2. digital
  3. 1077846604

Oversampling/Increased dither: a lot of hype?

Is there any clear evidence that longer bit lengths and higher frequency sampling actually improves the accuracy of sound reproduction or does it simply add coloration and superflous "digital noise" that if anything, only taints and distorts the original signal?
I have recently spent a lot of time listening to non-oversampling DAC's (SN Tube Dac being one of them...)and have literally have been blown away by the transparency, the "blacker than black" noise floor and a much more forward and natural sound.
I have to admit that I was extremely reluctant to evan audition the non-oversamplers secondary to all the hype surrounding oversampling. I was absolutely stunned by what these non-oversamplers were putting out...or maybe what they were NOT putting out. It was as if a thick veil of digital noise that I have really heard before was suddenly cancelled out.
Anybody else have similar experiences? If possible, i'd be interested to hear sound arguments for either one.
cohenlt
sean
6,231 posts
 
The biggest difference in sonics between some of these and "conventional" types of DAC's has to do with the type and quantity of filtering used. Less filtering equates to wider bandwidth, better harmonic structure, less phase-shifts with the resultant "lifting of veils". The drawback is the potential for increased ultra-sonic noise, potentially damaging your tweeter and / or amp. Sean
>
gliderguider's avatar
gliderguider
294 posts
 
I agree with Sean, but I'd add a caveat that the ultrasonics appear to be more of a theoretical than a real-world problem. I have yet to hear of amp or speaker damage that could be attributed to them. In a similar vein, the "advantages" of oversampling for red book playback are theoretically real, but the extra circuitry required to implement it usually gets in the way of the music. As always, the devil is in the details.

I haven't heard a DAC yet that could equal the natural presentation of my Audio Note.
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
IMHO, the sonic differences between various DACs stem from the analog filtering and amplification circuitry that follows the DAC. There are theoretical advantages to oversampling, perhaps not always realized because of inferior analog outputs.

A little history...Oversampling was a Philips idea (which they didn't bother to tell Sony about) so that they could use a good 14-bit DA instead of the flaky 16-bit ones that were common when CDs were introduced. Everyone agreed that the 14-bit Phillips ran circles around the Sony units.
skyboy's avatar
skyboy
19 posts
 
In the past couple of years I moved from an Ah!Tjoeb 99 to Sony SACD-777es to Cary 308 to cj Premier 9 to a Scott Nixon non-oversampling/non-analogue filter tube dac. The Scott Nixon is the purest clearest easyest to listen through.
sean
6,231 posts
 
Gliderguider: I agree with what you said about ultrasonics, but i wanted to be honest and fair as to the pro's and con's. Like you, i've never heard of anyone popping an amp or tweeter that was directly related to this phenomena. As a side note though, Philips evidently thought that this was serious enough to allow one to select the hinge frequency for filtering on their SACD 1000's. They specifically mentioned "potential for damage to amps and tweeters" when selecting the 50 KHz ( maybe it was 40 KHz??? ) filter. I ran mine at the highest setting with speakers that were flat out to 23 KHz and an amp that was linear out to 80 KHz and capable of over a kilowatt of output per channel with nary a problem for about a year. Sean
>
More to discover