24/96 vs 24/192 DAC


What is the main purpose between these 2? Is it (24/192) for sacd/hdcd/dvd-a play back - better sampling rate? Please explain in plain terms, as I am a tech newbie. I was going to buy either an Arcam cd72 or a Jolida 100 but found out that they both are 24/96. So is it better to get something with 24/192 DAC since it is newer/better technology? Please help!!!!!!!
Thanks in advance
jeanluc07
thanks Rcprince. I am more confuse as ever. please correct me as I am a tech newbie:
redbook cds - regular cds as we call them, sample @ 96khz
sacd - superaudio cd, sample @ 192khz??? can only play in sacd player or universal player
dvd-a - dvd audio format sample @ 96khz??? can only play in dvd-a player or universal player
HDCD - ?????

Or are the cd formats and the upsampling rate are indepentent of each other????? thanks
redbook cd's - 16 bit, 44.1 khz
SACD - 1 bit, ~ 2.9 Mhz (can't remember sampling rate
exactly, dependent on frequency?)
DVD-A - varies, max 24 bit, 192 khz
HDCD - 20 bit, 44.1 khz?

All use PCM stream except SACD which is DSD
I'm really not the one to be giving technical information, but I'll give it a try here, and hope that someone with better information can correct me:

1. Redbook CD is the regular CD you buy at the store. I believe that the players you mentioned above are regular redbook CD players. A redbook CD has 16 bits of information sampled at 44.1 Khz stored on it. A redbook player with "upsampling" capability can add digital noise to come up with a 24 bit/96 or possibly 192 khz signal to be processed, but it really can't add any information to the CD's information (although I do think a properly implemented upsampler such as the dCS Purcell can make a CD SOUND better). But a CD player without upsampling capability will only give you a 16 bit/44.1khz signal from a CD. There may be a reason that a true 24-bit DAC might be better at decoding a regular CD than a 16-bit DAC, but I'm not aware of it.

2. SACD does not sample at 192khz, it's some ridiculously high number. You need an SACD player or a universal player to play the SACD layer of an SACD. I don't think either of the units you mentioned can read and play back the SACD layer of an SACD.

3. DVD-A is (and I'm generalizing and ignoring the various multichannel and other capabilities here) a pcm-based 24 bit/96 khz medium, which requires a DVD-A player or universal player to decode at this time (I think some DVD players can play them too, but I don't know if they can fully decode the 24/96 signal). There is also another 24/96 medium out there, the DAD (principally available from Classic Records and Chesky), which is DVD-video based and likely to be left by the wayside in the high-rez wars, can play on a regular DVD player (not a CD player, though) and can, if your DVD player has a digital output that can output a 24 bit/96khz signal, be played through an external DAC with 24/96 capability. I think, and someone please correct me, that DVD-A still has an encryption scheme in the software that prevents a 24/96 digital signal from being passed from a DVD-A player, so you can't currently use an external DAC to play a DVD-A disc.

4. HDCD is a 16 bit/44.1khz medium, with some special encrypted signal or something manipulation that does make a sonic difference from the standard redbook layer but requires a decoder in your CD player to reap all its benefits.

This is really basic, and pretty confusing. Bottom line is that if you buy a redbook CD player, you won't be able to play anything other than CDs in it; if it has 24 bit DACs in it and 96khz sampling capability, it can possibly sound better than a standard CD player, but you should check the archives under "upsampling" to get an idea of the controversy around that process.
DVD-A can be done at 24/192khz

Ive got several DVD-A discs, Metallica Black, BB King Riding with the King, Stone Temple Pilots, Doors La Woman, and a couple others. They all sound sweet, well, the Stone temple pilots sucks...

BB King and Metallica sound incredible, but they are only 24/96. Not all DVD's run with any particular sample rate, some are 24/96, some are 24/192, some sample like redbook.

the ONLY recordings I have that are done in 24/196 are a few of the songs on the DVD-A demo disk.

The difference between the 24/96 and 24/192 is barly audible in my opinion. That coould be a result of lack of material i own in the 24/196 rate, I suppose in time as with any new technology it might pay to go ahead and get one with the 196/24, as with new any hardware it always takes a while for the quality software to start pumpin out.
Worry more about the implementation than whether an audio component has a "specific" technology or not. I would not pass up a 24/96 or even a non-upsampling DAC just because it is not 24/192. Same thing with DAC chips. Who cares whether it uses Burr brown 1704k's or DSD1792's. If it sounds good enough, then that alone should be good enough. It's all about implementation.