2. digital
  3. 1104507003

Is 24/192 all hype?

Sorry for the flamethrower-bait thread title, but I wanted to get people's attention. I have a couple of threads going in the HT forum about trying to integrate a HT capability into a two channel system, and there's a bit that needs to go here.

I have a Marantz DV8400 that I'm using as my source (maybe to be replaced with either a 9500 or Onkyo SP1000 soon). Now it has the DACs and DD / DTS capabilities - even decent BM - to kind of question the need for anything but a multichannel analog preamp. Here's the BUT: but if I already have a HT prepro that has only 20 bit DACs and ADCs and no MC analog bypass, do I really lose audio quality (assuming the quality of the prepro converters is better than the 8400) by running the analog of the 8400 into the prepro? If I run a DVD-A or SACD in this mode do I really "lose" something?
tonyptony
10 responses Add your response
sean
6,231 posts
 
Philnyc's comments about a 75 ohm standard are correct, but believe me, very few digital components actually adhere to that standard. This is why different cables sound and perform different i.e. the digital interconnect acts as an impedance transformer between the actual input and output impedances of these components. Sean
>
philnyc
162 posts
 
Lneilb,

Digital coax/SPDIF is spec'd to be 75ohms between the transport and DAC. So you need to make sure that your digital coax cable is truly 75ohms....
audioengr
3,282 posts
 
Sean and BigKids hit the nail on the head. It's not the chips so much as the implementation. It's the board layout, the power supply, what type of parts were used etc...
bluebull
269 posts
 
Bigkidz
DAC more important than Transport ? No , I do not agree.
Chris
bigkidz
3,381 posts
 
Sean is spot on here. Good sound from digital is mostly in how the design is implemented. I have found that transports are less important then a good dac and digital cable.

Happy Listening.
tonyptony OP
617 posts
 
Thanks for that, Sean. It is as I suspected, but it's good to hear from another person.
lneilb's avatar
lneilb
108 posts
 
"On top of that, you now have to worry about impedance matching between the transport and the DAC. "

Sean, what is the rule of thumb for impedance matching between transport and DAC?
I've never considered this. Only thought it was an issua with analog signal.....
sean
6,231 posts
 
Whichever DAC's have the widest bandwidth with the least phase shift will "probably" sound better. The problem here is that many "one box" players ( models not designed to be used as "transport only" ) suffer from higher jitter out of their digital out's. On top of that, you now have to worry about impedance matching between the transport and the DAC. There is no "set in stone" answer on this one. Sean
>
tonyptony OP
617 posts
 
So, Sean, "in theory" would a prepro / preamp / whatever we need to call it that had bandwidth capabiltiy beyond 20 KHz, doing a good job on the other factors you mention, be a better interface for a fully featured unidisk player than an equivalent interface whose bandwidth did not go beyond 20 KHz? (assume the player is not a piece of junk)
sean
6,231 posts
 
Most gear barely passes 16 bits of resolution in terms of the noise floor, so don't think that "bits" are all that important. What is more important is the bandwidth and how the filtering is implimented. The wider the bandwidth with the least amount of phase shift, the better the device will sound. This is true whether the device is 16, 20 or 24 bit. Sean
>
Log in to respond
More to discover
80x80
Sonnet Digital Audio Pasithea
80x80
Meitner Audio MA3
80x80
Denafrips Pontus-15