2. digital
  3. 1225837989

Anyone listening to 24/196?

If so, what DAC are you using? The Benchmark can intake those signals, but it downsamples them to 110. The BelCanto can't take them. The Bryston BDA-1 is one of the few non-megabuck DACs that can take 192 as an input.

Anything else under 3k?

From Bryston materials: "The CS-4398 operates in one of three oversampling modes based on the input sample rate. Single-speed mode supports input sample rates up to 50 kHz and uses a 128x oversampling ratio. Double-speed mode supports input sample rates up to 100 kHz and uses an oversampling ratio of 64x. Quad-speed mode supports input sample rates up to 200 kHz and uses an oversampling ratio of 32x."
lightminer
lightminer OP
164 posts
 
Yeah:

DSD64 = 1BIT / 2.8224 MHz = 2.8224 Mbit/s (per channel)
DSD128 = 1BIT / 5.6448 MHz = 5.6448 Mbit/s (per channel)
DXD (PCM) = 24 BIT / 352.8kHz = 8.4672 Mbit/s (per channel)
lightminer OP
164 posts
 
Just an interesting note a half year later, looks like 24/96 PCM is gathering steam as the next standard, although in the computer-digital world it will probably be a mix (i.e., 24/88.2 is currently also very common), but overall 24/96 FLAC set to level 6 compression has a slight lead over everything else from what I can tell.
wireless200
415 posts
 
I downloaded some 24/96 albums from HDTracks. You can never speak in absolutes on these things because there are so many variables but they clearly sound better to me. There's a certain something there (an anolog sounding somthing) that is an improvement over regular redbook. I wold have everything in 24/96 if I could. Nicely fluid, detailed, organic, whole from top to bottom.
ckoffend
684 posts
 
My DCS upconverter outputs to 24/192. However, in running the digital 24/192 signal to my DCS DAC, I am required to use two balanced digital cables or a firewire cable as regular digital coaxial or toslink digital optical cable do not have the capacity to carry the digital signal at this level (at least according to DCS). The DCS stuff is pretty nice as it allows various filtration algorithms to be applied and other adjustments. However, in the 24/192 these filters are not available as their manuals state that when processing at these levels [24/192], these additional controls are not necessary.
2chnlben
595 posts
 
I downloaded some 24/96 albums from HDTracks. You can never speak in absolutes on these things because there are so many variables but they clearly sound better to me. There's a certain something there (an anolog sounding somthing) that is an improvement over regular redbook. I wold have everything in 24/96 if I could. Nicely fluid, detailed, organic, whole from top to bottom.

Absolutely; there’s no question about it. Also try http://bluecoastrecords.com/ which has a limited selection of exceptionally well-recorded acoustic material, which is recorded live on location and produced/recorded with great care. The Keith Greeninger stuff is fantastic (you can listen to samples prior to buying the download). The files are in 24/96 WAV, but you can convert them to Flac if you want to via "Foobar" (which is a free download).
More to discover