[Andre2]

Okay, I bought Norah Jones, Come Away with Me in HiRez, from HDTracks (25 bucks, that's expensive) so I could compare, as I have the CD. 

I have been A/Bing the first three songs for the last hour.  These songs are, Don't Know Why, Seven Years, Cold Cold Heart.  I'm sorry to say that, in my system, differences, if any, are really minor. 

I am not sure that, on a blind test, I could distinguish the Hirez from my CDp.

okay, I take the stuff above all  back.  Today I have the full album downloaded in my hard drive, and I can sure hear a difference.  I believe what happen yesterday I was listening to the music through Jriver while the album was still downloading, my kbps on Jriver was around 2100, and the downloading actually froze after the fourth song. 

Today, playing without simultaneous downloading, Jriver is indicating a rate above 5500 kbps, and I can perceive the characteristics that I was observing on my first (free) download.  Of those, the most important to me is that the music quality, that is, the instruments are more true to the real live sound.

It is a subtle distinction - not that dramatic, but there is a distinction.  For example, in the begging of Nightingale there is some arpeggios on an acoustic guitar (well, throughout the music really) and I can hear a difference.  The guitar is more suave in the hi-res format compared to the CD. 
In Come Away with Me, right in the beginning the drums, the bass, and the guitar are more clearly defined and, her voice as she stars singing is "more distinctive".  I believe that immediacy of the music is better realized on the hires format.

[DS-21]

okay, I take the stuff above all  back.  Today I have the full album downloaded in my hard drive, and I can sure hear a difference.

Did you match levels?

[Andre2]

^^^ yes, I did.  ^^^

So, i guess the fellow that has wrote the article, with all the ear drawings and frequency regions and all that, forgot to do one basic thing:

listen to the music with his real ears!   

Is this improvements worth the cost?  It is up for each of us to decide.  I am a recent audiophile,as I built my system in September 2011, and I decided to go the digital routing, so my added cost will be the downloads.  Well, unless I decide to buy my own dedicated computer, as my current (old) dell laptop that I am using for music server is not even mine, but the company that I work for. 

[Letitroll98]

What it's going to take to convince me: a high rez file of the same well recorded song against my not-a-slouch cdp. Not just hirez music by itself.

 I should be able to click back and forth on the dac or preamp and be wowed by the supposed increased fidelity.

How many times have you tried this?

There's no doubt that mastering trumps format every time. 

Agreed and seconded.  And referenced Rclark's comment, any comparison without knowing the entire recording and production chain would render any comparison moot.  There are likely so many differences with the same recording that the most we could hope for is to say, "I like the way they mastered it in this format".  Which is actually quite valid.  What does it matter the reason if you like a recording better?  Recording, post production, format, whatever, you like what you hear better.  If after sample size "X" of purchase decisions you find yourself buying the Hi-Rez download more often than LP or CD, then that format is the superior one for your system and tastes.  Increasingly audiophiles are picking Hi-Rez or LP, and leaving Redbook CD on the shelf.     

[bdiament]

Hi Rclark,

What it's going to take to convince me: a high rez file of the same well recorded song against my not-a-slouch cdp. Not just hirez music by itself.

 I should be able to click back and forth on the dac or preamp and be wowed by the supposed increased fidelity.

Agreed 100%.

What you're going to need is a DAC that can actually do high res.  In my experience, many that have "192" on the spec sheet actually sound *worse* at the highest rates than they do at something like 96k.  This, I attribute to clocking that is not up to the significantly increased demands of the higher rates (based on what I've heard, this is far from trivial for the designer - some won't even try it and simply dismiss the higher rates).  The DAC must also have analog stages that can perform at the wider bandwidth of the highest rates.

With a DAC (and associated gear) that is truly up to the task, I invite you to visit the Soundkeeper Recordings Format Comparison page at:
http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com/format.htm

What you'll find there are downloadable samples from four different albums, all at different resolutions but all from the same mastering.  (This last is crucial as the page will explain.)

The first album was recorded at 24/96 so there are samples at 16/44 (CD resolution) and 24/96.
The other three were recorded at 24/192 so there are samples at 16/44, 24/96 and 24/192.

Note all samples are in raw PCM format (.wav) so no additional algorithms need be involved during playback, as there would be for the so-called "lossless" formats.

I hope you find the Format Comparison interesting.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com