Re: You can do a search......

24.4.254.36

Posted by TReestman on March 12, 2001 at 17:18:41

In Reply to: Re: You can do a search...... posted by renaissance on March 11, 2001 at 20:06:33:

I think you're making this harder than it needs to be.

First, no disc can be read at a higher resolution than it was recorded with. For the typical CD, this means 16/44. You can place this CD into a transport built by God and it still won't pull off more than 16/44. Period. That stream can then be sent to a DAC that will _upsample_ it to 24/96 (I leave it to others as to whether this improves the sound), in which case you need a 24/96 DAC to play it.

As for "true" 24/96 discs, any transport that can play them will pull off the 24/96 stream. It doesn't matter if this stream is sent to a DAC that then _downsamples_ it to 24/48 or something else, the fact is the stream was read at 24/96. Most of the 24/48 downsampling in these DACs is done for purposes of copyright protection, not because the DAC couldn't handle it.

Of course, if you put the 24/96 disc in a regular CD player it can't be read (well, assuming it doesn't also have a 16/44 stream). Why? It's a different format. Just because a DVD disc and a CD look the same, it doesn't mean they are.

As for why so many CDPs have 24-bit DACs, that's marketing and economics. This isn't new, 20-bit DACs were all the rage the last couple of years.

Finally, to answer your last question, your HK is going to read a 16/44 stream and send same. Your alleged player with 24/96 would read a 24/96 stream when playing a disc recorded as such (there is no such thing as a 20-bit disc). Would that alleged player _output_ the 24/96 stream? Maybe not, it may downsample it to 24/48 before output. For example, my Pioneer DV-626D has the option to output at 96KHz. But even if I use that option the manual says that for discs with copy protection the signal will still be digitally output at 48 (the analog output will be 96, however).

-->TR

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - offboard dac question - renaissance 17:16:47 03/11/01 (21)

Re: offboard dac question - garth 17:43:26 03/12/01 (0)

Apples and oranges... - NickR 23:42:56 03/11/01 (14)

Re: Apples and oranges... - renaissance 08:51:59 03/12/01 (13)

Re: Apples and oranges... - NickR 09:20:21 03/12/01 (12)

Re: Apples and oranges... - renaissance 10:40:44 03/12/01 (11)

My final post on this thread. - NickR 10:45:16 03/12/01 (10)

Re: My final post on this thread. - renaissance 12:18:39 03/12/01 (9)

16/44.1 is that and nothing else!!! - garth 17:53:09 03/12/01 (0)

For the same reasons that...... - Chris Garrett 14:29:41 03/12/01 (7)

Now that`s what I call an answer! (but check out how you signed off))) - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 16:48:48 03/12/01 (1)

Actually, there were two other typos in there as well and.... - Chris Garrett 17:02:53 03/12/01 (0)

Re: For the same reasons that...... - renaissance 16:07:30 03/12/01 (4)

Sorry, didn't answer the last part..... - Chris Garrett 18:06:31 03/12/01 (1)

Re: Sorry, didn't answer the last part..... - garth 03:06:39 03/13/01 (0)

Well here's the kicker..... - Chris Garrett 16:38:36 03/12/01 (1)

Re: Well here's the kicker..... - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 18:58:46 03/12/01 (0)

Re: offboard dac question - badman 19:30:34 03/11/01 (0)

Re: offboard dac question - cooney 17:36:20 03/11/01 (0)

You can do a search...... - Chris Garrett 17:24:12 03/11/01 (2)

Re: You can do a search...... - renaissance 20:06:33 03/11/01 (1)

Re: You can do a search...... - TReestman 17:18:41 03/12/01 (0)

Follow Ups

Re: You can do a search...... - TReestman 17:18:41 03/12/01 (0)

You can not post to an archived thread.