Mr.T wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
I said that I can't distinguish between an LP and a 24/96 copy of that LP

It's nice of you to finally admit there is no problem with digital recording
then.

Finally? Did you "finally" pull your head out of your ass?


All we need to know now is whether you think you can hear above 22
kHz, and why it is more important than the bottom octave or so, where vinyl
fails miserably. After all the only other difference for 24/96 over CD is
dynamic range beyond 96dB. It's obviously NOT that! :-)


Prove it.

wrote in message
oups.com
Mr.T wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
I said that I can't distinguish between an LP and a
24/96 copy of that LP

It's nice of you to finally admit there is no problem
with digital recording then.

Finally? Did you "finally" pull your head out of your ass?


All we need to know now is whether you think you can
hear above 22
kHz, and why it is more important than the bottom octave
or so, where vinyl fails miserably. After all the only
other difference for 24/96 over CD is dynamic range
beyond 96dB. It's obviously NOT that! :-)


Prove it.

It is your claim to prove, Scott.

Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com
Mr.T wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
I said that I can't distinguish between an LP and a
24/96 copy of that LP

It's nice of you to finally admit there is no problem
with digital recording then.

Finally? Did you "finally" pull your head out of your ass?


All we need to know now is whether you think you can
hear above 22
kHz, and why it is more important than the bottom octave
or so, where vinyl fails miserably. After all the only
other difference for 24/96 over CD is dynamic range
beyond 96dB. It's obviously NOT that! :-)


Prove it.

It is your claim to prove, Scott.

You seem to be confused Arny. Mr.T claimed the following.
"All we need to know now is whether you think you can hear above 22
kHz, and why it is more important than the bottom octave or so, where
vinyl fails miserably. After all the only other difference for 24/96
over CD is dynamic range beyond 96dB. It's obviously NOT that! :-)"

His claim his burden of proof.

Scott

wrote in message
ups.com
Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com
Mr.T wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
I said that I can't distinguish between an LP and a
24/96 copy of that LP

It's nice of you to finally admit there is no problem
with digital recording then.

Finally? Did you "finally" pull your head out of your
ass?


All we need to know now is whether you think you can
hear above 22
kHz, and why it is more important than the bottom
octave or so, where vinyl fails miserably. After all
the only other difference for 24/96 over CD is dynamic
range beyond 96dB. It's obviously NOT that! :-)


Prove it.

It is your claim to prove, Scott.

You seem to be confused Arny. Mr.T claimed the following.
"All we need to know now is whether you think you can
hear above 22 kHz, and why it is more important than the
bottom octave or so, where vinyl fails miserably. After
all the only other difference for 24/96 over CD is
dynamic range beyond 96dB. It's obviously NOT that! :-)"

His claim his burden of proof.


Not at all Scott. His comments were based on earlier claims that you
apparently now don't want to stand behind.

wrote in message
ups.com...
You seem to be confused Arny. Mr.T claimed the following.
"All we need to know now is whether you think you can hear above 22
kHz, and why it is more important than the bottom octave or so, where
vinyl fails miserably. After all the only other difference for 24/96
over CD is dynamic range beyond 96dB. It's obviously NOT that! :-)"

His claim his burden of proof.

Happy to oblige if :

1. There was the slightest chance you would accept scientific facts.
2. There was the slightest chance you could understand them.
3. You tell us what DNR *you* think vinyl is capable of, and provide ANY
supporting evidence that it is more than CD is capable of, either wideband
OR narrow band.
(it's absolutely impossible of course, so I won't hold my breathe :-)

MrT.