I have a Cambridge Audio DAC Magic Plus playing high-res files from my MacBook Pro. What connection will give me the best quality (24/192) out of the Mac into the DAC; USB 2.0, S/P DIF co-axial or TOSLINK optical? I don't think USB (even 2.0) will go above 24/96. I have a great system, will I even hear a difference between 24/96 and 24/192? Thanks for your help!
Yes. USB can handle just about any audio format. Do the math: 96K is close to 100K and 24 bits is three bytes. These are only two channels so 3 x 100,000 x 3 is less than one megabyte per second. USB 2.0 is more than ONE HUNDRED times faster than what you need.
It makes ZERO difference what kind of connection you use. It is DIGITAL. bits are bits. If anyone says different they are speaking voodoo anti-science to you.
Can you hear the difference between 24/96 and 24/192. First what are your recordings? If yu are listening to CDs that are 16/44.1 then upscaling them to 24/96 will do nothing but add noise. But if you happen to have recording made at 24/96 then you need to play them at 24/96.
the 24/128 setting is rather pointless. What really matters is the 24 bits not the sample rate.
Yes some people do record at high sample rates but that is because they will post process the tracks. But you are just doing playback, not running a recording studio so 24/96 is the best you can use and even that is really not much better than 24/48.
But the big thing is the source. Is it REALLY 24/96 or is it just upscaled CD quality.
----------
.....
let me quote some esoteric audio bs.....
You were right about that being BS. Anyone who claims to be able to hear that needs proof. I's OK to claim super-human powers but you need proof.
For example has anyone been able to pass a double blind listening test? Is this documented in ANY per reviewed paper? (some random web page or Wikipedia does not count.)
----------
... We can detect minuscule changes in temperature, light, sound, and touch...
That is absolutely WRONG. No one can sense small changes in temperature, light or sound.
Well I guess if you define "minuscule change" as "the smallest change that can be detected by humans" then of course we can.
Most of our senses work on a logarithmic scale. This allows us to see at night and in bright daylight but the trade off for this is our inability to see tiny differences. We mostly need about 3db or maybe 1.5 db to detect a difference.
Can YOU do better than that? Do you know anyone else who can? Even just one example to support the claim that "We can detect minuscule changes"?