[Starchild]

Waldrup has his point of view. Many don't agree, including many industry professionals who are at least as qualified as him.

Personally, some of the best sounding albums I have are well done analog recordings transferred to hi-res PCM or DSD.
I have no problem with them being called hi-res, as long as the fact that they come from tape is acknowledged.

I don't have the possibility of listening to actual master tapes of these albums, so listening to a hi-res transcription of the master tape is the best version of the album I'm ever going to get. I have a few examples like that where I also own the LP or CD, and the hi-res version is the best sounding one. I'm fine with that.

Agreed, Waltrep may not be the final word on the matter.  I often don't agree with him myself and I'm not as qualified as him or his critics.  What's a poor audiophile to do?!?  I have hi-res albums that I struggle to hear an improvement.  I bought a 24/192 version of True Blue by Tina Brooks that sounds awful.  The complained to the vendor and he ultimately refunded my money.  I'm wondering on the older analogue remasters if the sound improvement is coming more so from the remaster than from the higher sampling rates.  I guess I'm trying to refine my criteria when I'm deciding whether to purchase a hi-res album.  I think Waltrep has a point that if you take a 1960's original master and "dump" it in to a 24/96 bucket achieving the same fidelity as an album recorded with 24/96 resolution through out the recording chain is problematic.  Having said that, I've heard some excellent hi-res albums, the Vanessa Fernandez - Use Me comes to mind.  As consumers, we should be able to gave some confidence that a high definition audio product is in fact high definition. This where I do agree with Waltrep.

[dB Cooper]

The reason you 'struggle to hear an improvement' is that there isn't one IMHO. The dynamic range of any analog source material can be captured, easily, at redbook spec, with room to spare. Encoding analog at 24/96 or higher doesn't make the source material 'hi res'. The best metaphor I have heard is that putting a steak on a bigger plate doesn't make it a bigger steak.

[Starchild]

The reason you 'struggle to hear an improvement' is that there isn't one IMHO. The dynamic range of any analog source material can be captured, easily, at redbook spec, with room to spare. Encoding analog at 24/96 or higher doesn't make the source material 'hi res'. The best metaphor I have heard is that putting a steak on a bigger plate doesn't make it a bigger steak.

DB, while I admit there are some excellent sounding material at standard resolution (and it appears to be improving across the board), I'll have to say that I hear stuff (air, imaging, bass quality midrange clarity amongst others) on better hi-res material that's just not present to the same degree on standard resolution; obviously ymmv.  Having said that, most of my down loads are at standard resolution; there's a lot of good stuff out there at resaonable prices (less than $10).  However, if one of my faves such as Cassandra Wilson, George Duke (RIP), Brad Mehldau or Jimmy Cobb releases a new hi-res album I'm going to buy it.  My dac is a Schiit Gungnir multi-bit and I'm amazed at how good standard resolution digital sounds through it but to my ears good hi-res (even 24/44.1) does sound better. 

[Starchild]

This information from Pro Studio Masters for the new David Crosby album "Lighthouse".

88.2 kHz / 24-bit PCM – David Crosby Studio Masters

Tracks 1 - 9 – 44.1 kHz / 24-bit PCM, mastered in 88.2 kHz / 24-bit

Interesting.  Comments?

[PA]

DB, while I admit there are some excellent sounding material at standard resolution (and it appears to be improving across the board), I'll have to say that I hear stuff (air, imaging, bass quality midrange clarity amongst others) on better hi-res material that's just not present to the same degree on standard resolution; obviously ymmv.  Having said that, most of my down loads are at standard resolution; there's a lot of good stuff out there at resaonable prices (less than $10).  However, if one of my faves such as Cassandra Wilson, George Duke (RIP), Brad Mehldau or Jimmy Cobb releases a new hi-res album I'm going to buy it.  My dac is a Schiit Gungnir multi-bit and I'm amazed at how good standard resolution digital sounds through it but to my ears good hi-res (even 24/44.1) does sound better.

The most important thing is the resolution it was recorded in. I believe that a good, say  24/96 recording would also sound pretty good down sampled to 16/44.1.
But I do buy the original solution whenever possible.