Doesn't tell me anything, and the resolution remains one of the variables. What else would you want to find out? I do my listening and comparing, and if one sounds better than the other, then that's the one that I listen to. Coincidental that the ones that I've preferred under those circumstances just happened to all be the high res versions.

Ah, you are jumping to a cause without knowing the effect. No, not all cause related to the effect. Hi res protocol must be the cause for your preference. You have zero idea of that cause and effect and not interested obviously.
As I indicated, easy to master two discs differently by mixing it differently. It so happens that the high res is mixed differently, period. This was well demontrated when Sony was caught with their pants down in just such a test that they tried to cheat on. Oh, yes, that is also published.



But, you're presuming that it matters to me whether the improvements that I perceive are due to the format alone.

Not at all. You express that very well on your own.

And it's not like I got the means to make a determination on the format as the sole causal effect anyway, so the issue's a nonstarter.

Doesn't seem like you are interested in knowing, just correlate the easyest cause and effect. Doesn't work so simply. You have not ruled out other causes in this case, mixes.

[b]All I got to go on is the discs themselves, and if they're merely mastered better, then I still benefit with improved sound quality and get a multichannel mix thrown in for good measure. [b]

Yes, multi channel is the real benefit not available on CD. Since you only have the disc, you seem to rule out causes that doesn't fit for you?
Nothing wrong with remastering better. But that has nothing to do with a hi res capability.




Again, you're trying to manufacture an argument here. I never stated that the improvements that I perceived were solely due to the resolution. You're the one who's trying to steer the discussion in that direction, and to me that has no merit given that nobody else who's chimed in (except for maybe Terrence) has the means immediately at their disposal to do the necessary comparisons to confirm or rule the resolution out as a potential causal effect.

That is fine. More reason not to jump to an unwarranted conclusion then why they sound different, right?



How do you know? Have you ever done a DBT between a master and downsampled copy? Unless you've heard the masters that created both versions of the discs that I've compared, you have no basis for assessing the importance of one factor over another.

Oh, easy. No evidence exist, actually the contrary, that it is not the hi res at work. That is the issue, isn't it? You and others certainly jump to that conclusion in a hurry.



Why would you not care? If someone tells you that they farted, wouldn't a naysayer's first instinct be to ask for proof?

Actually, now you atre the one that seem to be delusional about this issue.


What if they just told you that they feel good? They're providing you with no proof. Would you believe them just because they told you, or would you doubt their assessment since feelings and perception are so fraught with fallibility?

Really not important, it is a feeling, isn't it? Just as the above silly comparison you are trying to conjourne up.