CD.
Sounds like (no pun intended) that 44.1 khz 16 bit CD recordings are a very fine source for conversion to FLAC for protection of current assets and future investments in a music collection.
Even in the incredibly rare instance in which a difference may be discernible, you stand to gain almost nothing in terms of additional fidelity.
It all depends on what they are doing.This might be- having a 16/44.1 recording and upsampling it to 24/96- having a 1 bit/2.8442Mhz DSD and resample it to 24/96 PCM- having a 1 bit/2.8442Mhz DSD play it analogue and record it at 24/96- etc. etc.Best thing to do: buy the 24/96 of Raising Sand and ABX it with the CD.Then you have the only truth that matters, your own local one.Before you do: check if your sound card support this resolution otherwise you are evaluating the resampling of your own audio chain!
So, let's ask the question again in a different way: Would you pay a premium for a 96/24 version of the Grammy winning 'Raising Sand"... a truly wonderful mixture, featuring two great artists of our generation(s) ?
If you want a free way to test out the differences between 16/44 and 24/96, Nine Inch Nails has their album "Slip" available for download in FLAC in both formats. I believe both formats were created from the same master.
Some difference in RG value could be due to the high frequencies that are not in the 44.1 kHz version.
foo_abx 1.3.3 reportfoobar2000 v0.9.6.12009/04/05 13:36:21File A: M:\Music\Nine Inch Nails\The Slip 24-96\10 Demon Seed.flacFile B: M:\Music\Nine Inch Nails\The Slip\10 Demon Seed.flac13:36:21 : Test started.13:36:35 : 01/01 50.0%13:36:42 : 02/02 25.0%13:36:51 : 03/03 12.5%13:37:03 : 04/04 6.3%13:37:12 : 05/05 3.1%13:37:19 : 06/06 1.6%13:37:29 : 07/07 0.8%13:37:41 : 08/08 0.4%13:37:51 : 09/09 0.2%13:37:59 : 10/10 0.1%13:38:05 : 11/11 0.0%13:38:14 : 12/12 0.0%13:38:20 : 13/13 0.0%13:38:28 : 14/14 0.0%13:38:41 : 15/15 0.0%13:38:48 : 16/16 0.0%13:38:52 : Test finished. ---------- Total: 16/16 (0.0%)
Whether 96/24 is audible different than 44.1/16 has been discussed extensively on this forum and elsewhere. You will find a lot of people who say that there is no audible difference, and you will find just as many who say that there is. Those who believe they can hear a difference usually point out that your equipment needs to be pretty good for you to hear that difference. I think that it also depends on the type of music, the recording equipment, and the post-recording processing. Generally, with pop or rock music, it would be very difficult to hear a difference on any system. With acoustic jazz or classical, if recorded well and processed well, I think that there is an audible difference. I have several 96/24 bit recordings of classical and jazz music (from HDTracks) that are awesome on my audio system, but very average when played on my computer.BTW, to my ears there is a huge difference between compressed 320kbs and 128kbs on all music and any system.