Should Sound Quality of Computer Audio be improved

You are suggesting that Joe the Plummer [sic] can do better Remastering in his garage, on his laptop?

Is PO confusing file conversion with mastering? That could be part of the problem.

I can't believe I am about to give PO some ammunition, but I have to tell it as it is. Deep breath...

PO, your post to Timlub 07-20-12 raises a few points (sorry everyone else!)

If you downloaded the identical file the mastering guy used. I.e the raw recorded file, then yes you could remaster on your laptop yourself. Now whether you have the ears, talent, skill, decent monitoring, and the right software to do a good job is another question. Some of the software is very intuitive and extremely powerful.

Only if you had a dithered down or bad low res copy would you immediately struggle with the quality. Crap in crap out for sure. You could not do it with a low res mp3 to a high standard. But if you were good you could make it sound better than the mp3! There is some amazing software out there to repair and manipulate sound.

As you go on in that post to Timlub though you do start to lose the plot. Or at least I lost the will to live. You are struggling with some dull windows issues which with a small amount of effort will go away. About a million posts ago I tried to help with that. So don't let that color your judgement. You not being able to set up your own computer is no reason to put down all technology. If my tracking was out on my TT would I blame vinyl for being crap?

Chadeffect- here is the reason for the Disk. Say you have
a Surround Sound Mix of Dianna Krall-"The Look Of Love".
Say you have one copy processed in Advanced Resolution
Surround Sound 24/96 Multi-channel Meridian Loss-less
packing.
Say you have another copy available as a two Channel WAV Download Music File (16/44.1, 24/96, 24/192). Wait!
The 24/96, 24/192 Versions are not available yet due to
limited selection of High Resolution Downloads. You say
it doesn't matter, toss the MLP Disk production, Download the 16/44.1, and wait until 24/96-24/192 versions become
available as Downloads. This maybe a hypothetical proposition, but it cuts across many High Resolution Disks
vs "not available for prime time yet" High Res. Download
of the same Release. How is a Two Channel 16/44.1 WAV
Download File a step up in sound quality from a High Res.
Multi-Channel MLP Disk? This is your "Soon all New Music will only be available as Music Downloads". I say "Hold
on just a cotton picking minute here". Not until you have
adequate High Res. Download Release content to match the
quality of existing MLP, SACD, DVD-Audio, XRCD, XRCD24,
K2 HD CD, Blue-Ray Audio Disks. 16/44.1 WAV Music Downloads only thing available to replace specific Releases on these Disk Formats? Atleast until we have to
wait for 24/96-24/192 Download Releases of our favorite Music to become available in High Res. again- for the
second time around? How long are we supposed to wait for our Music- 2 years, 10 years, 20 years? You can't say the
Recording Quality is separate from the Sampling
Rate, when the Sampling Rate of all New Music Digitally
Recorded has a direct corellation with sound quality.
You want us to go back to the "16/44.1" Digitally Recorded
Music of the 1980's, and how it was Digitally Recorded? This is your "Sampling Rate makes no difference", as you try to sell Higher Sampling Rate High Res. Downloads on the
Internet? Kind of absurd, don't you think? I am going to need a whole Barrel of Rum to swallow this "Whale of a Fish
Story! If you are Digitally Recording at a higher Sampling
Rate- this captures more of the acoustical event. Higher
Sampling Rate IS the Recording Quality, they are not separate entities. Again, no guarantees of High Sound
Quality; but, a little harder to do without.
I don't preach to you to not buy the 24/96-24/192
Music File Downloads off of HDTracks. I don't try to limit
selection with 16/44.1 Download Market with High Res. Selection waiting in the wings. Don't try to preach the elimination of my High Resolution, and I will listen to it. I will also listen to yours, but not stepping down to 16/44.1. Been there, done that for thirty years- don't tell me it doesn't make any difference! Naaahhh- what else have you got?

Strange example, Petty. You complain of listening to the MLP, SACD etc...and there being no high res download? As if the availability of MLP, SACD, Blu-Ray audio are any better?

Yes, we'd all like a wider selection of high res recordings - but at least to my eyes, high res downloads, while still limited in selection, is the only current digital high res format with any momentum and showing any sign of picking up. There are new high res downloads in all musical categories coming out every week. So much so that I have abandoned SACD altogether (lack of selection, especially for anything other than classical). Nobody is trying to kill any format here...just choosing whichever works best for us.

Fine to complain about the lack of selection in high res downloads...but when you compare to SACD, MLP 24/192 surround or Blu-Ray audio your complaints become a bit laughable.

And...once again (in case you didn't hear me asking the first time)...who the heck is saying the sampling rate makes no difference? You lose credibility when you continually misquote us.

PO you keep bring up this disk. As has been mentioned, whatever you already own you could back up and play at native sample rates. but no one is forcing you to do anything. Your disks will be around for a while.

As for your multitrack surround sound disks I would have to check. I know some software (maybe QuickTime pro?) can read this. If not there will be something. Admittedly a slight pain in the ass. But could be dealt with. Let's face it you can't have many more than 10 of these disks. And you could always keep what you use to play it now!

Now nearly all your problems are solved.

Now I think you (PO) keep focusing on the fact that I said once you get to a point with high res sample rates it's starts to become less important due to other factors. i.e above 192 there become issues. Reread above posts. I can't keep repeating myself. Im nit talking about returning to 44.1k! I feel like I'm trying to explain to my mother how to use her new TV.