AVS Forum banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,888 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by stamina1914  /t/1467656/can-someone-explain-this-to-me-as-if-im-a-2-year-old#post_23187063


What does 192 MHZ 24bit mean. It is advertised on the top my pio receiver. Is there a better ratio out there? If so, should I want it?

It should be 192 kHz, not MHz. Nonetheless, here's a pointer for you to get started. May not be written for a 2 year old, but a 3-4 year old at least! Just kidding!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,399 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by hakstone  /t/1467656/can-someone-explain-this-to-me-as-if-im-a-2-year-old#post_23187091


Don't be so lazy, do some research.

He did some research. He posted his question here!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,299 Posts
For a 2-year-old.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,857 Posts
No need to be so hard or sarcastic to the OP. If everybody bothers to search Google, read wiki and product manuals >90% of forum postings just wouldn't be necessary!



The short answer is, pretty all audio equipment has 24/192 DACs. Japanese mass market products like to put these specs and logos on the front for marketing, to impress the ordinary folk. 24-bit gives 144dB dynamic range, 192kHz sample rate gives 96kHz audio, more than sufficient.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,321 Posts
And as a two year old, he still may be able to hear something better than 44.1 kHz, 16-bit CD audio. For the rest of us, your ears are so warn out with live rock concerts, headphone MP3's, internal combustion engines without mufflers, and power tools that by the age of 18 normal CD resolution is much better than you will ever hear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,587 Posts
Just to elaborate on a couple of digital basics


The sample rate (192KHz) controls the highest frequency that the digital system can "see" and encode. The theory and practice say that if you have 2 samples per cycle, you can accurately represent the frequency. At 192 KHz, then, the system could encode up to 96 KHz sounds. The standard, seminormal expression of human hearing extends to 20 KHz, so the 192 KHz system can encode a little over two octaves that humans will never hear.


As a corrolary, if you feed a digital encoding system a signal with higher frequency than it can handle (say 25 KHz into a 44.2 KHz analog-to-digital converter), ugliness happens, because the system never sees the "whole" 25 KHz wave. It will ineterpret what it can see and spit out some likely completely unrelated lower frequency that's fairly sure to be within the human hearing range, and very likely to be dissonant. So they have to filter out the frequencies that are higher than the digital system can handle before the signal gets to the analog-to-digital converter. It is often said that in early digital, that "brickwall" filter actually was a major source of less-than-pristine sound. Generally much better now.


The bit depth (16, 24 or 32 bits) controls the (digital") dynamic range - - the difference between the loudest and the quietest sound the system can encode. As indicated above deeper bit depth can exceed 100 dB dynamic range. But most of the analog steps that follow conversion the digital to audio have, at the very best, around 100 dB or so of dynamic range above their noise floors. So arguably the extra dynamic range is "wasted" because our systems can't reproduce the quiet end of the scale (assumming they can reproduce the loud end without distortion, compression etc (especially from teh speakers).
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top