[BarbecueGamer]

That may be a stupid question, but I'm a little confused with the whole 24-bit/96kHz capability. Does that have nothing to do with bitrate of the music? Just a little unsure. I want to get something that I can use on my PC and play FLAC music. 

 

[PurpleAngel]

  That may be a stupid question, but I'm a little confused with the whole 24-bit/96kHz capability. Does that have nothing to do with bitrate of the music? Just a little unsure. I want to get something that I can use on my PC and play FLAC music. 

 
Music audio CDs are recorded in 16-bit/44.1K, so a FLAC made from a CD only needs to be 16-bit/44.1K.
So if your DAC can do up to 24-bit/96K, I can't see an issue.
 
You can buy FLACs that are greater then 16-bit/44.1K, but I'm guessing you currently have no plans on buying those kind of FLACs.

 

[BarbecueGamer]

   
Music audio CDs are recorded in 16-bit/44.1K, so a FLAC made from a CD only needs to be 16-bit/44.1K.
So if your DAC can do up to 24-bit/96K, I can't see an issue.
 
You can buy FLACs that are greater then 16-bit/44.1K, but I'm guessing you currently have no plans on buying those kind of FLACs.

What about 16/44.1 to 24/96, including 24/88.2? Because that's what the Schiit Fulla supports. So can I play all 320kbps MP3's? And what about if I buy CDs for my computer? 

 

[billybob_jcv]

It's the difference between *encoding*, *compression* and *format*. As was mentioned above, a Redbook audio CD is *encoded* at 16 bits and 44.1 KHz. That describes how the original recording was encoded into the digital CD format. You must have a DAC capable of decoding the encoded digital bitstream. A 16 bit, 44.1 KHz bitstream needs a DAC capable of accepting that digital bitstream. If you have a DAC capable of accepting higher resolution encodings, you can only take advantage of that capability if you send the DAC a bitstream encoded at a higher resolution, like 24 bit, 96 KHz. Sending a Redbook encoded bitstream (16 bit, 44.1 KHz) into a DAC capable of higher resolution really does nothing - It's still a 16/44.1KHz encoded bitstream.

FLAC and MP3 are simply formats for storing and compressing digital audio. FLAC is lossless compression with a variable bit rate. MP3 is lossy compression with either a constant or a variable bit rate. This bit rate is referring to the *compression*, not the encoding. The DAC doesn't see the format or the compression - this is handled by the playback software. The playback software reads the compressed file format (FLAC, MP3, AAC, ALAC, WAV, etc) and creates the bitstream that is sent to the DAC. The DAC decodes the encoded bitstream and creates an analog audio signal.

 

[BarbecueGamer]

It's the difference between *encoding*, *compression* and *format*. As was mentioned above, a Redbook audio CD is *encoded* at 16 bits and 44.1 KHz. That describes how the original recording was encoded into the digital CD format. You must have a DAC capable of decoding the encoded digital bitstream. A 16 bit, 44.1 KHz bitstream needs a DAC capable of accepting that digital bitstream. If you have a DAC capable of accepting higher resolution encodings, you can only take advantage of that capability if you send the DAC a bitstream encoded at a higher resolution, like 24 bit, 96 KHz. Sending a Redbook encoded bitstream (16 bit, 44.1 KHz) into a DAC capable of higher resolution really does nothing - It's still a 16/441.KHz encoded bitstream.

FLAC and MP3 are simply formats for storing and compressing digital audio. FLAC is lossless compression with a variable bit rate. MP3 is lossy compression with either a constant or a variable bit rate. This bit rate is referring to the *compression*, not the encoding. The DAC doesn't see the format or the compression - this is handled by the playback software. The playback software reads the compressed file format (FLAC, MP3, AAC, ALAC, WAV, etc) and creates the bitstream that is sent to the DAC. The DAC decodes the encoded bitstream and creates an analog audio signal.

 
Please excuse my ignorance, but are you saying I need a particular program on PC? "The DAC doesn't see the format or the compression - this is handled by the playback software. The playback software reads the compressed file format (FLAC, MP3, AAC, ALAC, WAV, etc) and creates the bitstream that is sent to the DAC." If so, what program? All I need to know is if I can use CD's and play FLAC music with this device. 
 
Thank you so much for that detailed answer! That was very informative. I tried my best to retain as much information as I could. I really appreciate it. 

 

[billybob_jcv]

Yes, if you want to play FLAC files on your PC, then you need to use playback software that is capable of reading a FLAC file. For example, neither iTunes nor Windows Media Player can playback FLAC files. Luckily there are many good and free programs that can, like VLC, MediaMonkey, Foobar, etc.

All three of the DACs you listed can play CDs and FLAC. The DAC just needs to be attached to a USB port, it really doesn't care what format the file is in as long as the PC sees the DAC as the default audio device, and you use playback SW that can read CDs and FLACs and send its output to the Windows default audio device.

It might help if you describe your entire system, all the components, and what you are really trying to do.

 

[BarbecueGamer]

Yes, if you want to play FLAC files on your PC, then you need to use playback software that is capable of reading a FLAC file. For example, neither iTunes nor Windows Media Player can playback FLAC files. Luckily there are many good and free programs that can, like VLC, MediaMonkey, Foobar, etc.

All three of the DACs you listed can play CDs and FLAC. The DAC just needs to be attached to a USB port, it really doesn't care what format the file is in as long as the PC sees the DAC as the default audio device, and you use playback SW that can read CDs and FLACs and send its output to the Windows default audio device.

It might help if you describe your entire system, all the components, and what you are really trying to do.

Here's my entire system specs- AMD FX-6300 CPU, GTX 670 GPU, 8GB Corsair Vengeance RAM, GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD3 Motherboard, 1TB Western Digital Hard Drive, Corsair 500W power supply, NZXT S340 case. Things plugged into my PC are a pair of Logitech desktop speakers, a LG Mic, computer mouse, and my modem.
 
What I'm really trying to do is just get something to replace my bad sounding on-board audio for my headphones. The device I had in mind to do that was the Schiit Fulla. And I just wanted to make sure that I could listen to my CD's and FLAC files no problem. 

 

[jjcha]

  What I'm really trying to do is just get something to replace my bad sounding on-board audio for my headphones. The device I had in mind to do that was the Schiit Fulla. And I just wanted to make sure that I could listen to my CD's and FLAC files no problem. 

 
The simple answer is that all the products you mentioned will do what you want to do.  Period.  Just buy one and you'll be just fine.
 
You are running normal audio CDs and 320kbps mp3s.  I think it's a pretty safe assumption that you are not running Hi-Rez FLAC files.  Until you start buying/downloading Hi-Rez music formats, don't worry about any of the stuff you're worrying about.  You really can't accidentally buy/download Hi-Rez music formats as they cost more and are like double/triple the size of regular files.
 
And, BTW, all the stuff you're talking about can handle Hi-Rez FLAC files, the only question is how high-resolution they can go.
 
To literally answer your original question, one, overly simplified way you can think about it this way:
 
320kbps mp3 = 320kbps, which is why it's called a 320kbps mp3
 
16/44.1, which is a standard audio CD and your normal resolution FLAC files = ~1000kbps
 
High resolution formats go even higher:
 
24/44.1 is ~1750 kbps
24/96 is ~3000 kbps
24/192 is ~5000-6000 kbps
 
It's not exactly the right way to think about it, but I hope this is helpful in converting the bit rate/sample concept (e.g., 16 bit/44.1khz sample rate) into kbps. 

 

[billybob_jcv]

If you can listen to FLAC & CDs now, then you will also be able to listen to them when you plug-in the Fulla. It will work fine.

 

[BarbecueGamer]

Thanks everyone for all the great help! I really appreciate it. You've been very useful to me. 

 

[BarbecueGamer]

Really quick, I wanted to ask you. Is it possible for a DAC/Amp such as the Schiit Fulla make my headphones sound worse? Most of the reviews from people say it's great or pretty solid for the price. But I'm hearing a lot of people say that it's soundstage is upfront and very claustrophobic. So does this mean my NAD Viso HP50, which have a very good soundstage, will worsen with this DAC/Amp? 

 

[BarbecueGamer]

  Thanks everyone for all the great help! I really appreciate it. You've been very useful to me. 

Also, is the NuForce uDAC2 a good one? Like I said, I'm just looking for something to replace my bad sounding on-board audio, because I notice some hissing and distortion when listening to my HP50 on my PC. But I'm also looking for something that doesn't try to colorize the sound on headphones. 

 

[PurpleAngel]

  Really quick, I wanted to ask you. Is it possible for a DAC/Amp such as the Schiit Fulla make my headphones sound worse? Most of the reviews from people say it's great or pretty solid for the price. But I'm hearing a lot of people say that it's sound stage is upfront and very claustrophobic. So does this mean my NAD Viso HP50, which have a very good sound stage, will worsen with this DAC/Amp? 

 
I would be really surprised if the Schiit Fulla did not make your music audio sound better, over on-board.
As it's DAC (Digital to Analog Converter) chip, the AKM AK4396, should be better then anything built into a motherboard.
And the Fulla's built in headphone amplifier should easy match or better, whatever is built into your motherboard.
And as the Fulla is external, it will not be effected by any electrical noise generated inside the computer case, and on-board audio is inside the computer case.

 

[GearMe]

I would be really surprised if the Schiit Fulla did not make your music audio sound better, over on-board.
As it's DAC (Digital to Analog Converter) chip, the AKM AK4396, should be better then anything built into a motherboard.
And the Fulla's built in headphone amplifier should easy match or better, whatever is built into your motherboard.
And as the Fulla is external, it will not be effected by any electrical noise generated inside the computer case, and on-board audio is inside the computer case.

+1

When I moved from my laptop's headphone out to a Fiio E10, there was a very noticeable difference. I'm actually looking at those products as well (and also the E10K) for a work PC...all good products from what I can tell. Just need to decide whether I want to spend $80 or $150.

 

[billybob_jcv]

One yahoo writes a review, and suddenly there's a belief that a $79 dac/amp sounds "claustrophobic" :rolleyes:
http://www.metal-fi.com/schiit-fulla-vs-geek-out/

I call BS.