[Five]

Originally Posted by Tubular

lol, I don't wanna break yer balls, but I think he was meaning that something captured 24/44.1 > dithered to 16/44.1 sounds about the same as something captured 24/44.1 with no dithering applied. The dithering really improves the sound a lot I guess vs. capturing in straight 16/44.1. I should have been more specific in the previous post.

the dithering helps keep some of that 24bit goodness, stops fades from sputtering etc. I was reading the post as "the same" not "about the same" ... "about the same" I would agree with, there is an improvement in quality but its splitting hairs compared to a simple analog vs digital comparison for example.

Originally Posted by Tubular

What I find hard to believe is that a great recording with a great reel to reel recorder > played back analog with no digital stages, will sound about the same as a great digital recording (16 or 24bit capture).

"about the same" is pretty subjective... but I think anybody with ears can hear a dramatic difference. You've just got to try it for yourself.

Originally Posted by Tubular

I thought the bit depth had a bigger effect than increasing the sampling rate.

try it out, see what you think. too much speculation and white papers and theory in this thread for my tastes, I would rather see FLAC samples posted up, with a post like "hey guys, listen to this 24bit vs 16bit comparison to hear what I'm talking about. I created these samples using xxx ...". Even "I tried comparing x transfer method vs y transfer method at home, and to my ears it sounds like x is about the same as y, so I use method y" etc etc.

If you only believe what's technically sound on paper then solid state is clearly better than tube!