> These are cheap, relatively fast, and not particularly good. While they sport impressive-sounding 12- and 16-bit readouts, the effective number of bits (ENOB) is usually around 8 or 9.
The edge case of the 1-bit conversion scheme used in SACD format is compelling from a few perspectives. The idea is to run the sampling rate in the megahertz region. SACD achieves 120dB of dynamic range with an extended frequency response up to ~100kHz. CD audio only achieves 96dB of range up to 20kHz with its 16-bit PCM scheme. From the analog hardware complexity standpoint, a bitstream converter is much simpler than a multi-bit converter. The 16-bit ADC might be cheaper due to the insane manufacturing volumes.
Trading bit depth for sample rate is a very compelling offer in many cases. The 3d graphics version of this is SSAA where you sample more pixels than your monitor needs in order to resolve higher frequency information.
The edge case of the 1-bit conversion scheme used in SACD format is compelling from a few perspectives. The idea is to run the sampling rate in the megahertz region. SACD achieves 120dB of dynamic range with an extended frequency response up to ~100kHz. CD audio only achieves 96dB of range up to 20kHz with its 16-bit PCM scheme. From the analog hardware complexity standpoint, a bitstream converter is much simpler than a multi-bit converter. The 16-bit ADC might be cheaper due to the insane manufacturing volumes.
Trading bit depth for sample rate is a very compelling offer in many cases. The 3d graphics version of this is SSAA where you sample more pixels than your monitor needs in order to resolve higher frequency information.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1-bit_DAC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Stream_Digital