How much has the SQ of gear improved in the last quarter century?

I was wondering why high resolution sources sound identical to standard definition sources on my system. Duh. I need to replace everything I have with the newest generation! Problem solved!

 

Unless you played in the band and suffered chronic work exposure, your hearing loss, like hair loss, is due largely to age. Regardless, I'd keep the super tweeters.

 

Resolution is highly over rated. Really is a quality that the ears are least sensitive to. in the ️

 

High resolution sources need to be properly executed to get the benefits. Some don’t sound any better because they were created using a lower resolution source. With a good system it’s pretty easy to hear the difference in a higher resolution source.

 

I hear the difference, but not always in a good way. I find I often don't prefer the hi-rez download over the CD version. They frequently don't seem as natural to me. As you suggest, it could be the mastering or the semi-fraudulent practice of upsampling the same source as the CD and calling it hi-rez. But I have a feeling that it's more than just that. Exactly what, I don't know, but maybe the higher frequencies above 2oK bother my ears, even though I can't hear them?

 

I know what you mean about sometimes not being able to exactly pinpoint why some recordings grate on your nerves. As I age, I also wonder if high frequencies I cannot hear anymore might be a problem.

I generally prefer good SACD transfers to older PCM. A good clean vinyl copy also sounds better. Depth and musical timbres are more vividly reproduced and the performers have more presence with high-rez. My preamp is new but my amp is almost 30 years old. I get it recapped and overhauled about every ten years.

 

I agree on SACD. When I switch from the redbook layer to the SACD layer, I can almost see the image unfold to 3-D before my "eyes." SACD is also smoother than PCM. SH's PP&M In the Wind SACD is truly amazing in this regard.