This is a question from a ignorant who would like to understand how that works.
The CD player specs state
Compatible disc formats 2-channel Super Audio CD / CD
Transport outputs Format: JEITA CP-1201 compliant
from the digital processor
Digital inputs COAXIAL Format: JEITA CP-1201/AES-3 compliant
OPTICAL Format: JEITA CP-1201 compliant
Sampling frequencies
32 kHz, 44.1 kHz, 48 kHz, 88.2 kHz, 96 kHz
(16 to 24-bits, 2-channel PCM)
Now if I record with a digital recorder using 96 kHz / 24 bits and copy the track on a CD, there is no sound, although the CD player reads the disc. Strange it sees one track when there are actually two. Why is that ? I was under the assumption, the cd player would play the disc and the processor be able to convert the 96kHz / 24 bits.
The CD player specs state
Compatible disc formats 2-channel Super Audio CD / CD
Transport outputs Format: JEITA CP-1201 compliant
from the digital processor
Digital inputs COAXIAL Format: JEITA CP-1201/AES-3 compliant
OPTICAL Format: JEITA CP-1201 compliant
Sampling frequencies
32 kHz, 44.1 kHz, 48 kHz, 88.2 kHz, 96 kHz
(16 to 24-bits, 2-channel PCM)
Now if I record with a digital recorder using 96 kHz / 24 bits and copy the track on a CD, there is no sound, although the CD player reads the disc. Strange it sees one track when there are actually two. Why is that ? I was under the assumption, the cd player would play the disc and the processor be able to convert the 96kHz / 24 bits.
If you try to record to a CD in any format other than CD-DA, and CD-DA is 16/44, it will not play back correctly in a CD player. 24/96 would need a DAD or DVD-A capable player.
" ... if I record with a digital [tape or hard disc?] recorder using 96 kHz / 24 bits and copy the track on a [16bit format] CD, there is no sound ... it sees one track when there are actually two. Why is that ? I was under the assumption, the cd player would play the disc and the processor be able to convert the 96kHz / 24 bits. ..."
The problem is the DAD / DAC in your CD player. Try playing the disc on a 24bit DVD player with audio output hooked to your audio equipment. (The 96k bandwidth may still get truncated to 48k, but it should verify that your disc does or does not contain valid 24bit data "tracks".)
This is of accute interest to those of us who believe that all modern recording should now be done on 24bit systems. All modern professional studios use analog to digital converters that are 24 bit / 96k or better. It should stand to reason that all professional, audiophile or consumer playback equipment should be able to play back this higher quality 24bit data ... That's what Bob Dylan has recently been complaining about = "CD audio sucks."
The problem is the DAD / DAC in your CD player. Try playing the disc on a 24bit DVD player with audio output hooked to your audio equipment. (The 96k bandwidth may still get truncated to 48k, but it should verify that your disc does or does not contain valid 24bit data "tracks".)
This is of accute interest to those of us who believe that all modern recording should now be done on 24bit systems. All modern professional studios use analog to digital converters that are 24 bit / 96k or better. It should stand to reason that all professional, audiophile or consumer playback equipment should be able to play back this higher quality 24bit data ... That's what Bob Dylan has recently been complaining about = "CD audio sucks."
although the lower the quality the better for Bob Dylan especially on older recordings. I prefer not to have perfect reproduction of his annoying squawk 😀
FastEddy said:
No it isn't. The dac couldn't care less about the source. CD players, by and large, play CD's formatted as CD-DA, a format limited to 16/44.
Nicola said:
In order to play back 24/96 files you would have to either record a DVD-Video as an audio only disc, AKA DAD, or record a DVD-A disc. Either way you would need the appropriate software.
" ... In order to play back 24/96 files you would have to either record a DVD-Video ... or record a DVD-A disc. Either way you would need the appropriate software. ..." ... and of course the appropriate playback device.
" ... The dac couldn't care less about the source. ..." Oh contrair' ... If the CD player has a 16bit (only) DAC, it is certainly possible that it can't do anything with a 24 bit data stream ... Certain very modern CD players have a DAC that can handle it ... but not all and not very many older players. Simple test: burn a 24bit wav file on a CD (it will use up a whole lot of space) and play it back on a CD (only) player ... 😱
"CD audio [still] sucks ..." - Bob Dylan
" ... The dac couldn't care less about the source. ..." Oh contrair' ... If the CD player has a 16bit (only) DAC, it is certainly possible that it can't do anything with a 24 bit data stream ... Certain very modern CD players have a DAC that can handle it ... but not all and not very many older players. Simple test: burn a 24bit wav file on a CD (it will use up a whole lot of space) and play it back on a CD (only) player ... 😱
"CD audio [still] sucks ..." - Bob Dylan
FastEddy said:"
This is of accute interest to those of us who believe that all modern recording should now be done on 24bit systems. All modern professional studios use analog to digital converters that are 24 bit / 96k or better. It should stand to reason that all professional, audiophile or consumer playback equipment should be able to play back this higher quality 24bit data ... That's what Bob Dylan has recently been complaining about = "CD audio sucks."
I think it's a case of misinterpretation.What Bob Dylan meant was
ever since mastering studios have been pushing up the loudness
level in a mistaken belief that the louder the album the better it sounds and therefore more saleble or successful,the competiton between the studios actually have taken a step back in quality.
Increasing the amplitude/loudness kill the dynamics or contrast between soft and loud parts that make the music interesting.Try listening to techno.
FastEddy said:
Even the dire TDA1543 will play back when faced with 24bit audio. It simple ignores the last 8 bits. That a .wav file will not play back on a CD only player has nothing to do with the dac. It won't play back for the same reason a .pdf or .zip file will not play back. They are not CD-DA compliant.
Offtopic: CD audio quality has more to do with the way the final mastering is done, check releases from Telarc, MFSL, some DCD's, XRCDs or other 'audiophile' labels. I don't claim that 44.1/16 is enough, but most records do not even reach 12bit resolution due to poor mastering.
" ... What Bob Dylan meant was ever since mastering studios have been pushing up the loudness level in a mistaken belief that the louder the album the better it sounds and therefore more saleble or successful,the competiton between the studios actually have taken a step back in quality. ..."
Yes ... and the basic reason these stupid "engineers" crank up the loudness curve and the compression is what he was talking about ... the result is that this overly compressed, boosted output to 16bit digital disc makes almost all consumer grade CDs suck.
He was and still is refering to the fact that "his" producer (Jack Frost aka B. Dylan) put out perfectly acceptable digital studio masters of 24bit/96k or better quality, only to have the publishers compress the whole Modern Times album down to 16bit/44k for the production consumer CDs = that suck. Sony, the originators of 24bit SACD, should know better. But because of infighting between the US based Sony greedhead distributors and other major producers and the stupidity of the suits involved, the resulting production is so hosed up as to almost unrecognizable as the studio work ... almost as if they did it deliberately in order to make their SACD and DVD video products look good by trashing the consumer CDs.
Yes ... and the basic reason these stupid "engineers" crank up the loudness curve and the compression is what he was talking about ... the result is that this overly compressed, boosted output to 16bit digital disc makes almost all consumer grade CDs suck.
He was and still is refering to the fact that "his" producer (Jack Frost aka B. Dylan) put out perfectly acceptable digital studio masters of 24bit/96k or better quality, only to have the publishers compress the whole Modern Times album down to 16bit/44k for the production consumer CDs = that suck. Sony, the originators of 24bit SACD, should know better. But because of infighting between the US based Sony greedhead distributors and other major producers and the stupidity of the suits involved, the resulting production is so hosed up as to almost unrecognizable as the studio work ... almost as if they did it deliberately in order to make their SACD and DVD video products look good by trashing the consumer CDs.
44kHz / 16bits & CD standards
Thanks to every body. So basically what that means is that on a audio CD there is only 44kHz / 16bits full stop possible - regardless the DAC behing ? So when company write on the cover 96khz / 24 bits this relates to the recording which then was downgraded to 44khz / 16 bits for the Audio CD ? I have a 96khz / 24bits live audio recording done with a digital recorder and i thought it would be possible to burn a cda file on CD (using NERO) but that was only illusion. I'm only left with the choice to downgrade the quality to a 44/16 in oder to put it on a Audio CD ? I thought using a 96khz / 24bits DAC behind the pickup would do, but.....
By the way the comment on the Dylan... well most of people seem to get along with MP3 quality... so the engineer end up recording music like a lightshow, with plenty of flashy & boomy stuff. Even on SACD you get CD with weird recording where engineers seems to like to put plenty of gadget with not much respect for the music. Quite ironic, some recordingsby RCA 50 - 60 years ago sound better.....
Thanks to every body. So basically what that means is that on a audio CD there is only 44kHz / 16bits full stop possible - regardless the DAC behing ? So when company write on the cover 96khz / 24 bits this relates to the recording which then was downgraded to 44khz / 16 bits for the Audio CD ? I have a 96khz / 24bits live audio recording done with a digital recorder and i thought it would be possible to burn a cda file on CD (using NERO) but that was only illusion. I'm only left with the choice to downgrade the quality to a 44/16 in oder to put it on a Audio CD ? I thought using a 96khz / 24bits DAC behind the pickup would do, but.....
By the way the comment on the Dylan... well most of people seem to get along with MP3 quality... so the engineer end up recording music like a lightshow, with plenty of flashy & boomy stuff. Even on SACD you get CD with weird recording where engineers seems to like to put plenty of gadget with not much respect for the music. Quite ironic, some recordingsby RCA 50 - 60 years ago sound better.....
" ... So basically what that means is that on a audio CD there is only 44kHz / 16bits full stop possible - regardless the DAC behing ? ..."
Yes, basically (if you ignore "Super" Audio CD / SACD).
" ... So when company write on the cover 96khz / 24 bits this relates to the recording which then was downgraded to 44khz / 16 bits for the Audio CD ? ..."
I have not seen this, the "downgrade" as I believe it would not fool anyone into believing that 16bit CDs are the same as 24bit DVD-A, etc.
" ... I have a 96khz / 24bits live audio recording done with a digital recorder and i thought it would be possible to burn a cda file on CD (using NERO) but that was only illusion. ..."
If you want to keep the dynamic range of the 24bit master, then you will have no real choice except to burn a DVD (audio) disc ... or somehow cram a few tracks onto several CDs. ("True" 24 bit/96k files should be quite large, 8 minutes >> 250 to 500 megabytes or even more.)
" ... I'm only left with the choice to downgrade the quality to a 44/16 in oder to put it on a Audio CD ? ..."
Choice above = "All CDs suck" - Bob Dylan. Alternate choice = burn several CD discs and search for a CD player that will handle the playback ... or burn a DVD-A disc and play it on your DVD player, dealing with the built in DAC or DAD / SPDIF "losses". ... or find a DVD player with a decent 24bit audio DAC (like http://oppodigital.com/dv981hd/dv981hd_index.html ... I have one and I love it, but the power supply could use a little DIY modification.)
Yes, basically (if you ignore "Super" Audio CD / SACD).
" ... So when company write on the cover 96khz / 24 bits this relates to the recording which then was downgraded to 44khz / 16 bits for the Audio CD ? ..."
I have not seen this, the "downgrade" as I believe it would not fool anyone into believing that 16bit CDs are the same as 24bit DVD-A, etc.
" ... I have a 96khz / 24bits live audio recording done with a digital recorder and i thought it would be possible to burn a cda file on CD (using NERO) but that was only illusion. ..."
If you want to keep the dynamic range of the 24bit master, then you will have no real choice except to burn a DVD (audio) disc ... or somehow cram a few tracks onto several CDs. ("True" 24 bit/96k files should be quite large, 8 minutes >> 250 to 500 megabytes or even more.)
" ... I'm only left with the choice to downgrade the quality to a 44/16 in oder to put it on a Audio CD ? ..."
Choice above = "All CDs suck" - Bob Dylan. Alternate choice = burn several CD discs and search for a CD player that will handle the playback ... or burn a DVD-A disc and play it on your DVD player, dealing with the built in DAC or DAD / SPDIF "losses". ... or find a DVD player with a decent 24bit audio DAC (like http://oppodigital.com/dv981hd/dv981hd_index.html ... I have one and I love it, but the power supply could use a little DIY modification.)
"or burn a DVD-A disc and play it on your DVD player, dealing with the built in DAC or DAD / SPDIF "losses"."
I am in progress of archiving my LPs to DVD.
I record in 96k/24b on a Tascam DV-RA1000. Then into the PC for declicking (manual!), minor equalisation, and a Craven B-type slow-rolloff anti-alias filter.
Then I burn to DVD-V. There are two or three very cheap programs for this, and they work. I could burn to DVD-A too (I have DiscWelder), but DVD-V makes more sense as there are more players supporting it, today as well as tomorrow.
There are DVD-V players from Denon, Pioneer, and others that output a 96k/24b stream over their SPDIFs when the concent is not encrypted.
For playback I use a Denon DVD-2930. Its analogue output quality is on a par with my CD player, an extensively modded Rega Planet.
I am in progress of archiving my LPs to DVD.
I record in 96k/24b on a Tascam DV-RA1000. Then into the PC for declicking (manual!), minor equalisation, and a Craven B-type slow-rolloff anti-alias filter.
Then I burn to DVD-V. There are two or three very cheap programs for this, and they work. I could burn to DVD-A too (I have DiscWelder), but DVD-V makes more sense as there are more players supporting it, today as well as tomorrow.
There are DVD-V players from Denon, Pioneer, and others that output a 96k/24b stream over their SPDIFs when the concent is not encrypted.
For playback I use a Denon DVD-2930. Its analogue output quality is on a par with my CD player, an extensively modded Rega Planet.
" ... I record in 96k/24b on a Tascam DV-RA1000. Then into the PC for declicking (manual!), minor equalisation, and a Craven B-type slow-rolloff anti-alias filter. ... burn to DVD-V. [or] ... burn to DVD-A ... DVD-V makes more sense as there are more players supporting it, today as well as tomorrow. ... There are DVD-V players from Denon, Pioneer, and others that output a 96k/24b ... over their SPDIFs when the concent is not encrypted."
Paraphrasing above for simplification of this absolutely spot on info about making high quality digital disc recordings.
I would really like to hear some of your output to DVD-V.
The Tascam equipment is some of the best and is found in a few "garage band" studios as well as a goodly number of quality pro studios ... http://www.tascam.com/Products/dvra1000.html ... and ... http://www.tascam.com/Products/dvra1000hd.html ... = high quality pieces and this latest version(s) do multi-channel 24bit / 192k in and out as well:
(2) XLR balanced analog line inputs
(2) RCA unbalanced analog line inputs
(2) XLR balanced analog line outputs
(2) RCA unbalanced analog line outputs
(2) Stereo AES/EBU digital inputs on XLR balanced jacks
Stereo S/PDIF digital input on coaxial connector
(2) Stereo AES/EBU digital outputs on XLR balanced jacks
Stereo S/PDIF digital output on coaxial connector
(2) SDIF 3/DSD RAW inputs on BNC jacks
(2) SDIF 3/DSD RAW outputs on BNC jacks
USB 2.0 interface for connection to PC
RS-232 connector for device control
BNC Word Sync Input and Out/Thru with auto termination
Wired RC-RA1000 remote input ...
Reference manual: http://www.tascam.com/Products/DV-RA1000/DV-RA1000_QR_ForWeb.pdf
Of interest: Tascam is owned by TEAC Corp.
(I personally can't tell the difference 'teen 96k and 192k = very old ears. When it comes to making the best masters possible to steer clear of the "garbage in, garbage out" question, most of the pro studios now consider the 192k as a benchmark = bigger files, but we've all got huge hard drives now ... I may write a book.)
Mercenary announcement: my company is not a dealer for Tascam equipment, but I think we should be ...
Paraphrasing above for simplification of this absolutely spot on info about making high quality digital disc recordings.
I would really like to hear some of your output to DVD-V.
The Tascam equipment is some of the best and is found in a few "garage band" studios as well as a goodly number of quality pro studios ... http://www.tascam.com/Products/dvra1000.html ... and ... http://www.tascam.com/Products/dvra1000hd.html ... = high quality pieces and this latest version(s) do multi-channel 24bit / 192k in and out as well:
(2) XLR balanced analog line inputs
(2) RCA unbalanced analog line inputs
(2) XLR balanced analog line outputs
(2) RCA unbalanced analog line outputs
(2) Stereo AES/EBU digital inputs on XLR balanced jacks
Stereo S/PDIF digital input on coaxial connector
(2) Stereo AES/EBU digital outputs on XLR balanced jacks
Stereo S/PDIF digital output on coaxial connector
(2) SDIF 3/DSD RAW inputs on BNC jacks
(2) SDIF 3/DSD RAW outputs on BNC jacks
USB 2.0 interface for connection to PC
RS-232 connector for device control
BNC Word Sync Input and Out/Thru with auto termination
Wired RC-RA1000 remote input ...
Reference manual: http://www.tascam.com/Products/DV-RA1000/DV-RA1000_QR_ForWeb.pdf
Of interest: Tascam is owned by TEAC Corp.
(I personally can't tell the difference 'teen 96k and 192k = very old ears. When it comes to making the best masters possible to steer clear of the "garbage in, garbage out" question, most of the pro studios now consider the 192k as a benchmark = bigger files, but we've all got huge hard drives now ... I may write a book.)
Mercenary announcement: my company is not a dealer for Tascam equipment, but I think we should be ...
44kHz / 16bits & CD standards
ok thanks that is now very clear thanks to your explanations.
Small additonal question.
Does the CD standard support only 44khz / 16bits or does it allows 44khz / 24bits ?
I understand that CD will not support 96khz / 24bits, here the move is to go towards the DVD/A or DVD/V player and set it to 196kHz / 24 bits. By the way I read the TASCAM doc, very interesting. They allow either DVD or SACD, which one you deem is more adequate ?
ok thanks that is now very clear thanks to your explanations.
Small additonal question.
Does the CD standard support only 44khz / 16bits or does it allows 44khz / 24bits ?
I understand that CD will not support 96khz / 24bits, here the move is to go towards the DVD/A or DVD/V player and set it to 196kHz / 24 bits. By the way I read the TASCAM doc, very interesting. They allow either DVD or SACD, which one you deem is more adequate ?
" ... Does the CD standard support only 44khz / 16bits or does it allows 44khz / 24bits ? ..."
The "standard" CD scenario is most often squeezed down to 16bit/44k by digital to digital conversion from modern studio recording methodology, either analog or digital, which is usually mastered at 24bit/48k, 88.5k, 96k or 192k or on high quality analog multi-track tape ... This conversion is a computer math function accomplished by processors doing the job processors do best = pushing data into registers (RAM), making comparisons, triming down the data packet size and pushing the result into storage on hard drives or optical drives (CDs, etc.) = data frame conversion.
It is quite possible to make 24bit/32k, 44k, 48k, 88.5k, 96k or 192k files and transfer any of these to the common CD formats (~ 650+ megabytes of storage) ... the storage space available remains the same on CD, so these larger files of 24bit data can get so big that the CD may only have room for a few minutes of music. (There are also CD video scenarios, but not of decent resolution to be useful, practical or marketable, IMOP.) The difficulties for us is that there are very few CD players that will handle the 24bit type of CD format = very few CDs with DACs able to make the conversion back to listenable audio (or video). (CD space = 650+ megabytes. DVD-A space =~ 6 GigaBytes. DVD-A file space ~= 10 times CD file space. DVD-A headroom =~ +10 db greater than CD.)
..... Ranting along ....
It is this digital compression to CD format(s) that leaves audiophiles in the cold = reduced headroom = reduced dynamic range . The process of conversion for high resolution audio to 16bit/44k often requires lots of engineering manipulation (compression, both digital and analog) in order to come close to what the original material was meant to sound like and squeeze it onto the CD storage space ... the results being a poorer quality reproduction of the original, In My Opinion and the opinions of many others including many musicians, engineers and audiophiles. ("All CDs suck." - Bob Dylan.)
....
The actual comparisons are best done with the reproducable, dynamic headroom in expressed in decibes.
Analog Vinyl = can be greater than +100 db bandwidth with special equipment (some claim more).
Analog FM Stereo Radio = up to 100K Hertz per channel (limited by the FCC) in as much as +85 db bandwidth.
Analog Magnetic Tape = can be greater than +90 db per channel (some claim more).
"standard" CD = can be greater than +85 db bandwidth.
DVD-video (audio tracks) = can be greater than +90db = usually 24bit/48k.
SACD = can be greater than +100 db = player dependant.
DVD-A = can be greater than +110 db = 24bit/96k or 192k = player dependant. (Some claim a little more: http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24.htm )
"the hush of a pine forest" = +3 db to +10 db above 0 db.
"the hush of a crowded auditorium" = +20 db to +25 db. (sometimes used as the baseline for recording live performances.)
"from a stack of Marshals", measured from the front row, center = +90 db to +100 db.
full throttle F-16 w/ afterburner from 100 meters = +125 db.
inside of a destructive tornado = +125 db to +140 db or more.
threshold of pain = usually considered to be +125 db to 130 db.
These statements are not absolutes ... there is a wide range of opinions in all catagories above. Suffice to say that a gain of +3 db is considered to be twice the previous sound pressure level and the human ear can easily detect this difference.
The main point: CDs = ~ 85 db headroom / bandwidth ... DVD-A = ~ 100 db or more headroom / bandwidth. So DVD-A has the potential of being more than + 15 db better headroom / bandwidth than CDs.
....
"Decibels (dB)... As a measure of sound intensity [sound pressure level], a zero-decibel reference is stipulated to be the lowest level audible to the human ear; the speaking voice of most people ranges from +45 to +75 decibels. ... " from: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/decibels
Always question authority ...
The "standard" CD scenario is most often squeezed down to 16bit/44k by digital to digital conversion from modern studio recording methodology, either analog or digital, which is usually mastered at 24bit/48k, 88.5k, 96k or 192k or on high quality analog multi-track tape ... This conversion is a computer math function accomplished by processors doing the job processors do best = pushing data into registers (RAM), making comparisons, triming down the data packet size and pushing the result into storage on hard drives or optical drives (CDs, etc.) = data frame conversion.
It is quite possible to make 24bit/32k, 44k, 48k, 88.5k, 96k or 192k files and transfer any of these to the common CD formats (~ 650+ megabytes of storage) ... the storage space available remains the same on CD, so these larger files of 24bit data can get so big that the CD may only have room for a few minutes of music. (There are also CD video scenarios, but not of decent resolution to be useful, practical or marketable, IMOP.) The difficulties for us is that there are very few CD players that will handle the 24bit type of CD format = very few CDs with DACs able to make the conversion back to listenable audio (or video). (CD space = 650+ megabytes. DVD-A space =~ 6 GigaBytes. DVD-A file space ~= 10 times CD file space. DVD-A headroom =~ +10 db greater than CD.)
..... Ranting along ....
It is this digital compression to CD format(s) that leaves audiophiles in the cold = reduced headroom = reduced dynamic range . The process of conversion for high resolution audio to 16bit/44k often requires lots of engineering manipulation (compression, both digital and analog) in order to come close to what the original material was meant to sound like and squeeze it onto the CD storage space ... the results being a poorer quality reproduction of the original, In My Opinion and the opinions of many others including many musicians, engineers and audiophiles. ("All CDs suck." - Bob Dylan.)
....
The actual comparisons are best done with the reproducable, dynamic headroom in expressed in decibes.
Analog Vinyl = can be greater than +100 db bandwidth with special equipment (some claim more).
Analog FM Stereo Radio = up to 100K Hertz per channel (limited by the FCC) in as much as +85 db bandwidth.
Analog Magnetic Tape = can be greater than +90 db per channel (some claim more).
"standard" CD = can be greater than +85 db bandwidth.
DVD-video (audio tracks) = can be greater than +90db = usually 24bit/48k.
SACD = can be greater than +100 db = player dependant.
DVD-A = can be greater than +110 db = 24bit/96k or 192k = player dependant. (Some claim a little more: http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24.htm )
"the hush of a pine forest" = +3 db to +10 db above 0 db.
"the hush of a crowded auditorium" = +20 db to +25 db. (sometimes used as the baseline for recording live performances.)
"from a stack of Marshals", measured from the front row, center = +90 db to +100 db.
full throttle F-16 w/ afterburner from 100 meters = +125 db.
inside of a destructive tornado = +125 db to +140 db or more.
threshold of pain = usually considered to be +125 db to 130 db.
These statements are not absolutes ... there is a wide range of opinions in all catagories above. Suffice to say that a gain of +3 db is considered to be twice the previous sound pressure level and the human ear can easily detect this difference.
The main point: CDs = ~ 85 db headroom / bandwidth ... DVD-A = ~ 100 db or more headroom / bandwidth. So DVD-A has the potential of being more than + 15 db better headroom / bandwidth than CDs.
....
"Decibels (dB)... As a measure of sound intensity [sound pressure level], a zero-decibel reference is stipulated to be the lowest level audible to the human ear; the speaking voice of most people ranges from +45 to +75 decibels. ... " from: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/decibels
Always question authority ...
FastEddy said:
Dither and truncate in the analogue domain, that, I would like to see.
Well, its CD, Jim but not as we know it. With a standard CD player, i.e. one that does not read MP3 or .wav files, you only have one format, CD-DA and its limit is 16/44. For anything else one would have to format the disk as a CD data disk and dedicated CD audio players will not read data disks, irrespective of the sample rate or audio file format. Talk of 24 bit dacs is a red herring.
All the didactic drivel aside, it is very simple. If you want to play an audio disk in the bulk of CD players past or present, the disk has to be CD-DA. And CD-DA is limited to 16/44.
" ... With a standard CD player, i.e. one that does not read MP3 or .wav files, you only have one format, CD-DA and its limit is 16/44. For anything else one would have to format the disk as a CD data disk and dedicated CD audio players will not read data disks, irrespective of the sample rate or audio file format. Talk of 24 bit dacs is a red herring. ..."
When considering the replacement of drive mechanizms ONLY ... the cost of a replacement CD player mechanizm capable of reading MP3 (.wav or other files at higher than 44k resolution) and the cost of replacement with a DVD player mechanizm capable of playing DVD-A and CD/MP3, etc. ... it is just about a wash = equal in costs. Even including the transport control and a decent 24bit DAC to go with it ... it is still almost the same, cost wise.
One should not hesitate to chose the better DVD mechanizm as it can and will playback all CD formats worth considering as well as the DVD video and DVD-A audio ... I would submit that this is no red herring at all.
FYI: My wife's uncle is dumping all of his classical CDs into my lap ... hoping I can find a way to "up convert" 'em to DVD-A quality ... Sad to say this would require way too much of my time verses any preceived reward or improvement.
IMOP: save your CDs for your car playback ... check out the lower cost "universal" players for your home system ... 😱
(I have several DVD-A players that I have discontinued using ... if any one wants one for comparison, please advise ... but you can't have my Oppo '981 = SACD / DVD-A / NTSC / PAL / upvert to 1080p video 😎 )
When considering the replacement of drive mechanizms ONLY ... the cost of a replacement CD player mechanizm capable of reading MP3 (.wav or other files at higher than 44k resolution) and the cost of replacement with a DVD player mechanizm capable of playing DVD-A and CD/MP3, etc. ... it is just about a wash = equal in costs. Even including the transport control and a decent 24bit DAC to go with it ... it is still almost the same, cost wise.
One should not hesitate to chose the better DVD mechanizm as it can and will playback all CD formats worth considering as well as the DVD video and DVD-A audio ... I would submit that this is no red herring at all.
FYI: My wife's uncle is dumping all of his classical CDs into my lap ... hoping I can find a way to "up convert" 'em to DVD-A quality ... Sad to say this would require way too much of my time verses any preceived reward or improvement.
IMOP: save your CDs for your car playback ... check out the lower cost "universal" players for your home system ... 😱
(I have several DVD-A players that I have discontinued using ... if any one wants one for comparison, please advise ... but you can't have my Oppo '981 = SACD / DVD-A / NTSC / PAL / upvert to 1080p video 😎 )
- Status
- Not open for further replies.