2. digital
  3. 169879-41852

16 bit vs 24 bit vs 35 bit vs 36 bit vs 64 bit DAC sampling

I have limited knowledge about DAC's, but as I understand it, a typical CD player used to have 16 bit sampling, and supposedly no one was supposed to be able to hear the difference between anything more than 16 bit sampling; however, I recently purchased an Esoteric K-01X, which has 35 bit sampling (why 35 bits? no doubt only to differentiate it from their then top of the line 36 bit sampled Grandioso series).  

Now I can hear a big difference between my old Musical Fidelity kW DM25 DAC with 24 bit sampling (circa 2005), and the newer Esoteric DAC with 35 bit sampling, although I'm not supposed to, although maybe there are some other electrical programs playing with the sound besides the sampling rate.  

Now, there are 64 bit sampling DAC's, and I'm wondering how much the ear actually does hear from the sampling, or if it's something else entirely that's making the digital sound better?  

Any insightful opinions or perspectives?  

Thanks.
drbond
noske
783 posts
 
@cleeds

I understand the steps appearance in the time domain.

Instead of the sinewave looking smooth in the time domain, it looks stepped up in increments, then down, up, down with the flow of the sinewave. The horizontal aspect.

As bit rate increases, the size of these steps decrease. With 65,536 of the little buggers, I reckon the curve would be pretty smooth (but not continuous), in the scheme of tings.

Nyquist goes to Hz sampling (the vertical aspect in the time domain) and the step landings - horizontal bits - would become narrower with higher Hz sampling rate.

In any event, I query the theorem that a continuous signal may be obtained. One may be approached.

I don’t click on links.
djones51
4,947 posts
 
The bitrate is set by the source in this case I assume you're referring to red book CD which is 16/44.1 . The CD player  upsamples to 35 bit, what comes out the analog end is not 35 bit you're lucky if it's 16 . Any difference you hear between various players is in the way they upsample and reconstruct.  
hshifi
572 posts
 
Hello,
I don’t think you would ever need above 22 bit even though the come as 24 bit. The rest you are hearing is the awesome Esoteric. The rest of the stuff in that box is awesome. You should hook up a $29 Walmart DVD player and hear how good it sounds. 
Ag insider logo xs@2x
cleeds
5,658 posts
 
noske
I understand the steps appearance in the time domain. Instead of the sinewave looking smooth in the time domain, it looks stepped up in increments, then down, up, down with the flow of the sinewave ... As bit rate increases, the size of these steps decrease. With 65,536 of the little buggers, I reckon the curve would be pretty smooth(but not continuous) ...
No, you’re mistaken. That’s why I provided you a link that demonstrates it for you visually. There are no "stair steps" in digital audio.
In any event, I query the theorem that a continuous signal may be obtained. One may be approached.
Do you understand the difference between a theorem and a theory? Do you understand that a theorem is a fact proven by math? That you don’t understand or accept the math, or that you won’t watch a video to learn, doesn’t invalidate the theorem.

Digital audio is not intuitive. It’s math.
itsjustme
681 posts
 
My opinion is that you like the new DAC but it has little to do with bit depth. Others have noted that you are limited by the original recording anyway.  Its the weak link theory (kinda like life).

I'll also point out that many of my absolute favorite recordings are in fact analog tape originals, digitally mastered to Phillips Red Book (16/44.1), but lovingly with proper levels set, filtering, etc.  The devil, as always is in the details.  Using Michelangelo's brush will not allow me to paint the Sistine Chapel.
More to discover