audiofools...maybe not so much

[DrGeoff]

most recordings are crap.  its so true!

I wouldn't say that most are crap. Many recordings are made with what is available at the time. The music is usually more important than the recording chain. Older recordings impart the sound of various 'eras' of recording technology and performance styles.

there are very few that truly deserve 'special handling'.  its for those that the audiophiles really go to extremes.

I have a collection of 24/96 and even 24/192 flac files but its not material I listen to, much.  it ends up being 'demo material' more often than not.

the regular stuff I listen to does not need high-end playback gear.

I have loads of 24/96 and 24/44.1 recordings, mixes and masters. I could sit in the studio and listen to the music through high-end studio equipment, but it's not very convenient
A lot of mixing and mastering these days is done for the purpose of the mass consumer crowd, ie iTunes and earbuds.

but then again, if we build our own, its not expensive, it uses better parts than a sony (etc) would put in and we can change things if we want to.  I built audio gear because its not expensive, I can do it and I can get much better specs than most mass producers are willing to spend on.  but I'm not saying I hear the extra difference.

We owe a lot to the ubiquitous 5532 op amp
Building your own audio gear is fun and can be quite satisfying. Adding the extra few dollars that the manufacturer decided to skimp on can make a significant difference to the sound. This is where DIY audio shines.

[linux-works]

listening to most of my cd's gives a bad experience since I hear the failures in the mix.  noise, distortion and way too much compression (and even gross mistakes like letting singers swallow the damned mic instead of having a reasonable distance so it does not clip) make the music sound like crap.

conversion from analog using 20 yr old a/d boxes also is a failure point.  I got a copy of steely dan 'gaucho' in 24/96 format and it finally is something close to enjoyable.  the cd copy is borderline acceptable and that band is one who actually cares about the resultant sound.  it was only the redo for the 24/96 format that they finally got the end sound as good as modern state of the art playback gear.

having too good of a playback system can work against you; you start to hear the failings and its not pleasant to hear full resolution when a lot of the wave is distorted or noisy.

[linux-works]

sacd is rippable with some kind of playstation hack, iirc.

I've seen sacd 'rips' before, so I'm pretty sure it can be done.  dvd-a is one that I'm not sure is rippable even by the PS.

[BravoV]

... Dvd-a is one that I'm not sure is rippable even by the PS.

Google for "dvdcpxm"