Yeah. I'm in the camp that understands it. Well, maybe I don't totally understand it, but I understand its implications and was certainly unable to differentiate between "high-res" audio and redbook audio even in pathological cases. For consumer use, anything over CD quality (44.1khz / 16bit) is a waste.
Over a long enough distance (~30 m), it's better to use
ADC <-HDMI-> DAC usually than send line-level signals
due to losses involved unless one wishes to spend zillions
on the most perfectly engineered and widely-incompatible
shielded coaxial cable imaginable.
Or, for a simpler and more affordable option, just use balanced wiring. It is effectively interference proof. =)
Further is the belief that lossless codecs cannot
be replaced compressed lossless or sufficient parameters
of some lossy formats.
There are some details, particularly percussion, that are just not well represented by lossy formats. It's like trying to represent sharp text at small point sizes with a JPEG.
Don't get me wrong. High bitrate lossy codecs are almost always good enough for nearly everything. It's what I listen to most of the time.
I get the ceremony of vinyl, but it's not going to
improve over perfect digital reproduction.
Agree, although I actually don't see much of that -- people really perpetuating the myth that vinyl is technically superior to lossless digital -- these days.
The one kink here is that sometimes vinyl releases are mastered better than their digital counterparts; many releases these days have that "brick wall" loudness wars mastering applied that smashes out all of the dynamic range. So sometimes there are vinyl releases that actually do sound better (though it has nothing to do with the format itself)
https://www.aviom.com/blog/balanced-vs-unbalanced/
There are some details, particularly percussion, that are just not well represented by lossy formats. It's like trying to represent sharp text at small point sizes with a JPEG.Don't get me wrong. High bitrate lossy codecs are almost always good enough for nearly everything. It's what I listen to most of the time.
Agree, although I actually don't see much of that -- people really perpetuating the myth that vinyl is technically superior to lossless digital -- these days.The one kink here is that sometimes vinyl releases are mastered better than their digital counterparts; many releases these days have that "brick wall" loudness wars mastering applied that smashes out all of the dynamic range. So sometimes there are vinyl releases that actually do sound better (though it has nothing to do with the format itself)