32-bit capable DACs, Split from: "WASAPI plug-in version 3.0 beta" (94907) Options

[SoNic67]

I don't know why people obsess about 32 bit "support" when their device manufacturer clearly states that that format is not supported. The DAC chips included on Xonar soundcards are regular 24 bit chips...
IMO, 32 bit is a worthless waste of space, all the '32 bit capable' DAC chips existent today have actual resolution less than 24 bit. Their catalog data is equal or even less than the top-of-the-line 24 bit DAC.
It's just shamless marketing and amazingly, enough people bite the bait.
The new beta plug-in (ver 2) works fine on E-MU 1820 w/ Win7 x64 and foobar ver 1.1.12 beta 6.

This post has been edited by SoNic67: May 26 2012, 01:04

[SoNic67]

32bit DACs make sense for designers since they do not have to care about bit decimation from 32 to 24 (i.e. most PCI sound interfaces support 32bit DMA samples only, yet they have to output 24bits on their I2S lines to codecs.

Padding zeroes is the default DMA mechanism. Why store those zeroes on HDD? You don't have to worry about 32 bit decimation - unless you are a recording studio with 32 bit ADC. Let me know what mixing console has that ADC's...

Maybe someone wants 32bit output to their DAC. It's hardly just "shamless marketing" and a "worthless waste of space". Maybe I misunderstood what SoNic67's post was trying to convey.

Let me try it one more time
For real audio resolution, the number to look for is the THD+N. That includes the noise and distortions on output (both are not part of original music). Most of the top DAC's are in the -105...-110dB range here. Some manufacturers use % to hide it, for example a THD+N of 0.0003% means -110dB.
The best performing 32 bit DAC on market is ESS Sabre 9012/9018. Listed by manufacturer with a THD+N of -120dB.

Now... a 22 bit audio signal represents a range of 132dB. Or in (%) will be 0.000024%. If your DAC doesn't have at least those numbers for THD+N, then it cannot reproduce the 22 bit correctly. Even the above Sabre32 doesn't "touch" those 22 bit...
Everything more than that is just noise and distortion added to the musical signal and sold as "32 bit magik". Wasted storage space and bandwidth.
Most of the PC soundcards don't even rise to 18 bit level of true analog quality.
24 bit was adopted because is a round number of 8 bit packets, not because it adds something to the final quality above 22 bit mark...

This post has been edited by SoNic67: May 26 2012, 19:34

[IgorC]

For real audio resolution, the number to look for is the THD+N.

Can You defend this statement with some additional information?

Then why include Dynamic Range into specification? Just go for THD+N, right?

This post has been edited by IgorC: May 26 2012, 20:11

[SoNic67]

For real audio resolution, the number to look for is the THD+N.

Can You defend this statement with some additional information?

Then why include Dynamic Range into specification? Just go for THD+N, right?

The final product is the music. Whatever is not music should be cosidered as altering the original signal. Therefore, for real resolution, you need to look at THD+N numbers. S/N is just the "N" part of that sum. Unless you really like the specific distortions... case for many tube-lovers.
Anyway I am saying that the physically limit of the human hearing is around 21-22 dB. Even the thermal noise of the air molecules in a 25C room is at that level. There is absolutelly no point for more than 24 bit (at 96kHz) reproduction of audio signals destined to be heard by humans.

DR, as is defined, is kind of a marketing tool. Is the SNR measured at -60dB of the full scale and at the value obtained, add 60dB. Well, that tells how good is the system at low level reproduction, but the distortions are really creeping up at higher levels, close to 0dB. Is was a desperate attmpt to hide the glitching distortion in early multibit DAC's. Not usefull today when all the DAC's have a zero-detection circuit that mutes the output when "zero" PCM code is detected.

This post has been edited by SoNic67: May 26 2012, 23:58