Hmmm... What is it with dither?...and the bit sacrificed on the altar of dithering...
More distortion, noise, and or aliasing = more resolution?...the filter can not ever ADD resolution, a filter can only take away...
Last edited:
@JcTcom
Very good!
It is a great learning experience, and it can be very fun and rewarding.
@Markw4
Dithering can have a point for certain recordings in 16bit if you want to target low level resolution and don't care about peaks, it does have a cost.
For 24bit it has no real value.
Dithering can be a bit like tube amps, fun to play with and a good learning experience, noise, not worth it if you want a pure signal.
Very good!
It is a great learning experience, and it can be very fun and rewarding.
@Markw4
Dithering can have a point for certain recordings in 16bit if you want to target low level resolution and don't care about peaks, it does have a cost.
For 24bit it has no real value.
Dithering can be a bit like tube amps, fun to play with and a good learning experience, noise, not worth it if you want a pure signal.
Last edited:
I hope you have good vacuum record cleaning machine, its a must. Otherwise you will be digitizing pop and crackle. Does not matter what sampling rate and bit depth.I have no doubt this is absolutely true. However unlike the majority of my music which I have purchased multiple times on Vinyl, CD, DVD-A, SACD, Blu-Ray Audio etc. etc... These particular albums I am not willing to repurchase and / or they are simply not available in any other format. Therefore I am going to try to convert them over as discussed and see how it goes.
@KaffiMann
I was recently given some 16-bit recordings of a Russian orchestra which were intended to be very pristine. No processing at all. However, I was listening on a high resolution 24-bit DSD dac through electrostatic transducers. The low level sound was gritty/fuzzy sounding. I assume the lack of processing included a lack of dither. Thus I heard very clear and unpleasant quantizing distortion.
Anyway, nowadays things are different. There are very good adaptive noise-shaped dithers that are practically inaudible. For final mastering to 16-bits seems to me it makes no sense not to use them.
Also, I edited my last post to ask about filtering. IIUC one point of using reconstruction filtering is to avoid aliasing distortion, an ugly type of non-harmonic distortion. Again, seems to me failing to filter in the name of increased "resolution" is hard to make sense out of when aliasing effects are considered. Similar type of thing for the need to filter out of band noise. No?
I was recently given some 16-bit recordings of a Russian orchestra which were intended to be very pristine. No processing at all. However, I was listening on a high resolution 24-bit DSD dac through electrostatic transducers. The low level sound was gritty/fuzzy sounding. I assume the lack of processing included a lack of dither. Thus I heard very clear and unpleasant quantizing distortion.
Anyway, nowadays things are different. There are very good adaptive noise-shaped dithers that are practically inaudible. For final mastering to 16-bits seems to me it makes no sense not to use them.
Also, I edited my last post to ask about filtering. IIUC one point of using reconstruction filtering is to avoid aliasing distortion, an ugly type of non-harmonic distortion. Again, seems to me failing to filter in the name of increased "resolution" is hard to make sense out of when aliasing effects are considered. Similar type of thing for the need to filter out of band noise. No?
Hah! People add distortion all the time intentionally as well, so I guess it is possible to view noise and distortion as valuable and desirable parts of the experience.More distortion, noise, and or aliasing = more resolution?
Regarding dither, like I said, for 16 bit recordings it can have a point when you want to target low level resolution.
I guess you can do like some others and embrace the noise and enjoy it as part of the experience. Might not be as easy to like as 2nd and 3rd order harmonics though...
The way you prase it regarding the record you might have found some other issues with it if it was dithered.
Edit:
You do know that producers are using plugins to intentionally add wow and flutter to modern recordings now?
Last edited:
I'm waiting for the "Hot Producer" plugin, or did I read about that in the Mixerman Chronicles?
Sure. I have listened to a lot of plugins over the years. Most of them I will skip.You do know that producers are using plugins to intentionally add wow and flutter to modern recordings now?
Just received my "Spin-Clean" record washer yesterday (https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B002UKSZUU?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title). I watched and read a tonne of reviews on record cleaning. The ones that compared Various types of cleaners including vacuum, and a $4k one that was supersonic or something could find no difference between the Spin-Clean or something like it & those crazy priced ones. Of course the ones that only reviewed the Ultra-sonic and the Vacuum ones at $1500 to $4000 or more touted that as the way to go (Of course with affiliate links in their review).I hope you have good vacuum record cleaning machine, its a must. Otherwise you will be digitizing pop and crackle. Does not matter what sampling rate and bit depth.
So given the budget I have set for this the Spin-Clean will have to do. Most of my LPs in any case are pretty pristine with very little crackling etc... (Other than some of the ones I have purchased from used record stores and garage sales so the Spin-Clean will get put to the test).
Dithering can have a point for certain recordings in 16bit if you want to target low level resolution and don't care about peaks, it does have a cost.
For 24bit it has no real value.
Dithering can be a bit like tube amps, fun to play with and a good learning experience, noise, not worth it if you want a pure signal.
Dithering is to quantization what anti-alias filtering is to sampling, even the mathematics behind it are similar. Use fine enough quantization and the noise in the audio signal may be large enough to get away without dithering, use a large enough sample rate and the spectrum of the signal may have dropped enough to get away without anti-alias filtering. In either case, I wouldn't want to rely on that, though.
Last edited:
As you don't really know if dither was used that is all speculation. That music mixes instruments with very different dynamic range (timpanis, harpsichord) so low level details may partly be messed up. Also the music itself is supposed to sound harsh and gritty.I was recently given some 16-bit recordings of a Russian orchestra which were intended to be very pristine. No processing at all. However, I was listening on a high resolution 24-bit DSD dac through electrostatic transducers. The low level sound was gritty/fuzzy sounding. I assume the lack of processing included a lack of dither. Thus I heard very clear and unpleasant quantizing distortion.
- Home
- Member Areas
- The Lounge
- First Post - Please stop confusing Frequency Range with Bandwith (Signed up for this)