CD Sound Quality -- please help educate me

Continuing from initial post.....

I'm not going to guess what DAC is in my Sony but I'm pretty sure it's not 24bit/192KHz that seems ubiquitous in more current players.

I understand conceptually what 24bit would offer -- many more levels of sound information (frequency, volume, etc). And I understand the possible benefits of higher sampling rates.

But I hope you can help with some questions:

1) I have CDs that range from 1990 to now - not a lot as there is a big gap in the middle. But just some older and new CDs. How are CD's generally mastered? I have a Joe Pass CD that indicates it was re-mastered in 24 bit. That seems to imply that CD's are generally mastered with something less than 24 bits.

2) If CDs generally contain less than 24 bits, then how does a a newer CD player with 24 bit DAC help? Or does a newer player with 24 bit DACs only provide a benefit with CD's that contain 24 bits?

3) What sampling is usually used for CDs when mastering? 44KHz? 96KHz? 192KHz? If CD's are generally created using 44 or 96Hz, then does a player supporting 192KHz help? Does it interpolate between points? Or is 192KHz support only useful for CD's that were created using 192KHz sampling?

4) And the bottom line: practically speaking, for a non-musician like me who enjoys listening to music but perhaps has neither the expertise nor critical hearing as most of you, is the sound quality / experience between a current player with 24b/192KHz DAC noticeably and obviously better than my Sony? Or would it be relatively subtle, require concentrated listening, and likely be lost on me? This question probably should keep my system in context.

I'd love to be able to just go out and buy a respected, used unit (in the $200 ballpark; there seem to be a few options in the Classifieds) and see what happens but my budget mandates that I'd really need to justify it first.

So, any help educating me and setting expectations is appreciated.

LoL, me, an audiophile? Well, I do enjoy listening to music but I'd hardly consider myself an audiophile (yet) in the ranks of folks on this forum any more than playing Need for Speed makes me a race car driver. :) I just know a few buzzwords.

So, if I understand the comments thus far, it does help to buy a 'current' CD player, not necessarily for 24/192 but to minimize things like jitter and for higher quality electronics - better data paths not necessarily data manipulation.

So, just taking an conceptual example: both a Marantz CD5400 (16/44?) as well as a Cambridge 540C (24/192) would be better than my Sony because of newer electronics and design, regardless of bit depth and sampling rate. And these units may be comparable as well (same generation).

Thanks -- interesting idea. Sounds reasonable although I know nothing about DACs.

But.... taking a quick peek at the classified. Wow -- I think we're talking about different price leagues here. I'd really need to read why, for example, a $350 Cambridge dac magic unit is better than a Cambridge 540Cv2 at $225.

In any case, for know, I'm still trying to reconcile how music is recorded onto CDs and the DACs used in players -- there seems to be a mismatch -- CD's are 16/44 (or up to 24/44) while players are now 24/192?

From a practical standpoint, do I only need a well designed, good quality parts, 16/44 player? Is the design and parts (outside the DAC) more significant than the bit/rate of the DAC?

@bombaywalla -- much thanks for the synopsis. I'll need to read it more closely. But the quick gist I'm taking away is that the number of bits relates to a refinement of the original sound through noise (hopefully noise only, not actual sound - I don't understand how noise is relegated to the least sig bits) reduction and/or interpolation during playback.

The benefit of non-44KHz sampling rates in the player still eludes me unless it's related to the interpolation of points from the data on the CD. But even then, it seems it would not necessarily make the sound 'better' only perhaps slightly different. It's filling in the gaps between data points for what may already be a practically smooth curve.

Putting all this together, it seems like, to me, this is all a matter of subtle refinement intended to better replicate the original sound, not necessarily to make larger, obvious improvements.

My fault -- 'better' is a very subjective term. And thinking about it, and this may be very naive and will probably change over time as I learn more about audio, for now 'better' means to me that it noticeably more accurately replicates the experience of a live performance as though I sitting 10 feet from the stage, front and center (which probably means I need to imagine quite a bit if they are just mixing various studio tracks).

Leaving 'better' aside, while I perhaps see the theoretical benefit of 24/192 players, I'm still not sure if I'd be able to hear any difference between my Sony and a more modern player given my system and room.

Regarding the suggestion of buying a DAC instead of a whole unit, I have a bunch of questions swimming around. But perhaps it'll unfold if I can get help with a stupid, basic one.

Taking for example the Cambridge DAC Magic box and their 540/640Cv2: Is the design and components in the DAC much better than what is in whole CDP? Or is it basically the same thing less the transport and the laser unit? I don't really understand the DAC -- I get the usage where you connect it to a DVD player or a computer to get better audio. It's just not obvious to me why it's better to spend more to get the DAC over a 540/640Cv2. To add to this confusion, it seems that Cambridge highlights their transport for their units -- are transports significant in CD playback? If I went with a DAC, would my Sony be lacking as a transport?

I know, stupid questions, but much of this is very new to me.

"It's hard to say which brand & model will make that impact on you - you'll have to try many of them before you declare success for yourself. ANd, these units are not always cheap."

Given my constraints, perhaps ignorance is bliss in this case and I should just be happy with what I have. :)