I'd imagine it's even harder when there is a doubt as to what is meant by ""equality"" and ""difference"".
Your "obsession" with "emphasis quotes" is more noisome than reading it as Jakob emphasizing his point. Agree or disagree with what he has to say, he's actually quite clear, so maybe read it rather than auto-reply "FUD"?
Electroj--downsampling during mastering is a fact of life, and very very few high res tracks are better than their 16/44 equivalents. This doesn't require much of a leap of faith does it?
You can (or at least I can) let your subconscious take control in a state of dissociation. Interpretation is bit tricky but that’s the fun part.
In a nutshell.....this is what I’m talking about ^
Trying to explain it is an effort in futility.......but I believe (down there in my subconscious!) that it’s important enough to dig deeper and i applaud those who are.
Wow, in the world of home audio (supposedly fun hobby), you are now delving into a state of dissociation.
Wow, in the world of home audio (supposedly fun hobby), you are now delving into induced trance state.not as in the ptsd one might get from your constant barrage of negativity, but more a induced trance state.
Wait, take that back. It is believable that you are following (induced) the directions of audio business sales pitch which explains your fondness of Jakob(#).
I forgot to mention that I came across Ozymandias
when I was 13 or so, always have taken it to heart.
DPH, I am familiar with mastering process and best practices of releasing material for different media and, that was _exactly_ the reason why I asked for examples. Otherwise your claim that 'hi-res music has tons of noise shaped dither' is just an unsubstantiated one.
I'm so confused why this is controversial to anyone but Richard, who thinks he's actually getting any value from he tracks? Are you taking exception with the shaped noise part or the dithering along the way as intermediate tracks get flattened? I know there's some arguments about flat vs noise shaping there, but anyone who doesn't dither tracks along the way will have huge truncation spikes! Well, unless the inherent noise in the track is high enough to act as its own dither. It would be impossible to see in a final spectrum as the final down sample will dominate.
An example, albeit one of yet another upsampled "hd track"
Are New HD Downloads Really Hi-Res Music? | Real HD-Audio
Do you mean the problem with a difference that seems to exist in reality, as in uncertain?
Yes, that reality is the problem for me.
THx-RNMarsh
Not following anything.....my findings just happen to align with his.
There’s more going on here than meets the ear.
Some people are wound so tight I suppose its impossible for them to understand.
Bob, some people could not hear some difference quite obvious to you, others do not care. There simply is not enough reason for them to understand. Some will not even look that the FR showed a 10 dB difference at 80 Hz and demand proof of your ability to hear that sort of difference. Even one in the recording business. I really don't know why these guys are here. I'm beginning to question the discerning capability of the general populace.
Last edited:
If there is dithering needed prior to final CD production, recording engineers are warned not to use noise shaped dither as it may sound bad if any post processing is then used.
Of course, if music is constructed from samples, the whatever dither previously applied to them would still exist.
What a pile of .. nonsense.
'Spike is probablly (yes, with two L's) analog tape bias'.
Right. Bias. At 40kHz. In this day and age. Does the author understands what he sees in his analyzer window?
The article is probabLLy™just another clickbait.
Now, DPH, this is how agressively noise shaped dithered 44/16 material upsampled to 96/24 would look like. (That's an excerpt from very quiet passage). Got any similar examples from Hi-Rez material you were talking about?
Attachments
Some people are unwound so loosely that they let their guards down against the marketing vultures.Not following anything.....my findings just happen to align with his.
There’s more going on here than meets the ear.
Some people are wound so tight I suppose its impossible for them to understand.
Sounds like you aren't enthralled with this forum. If I'm not enthralled with a forum, I would look elsewhere because there are many others with varying characters.
Originally Posted by Jakob2
So, the ideal dither/noise shaping process would completely decorrelate the quantizer noise from the audio signal and further remove more of the noise from the midrange and everything done without any audible deterioration.
In reality it seems to be different, as we know that some kind of noise modulation (not totally indepent from the signal content) occurs.
Me too, imo different noise shapings and ditherings each cause signatures in the overall sound.
Yes, that reality is the problem for me.
I have experimented with different ditherings when down scaling from 24bit to 16bit and found all shapes to be distinctly audible and although no dither sounded 'rougher' it also sounded more 'honest/white' and the ear learns to ignore the resolution limit and the directly correlated noise.
IME not so with noise shaping......it's putting a dynamic tone control and dynamic timing control on the nature of the quantisation noise and this is what I found audible since decades past in the likes of Panasonic's MASH and the Sony/Yamaha/Pioneer etc equivalents which each had a 'house sound'.....some of these propriety noise shapings were impressive sounding at first but eventually the 'magician's tricks' are revealed and the 'artificial' sound can get tiresome.
Noise shaping can subjectively improve clarity/resolution in the subjectively more critical areas but this in itself presents to the ear as an oddity, and the ear also picks up that the noise floor is not constant in the manner that base level intrinsic tape noise and vinyl surface noise are pretty much 'constant' in level and 'nature'.
IOW the noise shaping caused 'dancing noise floor' although way down in level wrt tape/vinyl systems is still audible and it strongly drives system 'signature' and over quite a subjective range and according to the nature of the noise shaping.
In this past experience down scaling without dither was my preference because although 'dirt' is introduced it is straight honest clean dirt that 'belongs' and doesn't sound out of place and my finding was very much that white/flat dither just adds a micro low level fine 'tape hiss' that sort of masks the problem but doesn't actually fix the problem, other noise shapes tweaked the nature of this 'hiss' and caused other audible artifacts each with their own signature.
Nowadays we all listen to a whole range of DAC output stages daily and they are all different....laptop, phone, BT speakers, TV etc,....and then there is an Ebay ES9023 board converting from laptop to my main system....some I prefer, some I don't.
Dan.
Last edited:
Rather inaccurate presumption. I question those behavior because it is perfectly plausible the disruptive act is directed against the forum. His disregard of technical data, display of anti social posts, repeatedly quote long passages and disruptive remarks seems designed such that other members would feel uncomfortable and leave the forum. Does not deter me, such behavior would generate enough red flags for mods to act on anyway.
Last edited:
Rather inaccurate interpretation of events taken place. Not directed at the forum but to those who post questionable claims. Not disruptive act but calling out BS / marketing hype / shill posts for what they are. It's a clarification. Just because you personally don't like or disagree with it doesn't mean they should be stopped.
That sure doesn't look like a response of a happy camper.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.