Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson
Originally Posted by JaapJan
RBCD is widely avaialable and cheap. It outperforms most if not all of the available recordings and with the right gear the playback is phenomenal. Ditto for downloads of several qualities.
To what are you comparing RBCD? It is the reference and there's no reason to settle for less. But have you compared it to higher rez media or, even, multichannel sources?
I've heard everything up to 176kHz and raw DSD (not from SACD, from a disc recorder in the studio), in both stereo and surround. Often a recording of something I just heard in the hall, and usually played by myself.

While the superiority of 24/96 to CD is clear, I never heard any difference between that and 176.

Actually the worst surround I ever heard was from DSD, and that I put down to the engineer. Which brings us back to Joel's point. While I would love the world to go 24/96 - that's a real improvement on CD - it's mostly down to the individual engineers, whether the result will be really good or not.


Ex-moderator
Sitting room: dCS Network Bridge, 818v3, HD621, 8kSE
Library: dCS Rossini Apex DAC/Clock, Clearaudio Performance Wood, Audio Research PH2, Mjölnir KGST, Mjölnir PureBipolar
SWMBO Room: 210, D33
Kitchen: RPi/RoonBridge, Genelec 6010 actives
Desk: Merging Anubis
Server: Roon/ROCK/NUC

Headphones: Stax SR-X9000, Stax SR-007, Stax SR-404LE, Audeze LCD-X...

Oldest audio file: 1889 Edison cylinder