Are high sample rates making your music sound worse?

mzkmxcv

You don’t even need measurement gear, all you need is a program that loads the two digital files and shows you the difference between them.

If you truly think listening doesn't matter, then you're the single best example of confirmation bias that this group has ever seen, imo. And we can all go home now. There's no need to listen to anything at all, except for whatever mzkmxcv proclaims.

mzkmxcv
' Also, the people I’ve heard from who are in the industry, all agree that digitized vinyl sounds identical. You finding this different either means you listened to garbage conversions or your brain is telling you what you want to hear, which since you hear a benefit from going to 192kHz leads me to think it’s the latter. Open to discussion, so please find the error in my logic.'

So you are saying that I'm imagining an improvement?

@goofyfoot  
 
To put it blunty, yes. Everything I found shoes that if people don’t know, they don’t even get up to 70% accuracy (picking CD or better over 320Kbps MP3), it’s usually 40%-60%.  
  
320Kbps was chosen for a reason, as that’s what they found was good enough.

@cleeds

So now you are saying even if the bits are the same it sounds different?

I have listened, didn’t hear a difference. Whose correct, me or you? Why? Because your ears are better or your system is better?

mzkmxcv, 
I've played the same vinyl transfer to CD for friends and they've remarked about the improvement to the overall sound between playing it at 44 kHz and then up sampling to higher frequencies. I can see that you're absolutely certain that your opinion is factual and that dissenting views are wrong but I would make the radical assumption that many would see you're factual observations of audio without listening as presumptuous and arrogant.