Absent that kind of access, I can only go by what's available to me, and that's the discs themselves.


Or, you can research what has been experimented with and published by others.

These discs available will not tell you anything except that they may be different for who know what hundreds of reasons.

My experience with high res digital has been very positive so far.

As wxman posted the differences in dynamic compression would be one reason.

I could care less about proof as to why.

Ah, you are not the inquisitive type then. Maybe you are being fooled? Your perception is really unreliable? Who knows? Anything and everything could be it.

If it's due to better mastering, it means better sound quality. If it's due to higher resolution, it means better sound quality. Same result with either conclusion, therefore I don't care about the reason behind it.

Yet, another real possibility: just trickery by poorly doing the CD so the hi rez sounds superior. You don't want to know if you are fooled so easy?

I mean, if I farted in the middle of a forest, what "proof" would I have that it occurred?

None, unless you recorded it and soemone witnessed that recording.

By the time I tell everyone that I bellowed some flammables out my back side, the stench would have dissipated.

Next time, you could have vitnesses or you could repeat it on request.

I guess to make the naysayers happy, I'd have to have an immediate medical examination with probabilistic models setup to make a determination on the likelihood that I passed gas at the exact time interval that I claimed that I did.

No, you are making it too difficult.

And even if that "proves" that my claim was likely, I'm sure the bias and self-delusion arguments will come up, and I'd have to write a white paper citing how I know for sure that my perception of flatulence was real and not imaginary.

Or, it could be real with better evidence