16 Bit vs. 24 Bit CD Player

CDs are 16 bit encoded. There are some CDPs that may upsample (which is an interpolation). However, as far as I am concerned, there is no general agreement about the advantages of this procedure. For example, in my CDP, a Astin Trew AT 3500+, upsampling may be connected or not at will. Most of the time I choose the non-upsampling mode because it yields a more natural sound. See a review of this feature, e.g., here: http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/at3500_e.html
 
Agree with previous post in that Redbook is inherently 16 bits. And changing sample rate doesn't affect word size. It's just that most DAC chips produced today are 24 bit.

You will, however, hear differences among players for a host of reasons: transport, power supply, analog line stage, etc.
 
Kind've what I thought.... this came from my desire for purchase the TEAC CD player. I like the smaller size and look of it, but after glancing at the specs, I noticed the 16 bit DAC. As I was looking at most of the other CD players on the market, I noted the 24 bit DACs. The DAC in the TEAC is the Burr Brown PCM5142 which I have no idea whether it is good or not. However, on the Texas Instruments site it says that this DAC "Accepts 16-, 20-, 24-, And 32-Bit Audio Data." So that means it's not just a 16 bit DAC, it's just being used that way in the TEAC unit because it's a redbook player, correct? Also, I hear you on the other factors involved in the sound of the unit. I guess it's going to be hard to gauge that from spcs only...pretty much have to listen w your own ears.
 
This may be slightly off-topic, but what is the consensus on whether HDCD is noticeably better assuming you're using a HDCD-capable player? I have several HDCDs that I play on an Oppo DV-980H,which has HDCD capability. They sound great to me, but not any better than some regular CDs on the same player. Other regular CDs of course do not sound as good. I remember reading HDCDs died out because the same quality could be obtained by good mastering. Thanks for all replies.
 
So that means it's not just a 16 bit DAC, it's just being used that way in the TEAC unit because it's a redbook player, correct?
Apparently so. The unit does feature file based playing, but that too is limited to 16 bit content.
 
This may be slightly off-topic, but what is the consensus on whether HDCD is noticeably better assuming you're using a HDCD-capable player? I have several HDCDs that I play on an Oppo DV-980H,which has HDCD capability. They sound great to me, but not any better than some regular CDs on the same player. Other regular CDs of course do not sound as good. I remember reading HDCDs died out because the same quality could be obtained by good mastering. Thanks for all replies.
I think the mastering of the disc is a much more big deal than whether it's HDCD or even the Japan SHM-CD discs. They do sound good (sometimes anyway), but that's usually because the album has been remixed.
 
Last edited:
CDs are 16 bit encoded. There are some CDPs that may upsample (which is an interpolation). However, as far as I am concerned, there is no general agreement about the advantages of this procedure. For example, in my CDP, a Astin Trew AT 3500+, upsampling may be connected or not at will. Most of the time I choose the non-upsampling mode because it yields a more natural sound. See a review of this feature, e.g., here: http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/at3500_e.html
Man, what a cool machine! Interesting that it gives you the option of 16 bit or 24 bit and you typically choose the 16 bit. I guess that does suggest a difference in sound though right? Is it more smooth then? Of course, that's just that machine, can't extrapolate to ALL CD players....I think I'm going to give this little TEAC a try...really love the small profile and I think TEAC makes some fairly quality stuff for their Reference line.
 
Last edited:
It looks like a lovely little machine. All that technology in 2.1kg! Their similar sized gold coloured 'reference' gear from a while back was truly lovely gear, all in a small footprint- very well made and sounded great.
 
Hey john, thanks for the input. I'm excited to give it a go... :) Going to have me a nice little hi-fi mini system round these parts.
 
Hey folks...just got the TEAC PD-301 CD player this evening. After a few hours of listening I think that my Onkyo C7030 CD player sounds better than the TEAC overall. The TEAC has more resolution w the hi frequencies...you can hear some sounds that aren't as clear w the Onkyo. However, this comes at the expense of being ever so slightly bright (this may fade w time). The Onkyo has a better overall balance, significantly more bass, and a wider sound stage. The Onkyo is a much better CD player. That said, the TEAC fits nicely w my little teenie tiny Sony mini-system up in my bedroom. The increased resolution compared to the CD player that comes w the unit is much better. So...gonna keep both players. Onkyo as my main CD player in system in den downstairs and TEAC w my mini system in the bedroom. win - win... :) I think the Onkyo C7030 is by FAR the best sounding budget CD player around. The Yamaha CD-S300 player sounded horrible in comparison. I returned that to get the TEAC.
 
Have to say..the TEAC CD player sounds wonderful in my mini bedroom system. A huge improvement over the stock Sony CD player that I was using.
 
Agree with previous post in that Redbook is inherently 16 bits. And changing sample rate doesn't affect word size.

Yes it does, if the player is oversampling.
16 bits at 44.1kHz becomes 17 bits at 88.2kHz, and 18 bits at 176.4kHz.
Each time you double the sampling rate, the digital filter produces one extra bit of information in each word.
It does not exist in the original recording and is derived by interpolation.

Pretty much NO cd player since about 1983 has actually run its D/A converters at 44.1kHz/16 bit, they have ALL used oversampling in one form or another.

And a 16bit D/A converter does not place a limit of 16 bits on the resolution of the analogue output; with the intelligent use of DSP, you can get accurate higher word length conversion. Even in 1982 was this possible - Philips used 14 bit DACs to get an absolutely accurate 16bit resolution.
 
Last edited:
Not sure I 100% understand your point, but you sound like you know what you are talking about... :) Just curious to what you would attribute the difference in sound quality to in CD players. I agree that the Onkyo 7030 sounds full, slightly warm/dark, nice soundstage....the TEAC sounds good too, but is definitely brighter in tone w more detail, but a bit less bass response. The Yamaha budget CD player sounded horrible to my ears...all I could hear was the sibilant s sound on vocals. Is it the DAC? The outboard materials? Other?
 
My opinion & experience: The 'sound' a digital player (outside of any flaws in the storage medium or optical system, which would result in lost bits that require heavy use of the error correction and/or error concealment systems) is very much determined by the analogue stages that follow the D/A converter. That would be any I/V conversion stage if present, the analogue recovery filter, and any op-amp buffers or anaglogue level control circuits.
The reason for using oversampling is not that it gets better resolution, but because higher D/A conversion clocks allow the recovery filter (which is analogue) to have a much gentler slope, with less pass band rippple, and less phase distortion. Those things are more audible than differences in the D/A converter and its word length.

If the recovery filter is designed primarily for use at 176.4kHz with 4x oversampling (just for example), it will not be the optimum filter if you ONLY reduce the sampling rate down to 44.1kHz. I have no proof, but I don't think most D/A conversion blocks switch the recovery filter to account for different sampling rates.
 
"very much determined by the analogue stages that follow the D/A converter." I think that is right. Without being specific, it's the "other stuff" besides the DAC that alters sound quality to an extant. I asked, because oddly, I find the TEAC (w 16 bit DAC) to be more detailed than the Onkyo w the 24 bit DAC. Perhaps the Onkyo has a filter that smooths things out a bit more, while the TEAC is a straighter (more directly accurate) output. I actually prefer the sound of the Onkyo because it tames some of the bright CDs I have a bit.
 
Difference is about $1.

My 24 bit BAT sounds better than my 16 bit Philips CD-80, but bits aren't the only difference.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom