More Bit in DAC the better ?

Interesting topic to share...

" THE BIG QUESTION: Are you dogmatic about using old shit and why you deny the technical progress of our wonderful industry? Are you some kind of a lunatic, a gaslight advocate? Are you a hi-fi Amish? Are you on drugs? What is wrong with you that you do not like 24 bit/192 KHz and HDCD and SACD and VLSI chips?

There are two kinds of resolution: digital and analogue. We can talk in digital "language" and conclude, that a digital information can have a certain - say 16 bit - word length. And the chip that reads it must be able to operate with 16 bit length of words. But can it (DAC) put out the resulting sine wave with similar accuracy ??? That is the KEY QUESTION.

Bits are the smallest measurement units which we can apply to the process. It is sort of like in digital cameras. Would you buy a 100 Euro Casio pocket camera which has a CCD with 10 million pixels or rather a 8 million Canon D30 SLR? The number of pixels on the casio is better, but it is all lost in firmware, compression, lens quality, accuracy of power supply, etc. In music reproduction, our CD has 16 bits. No matter what DAC we use - it is still 16 bits. That's means that we can reproduce a 2 V pp signal with accuracy of 2/65500 Volts.
So why the cheap DVD player with real 24 bits is not immediately better? Because increasing the digital resolution does not have a chance to come through the process. The fact that digitally speaking the chip can "understand the word -length of 24 bits" does not guarantee, that after reading it will output music of equally great nuance resolution. Remember - reading is not understanding. Just like with this text. Because the other elements which play role - the timing of impulses (clock) and the power supply stability and the analog stage - all have possibility to reproduce signal with accuracy of say 0,01 % which is 1/10000 which is far from 1/65500 and VERY FAR from 24 bit number, which is 2 to the 24th power, which is 65500 times 2 to 8-ght power which is A LOT. Actually it is 17 millions.So somebody promising a resolution of 24 bits is effectively claming that he produced electrical device which controls the output signal to a wide range of loads with accuracy of one/17 millionth part of a volt.
THIS CLAIM IS NOT VERY SERIOUS. We take it with a grain of salt.

So dear readers, there is no correlation between increased number of bits above 16 and sound quality. At least it is not automatically guaranteed. I suggest we rather concentrate on the best usage of the bits which we have, than worry of these bits we don't have ! "

good one, but does this also means that we are taken for a fool when we buy a 24bit DAC?

Aiyah Wabun,

Now only you tell us this thing ah!!!!!
After I spend my hard earned money chasing after 24bit/192hz CD recordings.
But how come ah my audiophile CDs seem to almost always sound better than the regular ones?
Or am I just imagining that I'm hearing better resolution, depth, & all that usual hifi jargon.Excuse me fellas!

So now what ah?

cheers & shalom
teleman51

Spoiler:

wabun wrote:Interesting topic to share...

" THE BIG QUESTION: Are you dogmatic about using old shit and why you deny the technical progress of our wonderful industry? Are you some kind of a lunatic, a gaslight advocate? Are you a hi-fi Amish? Are you on drugs? What is wrong with you that you do not like 24 bit/192 KHz and HDCD and SACD and VLSI chips?

There are two kinds of resolution: digital and analogue. We can talk in digital "language" and conclude, that a digital information can have a certain - say 16 bit - word length. And the chip that reads it must be able to operate with 16 bit length of words. But can it (DAC) put out the resulting sine wave with similar accuracy ??? That is the KEY QUESTION.

Bits are the smallest measurement units which we can apply to the process. It is sort of like in digital cameras. Would you buy a 100 Euro Casio pocket camera which has a CCD with 10 million pixels or rather a 8 million Canon D30 SLR? The number of pixels on the casio is better, but it is all lost in firmware, compression, lens quality, accuracy of power supply, etc. In music reproduction, our CD has 16 bits. No matter what DAC we use - it is still 16 bits. That's means that we can reproduce a 2 V pp signal with accuracy of 2/65500 Volts.
So why the cheap DVD player with real 24 bits is not immediately better? Because increasing the digital resolution does not have a chance to come through the process. The fact that digitally speaking the chip can "understand the word -length of 24 bits" does not guarantee, that after reading it will output music of equally great nuance resolution. Remember - reading is not understanding. Just like with this text. Because the other elements which play role - the timing of impulses (clock) and the power supply stability and the analog stage - all have possibility to reproduce signal with accuracy of say 0,01 % which is 1/10000 which is far from 1/65500 and VERY FAR from 24 bit number, which is 2 to the 24th power, which is 65500 times 2 to 8-ght power which is A LOT. Actually it is 17 millions.So somebody promising a resolution of 24 bits is effectively claming that he produced electrical device which controls the output signal to a wide range of loads with accuracy of one/17 millionth part of a volt.
THIS CLAIM IS NOT VERY SERIOUS. We take it with a grain of salt.

So dear readers, there is no correlation between increased number of bits above 16 and sound quality. At least it is not automatically guaranteed. I suggest we rather concentrate on the best usage of the bits which we have, than worry of these bits we don't have ! "

... the original guy who wrote that piece of crap really doesn't understand jack sh!t. (not you wabun, right ? U just copied it from somewhere else isn't it? )

All the wrong arguments here. And a total abuse of the word "bit" everywhere.

Sounds a lil bit sensationalist without any real argument.

I can safely say that listening to 16/44.1 will never be the same again after experiencing 24/192.

This was discussed in earlier post and an illustration by our Wonder Woman is attached;

http://www.hifi4sale.net/equipment-discussions-f6/dac-opinions-t5666-100.htm#21816

By the way, what happens to our Wonder Woman? Busy rescuing the world?

... the original guy who wrote that piece of crap really doesn't understand jack sh!t. (not you wabun, right ? U just copied it from somewhere else isn't it? )

All the wrong arguments here. And a total abuse of the word "bit" everywhere.

I do not have that knowledge to write so, and I dare not to comment him wrote "crap" as well..unless I know everything
just go thru it on web, felt interesting and share out over here...
I went search for answer after I listen to an old TDA1540 machine which sounds lot better a Wolfson WM8740 player... an apple just drop on my head..hihi

123_rocketman wrote:This was discussed in earlier post and an illustration by our Wonder Woman is attached;

http://www.hifi4sale.net/equipment-discussions-f6/dac-opinions-t5666-100.htm#21816

By the way, what happens to our Wonder Woman? Busy rescuing the world?

Could be having a tryst with The Invisible Man!