CANcOnANDsoNVIL

genuine question: what advantages are there for upsampling redbook (or even DSD64) to DSD512?

I tried lowpass filter = 30khz resample = 88.xkhz and volume on the new file is lower.

seems to me it does not really matter then if I get SACD or high-res then. since most people (including myself) would only get 1 version of a recording and not know a better mastering may exists... 😁 I'll rather spend money on getting a different recording than getting duplicates of the same recording.

So is there a general rule like maybe it’s more likely i can a properly mastered SACD vs a high-res recording? (I believe people in general only buy 1 copy of the same track) thanks

wouldn't the person (whatever effort they put in) be limited by the available technology the time?

I'm thinking perhaps the high-res files will sound "cleaner/better" because of advancements to mastering tech/techniques? your thoughts? thanks EDIT1: as an example, the SACD versions vs remastered/HD tracks of Miles Davis' stuff. EDIT2: SACD link: https://www.sa-cd.net/showtitle/833 | qobuz link: https://www.qobuz.com/gb-en/album/four-more-miles-davis/0827969359525

so I was using audioranger to auto-download tags into my collection when I inspect the files, it inserts a lot of tags into the files. At the moment, my music files has barebones (artist, album artists, genre, track no and title) what sort of benefit do I get from such information? Is this information used by software? thanks this screenshot was taken using foobar2000.