An audio buddy of mine recently sent me an email in which he quoted his friend talking about the introduction of digital into the telephone industry. His friend worked for AT&T and was instrumental in incorporating digital technology to replace the analog system in use at the time. Here's what he wrote:
After reading this, it occurred to me that this might be a good method to use for comparing the various digital formats being used in audio today. The method to evaluate and compare the different digital resolutions would be to multiply the sampling rate by the quantization bit rate for each digital format. That way the various digital formats could be compared on an equal basis. For example, the resolution of 16/44 Redbook would look like this:Redbook resolution = 44,100-Hz x 16-bits = 705,600-bits/s per channel
DSD64 (SACD) resolution = 2,822,400-Hz x 1-bit = 2,822,400-bits/s per channel
If we allow 16/44 Rebook to be the standard to which the other formats are compared, we can see how much higher resolution the other formats provide. For example, here's how SACD compares to Redbook:
2,822,400 / 705,600 = 4.000-times Higher Resolution than Redbook
Here's a table of how some of the other digital formats compare to 16/44 Redbook:
As can be seen from the table, DXD has a resolution that falls in-between the resolution of DSD128 and DSD256. It also shows that 24/176.4 and 24/192 PCM both have significantly higher resolution than standard SACD. I have a feeling that DSD512 might be overkill when you compare the additional memory required for storage. On the other hand, DXD might be the most efficient digital format from the standpoint of digital resolution relative to the amount of storage memory required.Anyway, I thought this type of comparison was rather interesting so I wanted to see what some of you other digital enthusiasts think about this concept.
Thanks!
John Elison
Edits: 09/02/20
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - Digital Resolution -- An Analysis - John Elison 17:21:46 09/02/20 (44)
- But what is "resolution" eh? - Head_Unit 23:42:01 01/12/21 (0)
- As for me... - E-Stat 10:09:53 09/07/20 (0)
- RE: Digital Resolution -- An Analysis - AbeCollins 09:45:12 09/05/20 (10)
- RE: Digital Resolution -- An Analysis - John Elison 10:42:08 09/05/20 (9)
- RE: Digital Resolution -- An Analysis - AbeCollins 11:23:00 09/05/20 (8)
- RE: Digital Resolution -- An Analysis - John Elison 13:39:42 09/05/20 (7)
- Now, if we understood the relationship between bit "density" and perceived sound quality. nt - G Squared 11:45:11 09/10/20 (3)
- RE: Now, if we understood the relationship between bit "density" and perceived sound quality. nt - flood2 17:42:45 09/10/20 (0)
- That might be different for everybody! /nt\ - John Elison 15:15:43 09/10/20 (1)
- Anyone with a working knowledge of Information Theory ... - flood2 17:45:21 09/10/20 (0)
- RE: Digital Resolution -- An Analysis - rivervalley817 14:18:39 09/05/20 (2)
- RE: Digital Resolution -- An Analysis - lmaletz@comcast.net 09:37:34 09/13/20 (0)
- Thanks for the link... - John Elison 16:13:39 09/05/20 (0)
- Or this, from HDTT Website: - oldmkvi 13:37:42 09/03/20 (23)
- That's all very well if you ignore the associated noise of DSD - Chris from Lafayette 18:45:14 09/03/20 (20)
- Yet why did you purchase a player that's capable of reproducing more noise that our Sony's can? : ) nt - jdaniel@jps.net 17:08:11 09/05/20 (4)
- Huh? You'll have to explain that one, jdaniel. [nt] - Chris from Lafayette 20:12:45 09/05/20 (3)
- Yours processes quad DSD, right? Our Sony's only 128. Nt - jdaniel@jps.net 11:21:05 09/06/20 (2)
- Yes - my DAC process DSD256 - so how does that produce more noise? [nt] - Chris from Lafayette 11:33:13 09/06/20 (1)
- Well, 2 X's the DSD.... Was just joke. Nt. - jdaniel@jps.net 15:16:12 09/06/20 (0)
- More resolution= more more information. When is inaudible noise really - oldmkvi 09:13:50 09/04/20 (4)
- Some of those high frequencies themselves are inaudible too! - Chris from Lafayette 10:17:33 09/04/20 (3)
- RE: Some of those high frequencies themselves are inaudible too! - John Elison 12:23:10 09/04/20 (2)
- "Do you like vinyl?" - No. Although I tolerate it occasionally. - Chris from Lafayette 16:25:26 09/04/20 (1)
- No one, especially me, says that is the Only reason. - oldmkvi 09:21:31 09/13/20 (0)
- RE: That's all very well if you ignore the associated noise of DSD - John Elison 19:32:09 09/03/20 (9)
- RE: That's all very well if you ignore the associated noise of DSD - zacster 20:30:10 09/03/20 (4)
- RE: That's all very well if you ignore the associated noise of DSD - John Elison 23:00:30 09/03/20 (3)
- RE: That's all very well if you ignore the associated noise of DSD - zacster 04:36:52 09/04/20 (2)
- RE: That's all very well if you ignore the associated noise of DSD - John Elison 12:45:03 09/04/20 (1)
- RE: $$ - LtMandella 16:21:24 01/18/21 (0)
- Hi, John - I've got the ability to play all those formats you mention [nt] ;-) - Chris from Lafayette 20:16:33 09/03/20 (3)
- Great! Me, too! - John Elison 22:52:49 09/03/20 (2)
- RE: Great! Me, too! - flood2 02:37:45 09/06/20 (0)
- RE: Great! Me, too! - Chris from Lafayette 00:52:42 09/04/20 (0)
- RE: Or this, from HDTT Website: - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 15:34:09 09/03/20 (0)
- RE: Or this, from HDTT Website: - John Elison 14:20:26 09/03/20 (0)
- RE: Digital Resolution -- An Analysis - Roseval 03:03:51 09/03/20 (6)
- RE: Digital Resolution -- An Analysis - John Elison 07:30:33 09/03/20 (2)
- RE: Digital Resolution -- An Analysis - Roseval 09:25:13 09/03/20 (1)
- RE: Digital Resolution -- An Analysis - John Elison 10:10:07 09/03/20 (0)
- DSD goes 0-100,000 hz. PCM? nt - oldmkvi 07:21:41 09/03/20 (1)
- The answer is on Roseval's chart [nt] - Chris from Lafayette 11:16:19 09/03/20 (0)
- +1 - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 04:11:36 09/03/20 (0)