Do we really need hi-res audio?

[@humanbass]

People dont grasp how must of music actually happens under 7khz. For example. The fundamental of the lowest E note of a six string guitar is 82hz. The highest note of a 24 fret guitar is 1312hz. Yes, the highest note we associate with high pitched solos is not even 1.5khz. Yes, I know there are the harmonics, but even you consider the harmonics go 2 extra octaves, it is still below 6khz.

[@brentcollins9727]

It’s crazy how little we know about this hobby we love so much. 😂

[@terenceollerhead3680]

Excellent. I went down this rabbit-hole months ago. My less expert conclusion was the same; we don't need hi-res, but as I listen mostly to Classical, and the stereo era began seventy years ago, many famous recordings from the pre-digital era, particulary the Solti Ring and the Britten Requiem, have since been remastered. You don't need hi-res to benefit from this, but the remastering is what mattered: cleaning up the original tapes, changing balances, fixing pitch, etc. etc. So the new Solti Ring is as good at 16/44 as at 28/192; the difference you're hearing is the remastering, not the upsampling.

[@simonzinc-trumpetharris852]

It's a money making con by the music industry.

[@calinbatran]

Excellent video! Thanks for the clarifications, for a regular user these explanations are welcome. I was about to spend a lot of money but I think my best is in the CD quality area. Thank you!

[@si1208]

A clear and concise explanation. Some audiophiles will deny it, of course, as they won't be prepared to admit having bought the hi-res snake-oil!

[@michaelbuxton8947]

The voice of reason. So much of it is about chasing the numbers. If you can see 192kHz on the screen of your streamer it's bound to sound better - isn't it???

[@ukaszkowalczyk7938]

Bartosz, dzięki za bardzo konkretne wyjaśnienie tych zawiłych treści. Świetny film 👍

[@cyrusaudio]

Cieszymy się, że się podobało :-)

[@Baudesign]

I am pretty sure that, thoughout this whole presentation, I could hear some high-res jazz music in the background. It was audible, although I could not hear anything above 16kHz.

[@sloboat55]

Beyond excellent, downloaded after watching. I play CDs exclusively. Techno-Layman explanation certainly helps me. Thank you

[@davidhole8175]

Excellent and informative presentation that cleared up some misunderstandings I was holding for many years! I truly love all my Cyrus gear and would never replace it (apart from with other Cyrus gear)

[@cyrusaudio]

Glad it was helpful!

[@andreasmittelstaedt591]

The video and the explanations given in it are excellent, easy to understand and, above all, true. However, the background music cut in at far too high a level is absolutely annoying! It would be nice if Cyrus could re-release this helpful video, this time without the music. Thanks!

[@AnitaSV]

The 12.5 registers on my spectrum analyzer and higher ones don’t show up at all. Perhaps KZbin is filtering out high frequencies? I tried tone generator app in iOS App Store. I can hear till 17.5khz.

[@Chriskeon75]

Impressive, my hearing top up at about 14khz

[@cyrusaudio]

This is unfortunately true, thanks for pointing it out. We have analysed the transcoded KZbin files and indeed those higher frequencies have been filtered out by KZbin. Nevertheless there are plenty of online tone generators you can try to find out how high your hearing goes. Simply search for "Online Tone Generator".

[@paulgingell973]

Thanks for clarifying that, though I was going deaf 😂

[@r423sdex]

They have been filtered out because they are pointless.

[@iainford7592]

Interesting, with the tone test I heard the 12.5k test as a high pitched sound (both channels) the 16k test I heard as a low frequency tone, and 18k I heard as a high pitch (higher pitch than the 12.5k tone) but only in the right channel (right ear) Headphones are Monoprice M1060 Open Back Planar headphones. You can work out my views on hi-res as I have a modern implementation of the original TDA1540D chips running non-oversampling.

[@gaz1046]

Excellent explanation, thank you!

[@cyrusaudio]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@rhettoneal]

It’s like goodsound said, it’s all about the filters. Hires is easier for my DAC to decode without altering the signal. It’s all good.

[@goodsound4756]

The filters are not only applied in DA conversion, but also in the studio‘s AD conversion, Hi-Res allows for less steep filters, therefore less damage to the audio signal. Gentler filters = better audio. Studies have shown that the human hearing resolution is ca. 7 microseconds. You claim that more than 44.1 kHz sampling frequency is not necessary. However, CD quality only means a time resolution of 20 µs. Only at 192 KHz sampling do we get down to 5 µs. From this I conclude that Hi-Res can make sense over this point of view. Granted, not every listener will have that ability, but prof. musicians and conductors with trained listening may have.

[@dwaynepiper3261]

Bravo! Very few people get this. Music is not just about frequency but also about timing. HighRes has some benefits for transient response and timing. My opinion is that 96khz is the sweet spot for high fidelity. Going higher may give another 1% or 2% in quality but is it worth the expense and will you notice. You need to have very good equipment compared to the average consumer to really get any benefit.

[@gurratell7326]

AD with oversampling is a thing you know, and delivering something higher than 44.1 ain't necessary since we don't hear over 20khz anyways (most people go even lower than that). This time resolution thing ain't an argument either since those waveforms can very much happen between samples as well. Don't underestimate that sinc!

[@simonzinc-trumpetharris852]

7 micoseconds is totally incorrect. So that's wrong. It's about 3 milliseconds at best.

[@goodsound4756]

@@simonzinc-trumpetharris852 proof?

[@kellygrant4964]

And of course the response..."well you need a higher resolving system" then you will hear the difference. I am sure there are those self described golden ear people that can tell the difference all the time. You know the same ones that can tell when their cables on on or off the floor.

[@emmanuelpoirier4602]

What sounds best for one person is not what sounds best for another: we are not industrial products, each of us has a different perception, this include different sound perception. A person trained in classical music with real instruments for years will have a far higher sensitivity to sound quality than the pop music lover listening to mp3 lossless compressed with low quality in ear bluetooth compressed earbud. Same for somebody trained to cooking in 5 stars restaurant will have a far different palate than a mc donald customers. Generally speaking masses have been trained for decades to love very low quality of anything: food, audio, tv series, reasonings, morals, that's why the world is going downhill.

[@StevenBoucher-z6p]

What music is playing in the background?

[@goodsound4756]

A disturbing one

[@ExtrusionTech]

Pure DSD recording and playback almost always sound great. Not necessarily because of the DSD process, but because of the care used in making such a recording. Most other recording are made with random levels of quality,

[@r423sdex]

DSD definitely cannot be trusted on a sound quality basis. I have seen files that are very poor.

[@dwaynepiper3261]

Are sure they were recorded as DSD or could they have been converted from PCM 44Khz and upsampled then marketed for DSD playback?@@r423sdex

[@dwaynepiper3261]

DSD was created as a recording and archive format because at the time it could be converted to PCM or any new future formats with minimal loss in quality, unlike PCM. Converters have improved a great deal since then.

[@MrPINKFL0YD]

Ruined by the background noise. Avoid

[@sooncf4613]

Do we need 3000cc car. Why I need 3000cc car, a 1300cc car already can give me 110km/hour speed on the highway that is the speed limit set by the government. Now I can decide to go ahead to purchase the 1300cc car, and use it for maybe 10 years, after 10 year I just need to buy another new car that is 1300cc and so on for the rest of my life, and I can save a lot and keep the saving together with me and live a happy life forever and ever……amen.

[@JAMRADIONYC]

I think Hi-Res audio is noticeably better to my ears. Especially the sound stage and depth.

[@gurratell7326]

If you'd do a blind test between 24/192 and 16/44.1 you would at the VERY best hear a very slight difference in the upper most treble, but most likely you wouldn't hear any difference whatsoever since I bet you don't hear anything over 12-20khz (depending on your age) and don't play your music at 100dB+ anyways.

[@gumbygreeneye3655]

Blind test.

[@simonzinc-trumpetharris852]

How can you tell?

[@asotomayor]

Older music, maybe for archival purposes. Newer music definitely no.

[@simonzinc-trumpetharris852]

NO!

[@howardskeivys4184]

I issue you with a challenge. Compile a lengthy playlist of CD quality tracks you enjoy listening to. Compile an identical playlist, this time using ‘high res’ tracks. Listen to both. I bet you will suffer from listener fatigue far quicker with the CD quality, even if you don’t hear a difference.

[@zzt231gr]

Excellent and well said!Totally agree!