192khz .. playback fidelity lower than 44.1khz?

[Tony Hardie-Bick]

On 06/03/12 23:37, Christian Borg wrote:
> (But even with all reading I always wonder about 24bit vs 32bit FP and if it
> actually does any difference for me soundwise. Guess I'm destined to back and
> forth there ...)

until about a month ago I would swear that 224 kbps or similar vbr mp3 was good 
enough for my ears. then i got into Steve Roach (so far: "The Magnificent Void" 
and "Mystic Chords & Scared Spaces - some of the best ambient music I have ever 
heard...)

At the start of the first track of Mystic Chords (jeez, crap title...), "Palace 
of Nectar" the main melody is way back in the mix, behind an entire rain forest 
and un-nameable analogue synths (well, Oberheim, if one must...), and I wondered 
if I would hear a difference with an uncompressed original. So I grabbed a Flac 
of the same piece, and... yep, really there's a difference. It's subtle, but major.

Here's the piece I'm talking about (compressed, obviously):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b09Xg9KF-PI

Let me describe the difference carefully, as it is quite weird.

The melody is "louder" in the mix in the flac version. You hear it coming in 
just that bit sooner as it emerges and disappears against the mush of 
surrounding texture.

There is a power to the music which is absent in the mp3. Also stereo detail. 
It's a quality of awareness, too.

These are very subjective values, I know.

I cannot listen to the mp3 version any more.

And so now, with much of my music in 224 (approx, vbr etc) mp3, I'm freaked out 
about what might be missing elsewhere.

The Steve Roach material is the supreme test however. I have piano music, for 
example, where I'd be less concerned that I could tell the difference.

But am I right?

64 bits and counting...

Tony (HB)