|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
213.7.61.45
In Reply to: RE: INTERNET TEST: 24-bit vs. 16-bit Audio. posted by Archimago on April 20, 2014 at 10:52:35
''As for dithering, that's standard anyways for all bit-depth reduction. Plus it adds a bit of noise. Let's just say I'm using nothing fancy at all...''
saying this shows that you don't understand the effect of dither and dither functions on sound quality.
The test is useless.
Follow Ups:
Why does Archimago have to understand the subtleties of dither? He's asking for peoples' listening opinions. The listeners don't need technical details. All they need are their ears.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
it can be a test of how and what dither has been applied.Please explain this: how does hearing a difference with no particular attention paid to dithering depth or function add to the knowledge base on the sound quality of higher versus lower resolution music files?
At best, a survey like this, when published, is likely to add to adisinformation.
Edits: 04/20/14
Consider this: if people could not hear any differences between 16 bit and 24 bit that would have been a good demonstration that there is no benefit in distributing music to consumers in 24 bits. However, given that people have heard differences, one realizes immediately that there is an advantage in sound quality, namely distribute in 24 bits, if only to avoid the possibility that the dither step was done poorly.
One can not use a single set of listening tests to isolate the cause of sonic differences, only to ascertain that there were sonic differences. To attribute a cause one needs a model of possible causes and then one needs to conduct a series of experiments to isolate the cause that accounts for the effects heard. Such an experimental program has to start somewhere, and the obvious one where bit depth is involved is the type of experiment that Archimago has offered. If differences are found, then more exploration can be done to find out if there is a form of dither that would minimize these differences, possibly to the point where most people could not hear them. I think it unlikely that Archimago botched the use of dither in creating his test files. Most audio editing programs have a good implementation of the basic dither as this has been known for decades.
I should think it rather obvious, this being an Asylum, that all of these experiments are just being done for fun and are not likely to end up in a peer reviewed journal.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Having raised a question and having it answered, I think you are just trying to score points as you often do.
I have better things to do.
What is not acceptable is someone carrying out a survey on questionable premises, as the result will no doubt be publicised as a valid conclusion.
In the past I've questioned the premises behind Archimago's posts and survey's, but in this case I did not do so because I could find nothing wrong with his premises. He does not deserve unwarranted sniping in this thread.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
your 'mastering' expertise claim is suspect.
Okay fmak. I'm not sure if this is all that relevant here. The technical details of how dither "works" isn't that important... Certainly a worthy topic for another thread. It's done as part of reducing bit-depth in any reasonable studio for decades, and that's all I did and will explain the exact setting later.
All I ask is people have a listen and tell me if they think one sounded better. Also how much confidence they have in the choice. It might end up that a person chooses the 16-bit version with confidence with all 3 samples and that'll enter into my analysis as well.
-------
Archimago's Musings : A 'more objective' audiophile blog.
Just an abusive ad hominem.
If you're saying 'he doesn't understand' something, why don't you splain it to us?
I guess you prefer hit-n-run posts to adding to the conversation.
"The problem with quotes from the internet is that many of them just are just made up."
-Abraham Lincoln
you have no notion of how dither affects sound from a system, you should not be posting like this.
After reading the text linked below, would you still say that fmak's post launches "just an abusive ad hominem", or simply states a basic fact?
The question, of course, becomes whether it's audible in one's system with one's ears - but there's no doubt that, at least theoretically, dithering is not harmless to sound quality.
"The question, of course, becomes whether it's audible in one's system with one's ears - but there's no doubt that, at least theoretically, dithering is not harmless to sound quality."
The absence of dither when it should have been used grossly affects sound quality at 16 bits. A low level sine wave just above the threshold is clearly audible as a clean sine wave with dither, but turns into a square wave without dither. Just below the threshold, a low level sine wave will still be audible above the noise with dither, but will be completely silent without dither. With recordings of acoustic music made in large concert halls one can hear the effect as a musical note fades out in the hall reverberations. With dither, the echos fade smoothly down to and below the noise floor. Without dither, the hall reverberations fade into gross distortion just before becoming abruptly cut off. The same effect occurs with studio recordings that have been manually faded at the end of a track. These effects are readily audible if one listens at natural (concert) volume in a quiet room on a resolving system.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
dither can extend dynamic range and the final SQ depends on the dither depth and the dither function. Features like the Meridian Mastering Processor and the Apogee UV process apply some or all aspects of these. The effects are easy to demonstrate using a good editing program.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: