Zp 24/96

colourful charts that demonstrate the better numbers
Ah, you may be thinking of the infamous 'stairstep' diagram showing how 44.1kHz sampling can surely yield only a crude approximation of the original band-limited analog waveform ... thereby at a stroke demonstrating that the reviewer hasn't even a basic understanding of digital audio.

Ah, you may be thinking of the infamous 'stairstep' diagram showing how 44.1kHz sampling can surely yield only a crude approximation of the original band-limited analog waveform ... thereby at a stroke demonstrating that the reviewer hasn't even a basic understanding of digital audio.
Or a basic understanding of how the human brain works either. The words I have heard used for that step effect is that the soul of the music resides between the 0s and 1s, and is lost in digital audio, which is therefore soulless. My response to this usually is to ask how come one is able to enjoy the video experience - it is just a rapid succession of still frames after all, not analog as in real life. Is real life also analog anyway - good old wave v particle thing there...
But I am also referring to the many other fancy charts for things like jitter, noise floor, distortion etc. where at the end of the day the question is if the improved performance of all these is now beyond the range of audible hearing, what difference does it make?

Or a basic understanding of how the human brain works either. The words I have heard used for that step effect is that the soul of the music resides between the 0s and 1s, and is lost in digital audio, which is therefore soulless.

You're still missing the point, the point about the "step effect" is that it doesn't exist at all, as digital audio simply does not create a stepped approximation waveform of the type often shown by those trying to show how much "better" 24-bit music must be. It's not that the effect is "inaudible", it's that it's complete and utter nonsense.

You're still missing the point, the point about the "step effect" is that it doesn't exist at all, as digital audio simply does not create a stepped approximation waveform
Quite possible, I am not an engineer. The way I conceptualise digital audio for myself is if that if there are enough 0s and 1s of information the resultant of these is seamless enough for my brain to not notice the gaps. Works for me, even while it may be wrong too.
PS: allow me a stab at it though - the speakers still need analog signals to work. The more the 0s and 1s, the more the information content and the closer the signal to the recorded analog sound, and therefore more hifi. Once past a certain amount of information, more fi doesn't matter, because it can't be audibly heard.
How about that?:-)

Quite possible, I am not an engineer. The way I conceptualise digital audio for myself is if that if there are enough 0s and 1s of information the resultant of these is seamless enough for my brain to not notice the gaps. Works for me, even while it may be wrong too.

Don't worry, this is a very common misconception. The point is that it's not only "seamless enough for your brain": It's absolutely (read: not 99,9999999999999%, but 100%) seamless.

It's absolutely (read: not 99,9999999999999%, but 100%) seamless.
Got it:). Does my PS above reflect it better?!

With so much noise on this thread, I am sure the OP won't mind this digression:
Can some one post a brief description of what a DAC does, at it simplest? I can see the video analogy is faulty, but it would be good to have it replaced by something else.

You could go here and watch Monty Montgomery's videos. He goes through material pretty quickly so you might need to pause/rewind/replay.

Got it:). Does my PS above reflect it better?!

NO! You're still thinking that there are gaps, there aren't! A 16-bit 44kHz audio file will PERFECTLY reproduce any analogue signal up to 22kHz, not very nearly perfectly, PERFECTLY!

THERE. ARE. NO. GAPS.

NO! You're still thinking that there are gaps, there aren't! A 16-bit 44kHz audio file will PERFECTLY reproduce any analogue signal up to 22kHz, not very nearly perfectly, PERFECTLY!

THERE. ARE. NO. GAPS.
Hmm, notwithstanding the shouting, I still have a question.
Quote:
Digital Filter - Fills in the Blanks

The digital filter is the computer algorithm that looks at the digital audio in the past, and the digital audio in the future and tries to figure out what was going on with the music, and tries to shape the final analog output to match as closely as possible that original waveform, now missing for ever.
Unquote
What I understand from this is that even the 16/44 file will have gaps that will have to filled in by the DAC to give a step less analog output, that matches as closely as possible the analog signal recorded, before it was digitised.
It follows from this that a 256kbps file will have more gaps and something will have to do the work of trying to figure out what these larger gaps are so that a step less analog signal can be produced.
It also follows that more content than a 16/44 file will have smaller gaps to be filled, but the result will still be an approximation of the original wave form.
I also understand that the approximation from the 16/44 information content is good enough to audibly sound the same as the original analog wave form.
Question: whats wrong with the above?