Speaking of bandwidth, did you now that the lower frequency limit of the CD medium is 0 Hz, that is DC?
This one has several likes. I happen to know that there's a free dspguide somewhere online, if I could only remember the URL ...
This is the definition in Wikipedia: "High-resolution audio (high-definition audio or HD audio) is a term for audio files with greater than 44.1 kHz sample rate or higher than 16-bit audio bit depth."
So e.g. 44.1kHz/24bit is high resolution just as 192kHz/16bit or DSD64.
Resolution for me is related to how many bits you use to encode a sample of the signal - indicated in bits (8bits, 16bits, 24bits etc).
Sampling rate is how many samples you take in a second (this is literal) - normally indicated in kHz (44.1kHz, 48kHz etc).
Each sample will be enconded by a certain number of bits.
Sampling rate will limit the highest frequency or bandwidth. E.g.: 44.1kHz limits the converted signal to 22kHz (half of sampling rate - Nyquist theorem).
Number of bits (resolution) will limit the signal-to-noise ratio or the dynamic range (difference between minimum and maximum level).
8bits (256 levels) will give 48dB S/N an 16bits (65536 levels) 96dB. (20*log10(levels))
And there are marketing definitions - anything can be anything!
Sampling rate is how many samples you take in a second (this is literal) - normally indicated in kHz (44.1kHz, 48kHz etc).
Each sample will be enconded by a certain number of bits.
Sampling rate will limit the highest frequency or bandwidth. E.g.: 44.1kHz limits the converted signal to 22kHz (half of sampling rate - Nyquist theorem).
Number of bits (resolution) will limit the signal-to-noise ratio or the dynamic range (difference between minimum and maximum level).
8bits (256 levels) will give 48dB S/N an 16bits (65536 levels) 96dB. (20*log10(levels))
And there are marketing definitions - anything can be anything!
Bet dollars to donuts he wouldn't read it ether way. Looks a lot like the OP has already been reading all the incorrect information available on audiophile websites. I mean, if you google, "does SACD sound better than CD" it will lead to a lot of dubious internet meme alternate facts. Same type of thing for hi-res versus CD.
OTOH, if you search for, "do most dacs accurately reproduce all the information encoded on a CD?" what you will probably get is a lot of arguments based on standard FFT measurements (which IME do not measure enough in the way of dynamic behavior, not enough in the way of correlated noise effects and related noise sidebands, and not enough in the way of sound stage cue reproduction accuracy). Unfortunately, standard measurements for those things do not seem to have been developed as of this point in time.
OTOH, if you search for, "do most dacs accurately reproduce all the information encoded on a CD?" what you will probably get is a lot of arguments based on standard FFT measurements (which IME do not measure enough in the way of dynamic behavior, not enough in the way of correlated noise effects and related noise sidebands, and not enough in the way of sound stage cue reproduction accuracy). Unfortunately, standard measurements for those things do not seem to have been developed as of this point in time.
Last edited:
The fact is that the "64" in DSD64 refers specifically to the Sample Rate. Which is 64 Times that of a standard CD.
It is true that most of the literature will tell you that SACD is a more detailed music experience but this question has mainly been answered by my Ears. Pretty much every SACD I own I also own the CD version and also the LP version to a lesser extent. There is no question but that the SACD version contains more detail and includes some detail that is just missing in the CD.
You are correct. I didn't explain why I want to convert my LPs to Digital format.
The fact is that I very rarely listen to the actual physical media anymore (Except for recently once delving into this project I have been listening a lot more to my LPs). I have a number of LPs that I either don't want to repurchase on another medium or it does not exist on another medium. I want to convert these to Digital so that I can listen to them with the rest of my music which is stored on my NAS in digital format of one type or another.
Regarding DSD64, it is based on 1-bit delta-sigma A/D which has some advantages such as a lower order DAC low pass filter.
It is a different process from the multibit (16bits) PCM used in Compact Disc A/D.
DSD64 can be better, but it doesn't mean 64x times better than CD since we are comparing different processes.
Marketing needs good numbers and new things every year so people can make choices here and there and buy new stuff all the time.
It is a different process from the multibit (16bits) PCM used in Compact Disc A/D.
DSD64 can be better, but it doesn't mean 64x times better than CD since we are comparing different processes.
Marketing needs good numbers and new things every year so people can make choices here and there and buy new stuff all the time.
JcTom , Unless you have your turntable and cartridge setup perfectly , CD is far superior to vinyl unless you like dull treble and muddy bass.
Getting the balance right is why carts and preamps can be so expensive.
Getting the balance right is why carts and preamps can be so expensive.
I just want the music accessible in as high a quality as I can derive from the vinyl since as previously mentioned I don't intend to pull the Vinyl out very often but still want to be able to listen to the music.
Dealt with this before and many (but not all) digital hires versions from master tapes turned out to be pretty well. The average better than DIY converted analog to digital stuff. The ADC and the analog setup being too error/imperfection/variable prone.
Not an expert but to me quite a few remastered versions sounded worse than the original versions again with exceptions.
Not an expert but to me quite a few remastered versions sounded worse than the original versions again with exceptions.
Last edited:
I wouldn't disagree with this. There is obviously more to digital music than the sample rate alone. And although I do believe that SACD in general sounds better than the same album on CD in general it is not "64" times better to my or probably anyone's ears.
I haven't noticed you mentioning what Deck / Tonearm / Cartridge / Pre etc. you plan to use to feed into the ADC. All the fussing over the digital encoding and playback side won't do diddly-squat unless you get the first step 'right'. Garbage in...
Probably true.
But the the albums that I have not already purchased on other medium and do not want to repurchase and for the ones that simply do not exist on another medium Converting them to Digital as best as I can is going to be better than not having them available within my existing music library that I listen to daily.
But it is not so important that I am going to spend thousands of dollars on a turntable or other equipment to get them there.