Zp 24/96

There are no gaps. There are no steps. The digital samples represent the input waveform at that instant. At any other time the level is in fact undefined. Have a look at the second video at the link I posted.

Oh, and a 256kbps file is that size because of lossy compression, which is a whole different ball game. It's still based on 16-bit and (usually) 44.1kHz sampling.

There are no gaps. There are no steps. The digital samples represent the input waveform at that instant. At any other time the level is in fact undefined.

Have a look at the second video at the link I posted.
I tried. Apple Safari is not supported.
The quote was from this:
http://www.msbtech.com/support/How_DACs_Work.php

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?

What's wrong? Pretty much everything (which goes to show either how widespread this misconception is even amongst professionals, or how far they go in order to trick their customers into buying snake oil).

If shouting doesn't work, maybe frequent repetition will help to get the point across: There. Are. No. Gaps. A recording sampled with 16/44 will contain everything there was in the analog waveform below 22 kHZ with the same absolute, mathematically unerring preciseness. There will be not the faintest amount of approximativeness. It's not that the difference isn't audible - it does not exist. At all.

Everything you might gain by using a higher sample rate is that higher frequencies will be captured. Your ears are not able to hear them, in the same way that you can't see x-rays with your eyes. On the downside, this can in some cases actually lead to a lower sound quality, as most audio gear wasn't designed to handle these higher frequencies.

To sum it up: If you're lucky, there will be no difference. In any case, you won't gain anything, but your chances of running into other problems are high.

Ceterum censeo: There are no gaps.

PS: Audio compression (as in "256kbps") has nothing to do with that. With any lossy compression method (mp3 etc.), information will be lost. The dichotomies here are i) lossy vs. lossless compression (audible differences can occur, lossy may sound worse) and ii) 16/44 vs. 24/192 (theoretically no audible differences occur, though practically 24/192 may sound worse).

Oh, and a 256kbps file is that size because of lossy compression, which is a whole different ball game. It's still based on 16-bit and (usually) 44.1kHz sampling.
Ok, but the question here is:
Is the way the 256kbps file is handled done differently by different DACs or is this in the codec that did the compression and every DAC will handle it the same way while using the information to produce the step less wave form?

Ok, but the question here is:
Is the way the 256kbps file is handled done differently by different DACs or is this in the codec that did the compression and every DAC will handle it the same way while using the information to produce the step less wave form?

Decompression is done by the codec. For the DAC, it doesn't make a difference.

Decompression is done by the codec. For the DAC, it doesn't make a difference.
Ok, thanks everyone.
I did look up Nyquist on the net, but the minute I saw the math that looked suspiciously like Calculus, I realised I am never going to understand it.
Time now to listen to some very high quality music from my recent 256kbps I tunes purchases and clear my mind:).

Time now to listen to some very high quality music from my recent 256kbps I tunes purchases and clear my mind:).

That's the spirit! 😉 Enjoy it!

The quote was from this:
http://www.msbtech.com/support/How_DACs_Work.php
I also found:
we know that there is data missing between each sample, and that the original level may have been a little more or less than the level recorded (quantization error). This is where the science ends and the art begins as we try to guess what the errors were and what is missing between the blanks

I'm sorry, I stopped reading at that point and searched in vain for the words 'dither' and 'Nyquist' on the page.

Not unrelated, I'm sure, is the fact that this is all to help sell a $7k DAC....

I also found:
we know that there is data missing between each sample, and that the original level may have been a little more or less than the level recorded (quantization error). This is where the science ends and the art begins as we try to guess what the errors were and what is missing between the blanks

I'm sorry, I stopped reading at that point and searched in vain for the word 'Nyquist' on the page.

Not unrelated, I'm sure, is the fact that this is all to help sell a $7k DAC....

Articles like that should be the target of lawsuits. I'm dead serious. It is the very definition of consumer fraud.

That's the spirit! 😉 Enjoy it!
Indeed. It has been a good day. To quote Rumsfeld, I have progressed in this area from an unknown unknown to a known unknown.

Not unrelated, I'm sure, is the fact that this is all to help sell a $7k DAC....
Ahh..you cynic! I didn't even get to that part of the page:).
Articles like that should be the target of lawsuits. I'm dead serious. It is the very definition of consumer fraud.
🙂. In which case in addition to digital snake oil salesmen, the lawyers will also get on the train.