Bump it up to $300 for the low end and you’ll be hard pressed to notice the difference in the super-expensive models. Not convinced that DVD Audio has audibly better quality than CD though.
True that, no atomic upsampling esoteric dac can make your source better.
OP: using a $1k setup to listen to 256kbps itunes podcasts is futile. A setup like that only comes in handy when you have 1) good vinyl, tt, needle,preamp et all, 2) for high end studio referencing and 3) if you have 24/88.2 and up material.
Many hear placebo.
I can in all honesty say i can distinguish some differences, bu ther’re surely not as evident as, say, going from 128 to 256kbps.
Well DVD-A is 192/24, whereas CD is 44/16, so there’s a quantifiable difference… the real question is whether or not the source material was produced in a way which transfers better to the higher quality format.
44.1kHz already covers the human hearing range with some room to spare. 24bit (or even 32) is useful as headroom for recording/producing, but it really doesn’t seem necessary or beneficial for listening to the finished product.
Maybe to you.
True, humans can only hear up to 20khz.
Still, 44.1 only results in about 22khz max. reproduction frequency, and this is only good with ideal waves. With different, phase incoherent waves the ability of CD recording (or 16/44.1) dips a lot, giving out an approximate real world max. frequency of around 15khz, well into the human ear’s ability.
Now, even tho we can only hear up to 20kz (i do 23khz, call me special or something), the human body, especially the head (very sensitive areas such as the human eye’s cornea or the lips, are very subsceptible to ultrasonic information.
Now you might say “there isn’t US info in recordings”, and you could be wrong with today’s 5-minute-will-i-am-style tracks, but you are very wrong when it comes to actual instruments, or even just the human voice. Everyone of that noise-makers also produces and carries some ultrasonic information when it is played.
This is why many audiophiles love these so-called “supertweeters”, that can reach way up in the 100khz range.
And now you understand why recording in 24/192 is important to some people 
Recording/mastering/producing at 24/96k+ makes sense, but it has no benefit for listening to the final product. You don’t see TVs, cameras, or computer monitors boasting about how they can accurately reproduce microwaves or ultraviolet, just in case the radiation has some effect outside your eyes.
16bit/44.1k does cover everything the human ear can perceive, and certainly does not cap out at 15kHz. Just look at a spectrum analysis of a FLAC file or even a 320kbps MP3 to see this.
Sorry, i cannot find the article i read once where the author made a very throughout spectrum analysis and came out with the result that ,even tho the CD could reproduce as high as 22khz, most waves over 15/16khz came out choppy and sawtoothy with the cd, causing it to lose “airiness” and becoming fatiguing, whilst the lp retained all the info.
And i do agree with him from personal experience.
Here’s another video that i quickly found targeting the issue.
You can make claims about high bitrate and sampling frequency having supposedly better quality, as that is actually supported by facts. Claiming that vinyl can beat a decent digital file in terms of accurate reproduction is just ridiculous.
Vinyl does not retain “all the info” - it’s a piece of plastic that’s being constantly scratched, how exactly does that compare with a bit-perfect digital file? Also a typical cartridge will have a frequency response topping out at 20-22 kHz, just like CDs.
You should link actual studies if you want to illustrate a point rather than a video made by someone who doesn’t understand the principles behind the point he’s trying to make.
Even some basic facts would be nice.
http://xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
Nobody here is suggesting Daniboy to spend $1000 on his set-up. If anything I wrote my previous post to outline how you can find a relatively cheap combo that can handle quality audio, be it anything from listening to a podcast all the way to mixing music from scratch. I will however stress that the entry cost to work on music is so low (in comparison to the last couple of decades) that’s it’s hard not to considering investing in similar gear if you’re looking at working on music at all.
I disagree. All headphones sound different based on components and build, regardless of source. It’s the exact same concept for speakers and microphones (they are mechanically reverse speakers). To add to this, CD Quality (44.1kHz/16Bit) is the standard, and is more than capable to showcase the quality of an audio chain. Even headphones in the same price/quality bracket will sound different from each other.
I can’t believe we’re discussing this. Unless everyone understands Nyquest theory and how sample rates and bit rates work then there’s no point talking about this. You do realize there is a high-cut filter in place during sampling to rid the audio stream from frequencies above 20kHz right? That’s called ANTI-ALIASING. Over-sampling (like at 192kHz) is done to make it so the high-cut filter isn’t cutting so close to 20kHz, where we could hear some changes happening because of the filter. This is why people claim higher sample rates sound better. In theory 44.1kHz (according to the Nyquest theory/frequency) can perfectly capture all frequencies between 0-20kHz. Obviously at higher sample rates there is more sampling happening, which adds to the fire by suggesting that it would produce a more accurate waveform. In any case, 44.1kHz 16bit was chosen as a standard for a reason.
I have no problems talking about this (though it seems to be a never ending debate), but let’s do it somewhere else guys. I doubt Daniboy is worried about 192kHz/24bit (or do I dare even bring up 32bit?).
Then he shouldn’t be spending $1000 on headphones lol.
If we were talking about speakers, that’d be a different story, but with headphones there are plenty of top-quality sets for a tenth of that price.
Said by someone who throws Silhouettes By Avicii on his June Progressive House Mix… Maybe some podcast listening would boost your music choices.
If you’re going to be an asshole, then I’ll stop trying to save you money. Your loss.
AWSOME, thanks for all the info bro! This is exacly what I needed to know!
Will you be putting mixes up on your Soundcloud soon?
Sure! Actually, I’ve been doing it for months, this is my newest podcast:
https://soundcloud.com/dannyhardmusic/danny-hard-showtime-004
This link in my profile is old (doesnt belong to me anymore), as this daniboy nickname
I’m sorry bro, but I’m here for some intelligent info, I’m not into discussing what is the best thing to do with my money.
That’s actually pretty good, although the lack of vocals makes me sad.
You’re still a douche for insulting my choice of tracks though lol. People like Silhouettes, and it fits perfectly with the overall tone of my set.
hahaha thanks, your podcast is not so bad too, I didn’t mean to insult you bro, but after R01’s giant-full-of-info-post, everything else just seemed useless hahaha
Haha 
'sok. I have a specific bias against people trying to make other people asking for help spend money unnecessarily… the fact is, if you want to use headphones instead of speakers, you can get a fantastic pair for £100 which will be MORE than good enough for listening to music with. Also, there’s no such thing as “best” really, as all headphones/speakers sound different to different people, and it’s only through trial and error you’ll find a pair you like.