Truncated vs. Dithered

  • Thread starter Thread starter RCAGuy05
  • Start date Start date
R

RCAGuy05

New member
Any perceptual difference to those with the "golden" ears?? I have a hunch its no difference yet what do you guys think, to me this these two applications just seem really confusing any input would be interesting.
 
are you talking about at the end of a clip of audio?

truncated=slicing an audio file?
dithered=bringing the volume of an audio file up through the use of noise?

i'm not really sure what you are getting at here, but if you give me some more info, i might understand what you are talking about.
 
I can hear a small difference, and the theory is solid behind the apparent extension of dynamic range. It costs nothing to do it, so what is the harm?
 
RCAGuy05 said:
Any perceptual difference to those with the "golden" ears?? I have a hunch its no difference yet what do you guys think, to me this these two applications just seem really confusing any input would be interesting.

Record something with a longish reverb tail at 24 or 32 bits (if doing it inside a workstation). A percussion hit for example. Now, export to 16bit twice, one with dithering, one without.

Load them one after another, and listen to them, specially the reverb tails at a reasonably high volume. Hear a difference? When listening carefully (you might want to use headphones), you can hear the difference, you don't really have to have ultra trained, "golden ears".

Do a short full mix (at the highest volume you can) and do the same as above. Compare. Pay specific attention to stereo detail, bass, and treble such as hi-hats and snares.
 
Most recordings I hear out of home, and even smaller production studios, have a noise floor that is higher than what the dithering level would be.

Yeah, you are only going to notice the difference with something fading out, and even then, you would need VERY quiet recording!

If it makes you feel good, dither. If it makes you feel like you are doing too much to the audio, don't. :)
 
So then the consesus must be that dithering brings noise that can be noticed, while truncating does not. Yet with truncating you drop the bottome 8 bits, this doesn't compromise the sound?
I guess I'm wanting a general answer from those more experienced as to which one is best, yes I am shooting for more quiet without compromising the tone, duh. :)
 
RCAGuy05 said:
So then the consesus must be that dithering brings noise that can be noticed, while truncating does not. Yet with truncating you drop the bottome 8 bits, this doesn't compromise the sound?
I guess I'm wanting a general answer from those more experienced as to which one is best, yes I am shooting for more quiet without compromising the tone, duh. :)

Either approach truncates the 8 least significant bits, but with dither, the new least significant bit is noise shaped to sound better. Essentially it adds very high frequency noise, which causes very quiet portions of the music to sound smoother.

You're just going to have to try it yourself: find your best reverb tail that fades away to silence, and do a dither vs. non-dither comparison. Turn your monitors up so your peak level is a little more than 96dBSPL (they shouldn't be far off that anyway), so you can hear the fadeout all the way. See what you hear for yourself.
 
Ok, I will attempt to describe what a dithering algorythm does, and why it will sometimes help.

Your bit depth comes with a maximum dynamic range that it can represent. For 16 bit, this is about -96dBfs. Few, if any 16 bit converters actually achieve this dynamic range, but generally get close (maybe -90 to -93dBfs). 24 bit converters inherently can do -144dBfs, but in real life, only offer around -110dBfs (the analog circuit of the converter accounts for this "real world" dynamic range...anyway...).

So, when you record with a 24 bit recorder and save at 24 bit, you can represent about 110dB of dynamic range. Cool.

Now, we know that CD's only do 16 bit (96dB) dynamic range. So, there is a problem here. The 24 bit file must be TRUNCATED down the 16 bit. The act of TRUNCATING just cuts off that extra dynamic range. Simply, it is GONE. The LSB (least significant bit) is still holding a LOT of audio information that the ear is sensitive enough to distinquish. As the LSB toggles On and Off, your ear can HEAR the "digital black" (LSB switched off) and audio (LSB switched on). The LSB being ON is going to be usually 6dB louder than digital black. So, depending upon the musical content, the toggling of the LSB will cause a sort of "distortion" sound. Our ears ARE sensitive enough to pick up on this.

So what to do? We certainly don't want this "toggling" of the LSB to happen, because it tends to sound bad.

What a dithering algorhythm does is add a "shaped noise" (shaped noise is basically noise that is out of the senstive region of our hearing, 2-5KHz) that is "mixed" with the audio. Basically, the act of the LSB staying ON because of the added noise means that audio that is technically lower in volume than the dither noise is recorded on the LSB, thus, giving the illusion of more dynamic range. On a meter, the volume down that low is staying the same, but to our ear, which can hear the music well, but not hear the dithering noise added, we are hearing volume variations!

It is a clever approach to increasing the PERCIEVED dynamic range of 16 bit recordings.

So, just think of dithering as noise that we don't hear so well, mixed with the audio that allows audio that is technically lower in volume than the dithering noise to be heard because the LSB is always ON.

The reason I say that many home recordings, and rock mixes don't really NEED dithering is because these kinds of recording generally already have noise that is louder than dither noise! This could be from noisy preamps, amps that has rushing noise recorded, etc....Also, the genre of music may not be very dynamic, and the production style may be quite dense, thus, not leaving any room for us to really hear a "fade out" , which is when the LSB toggling on/off become appearent.

So, if you already have a fairly noisy recording, or a song that doesn't fade out in any kind of way, you probably won't ever hear a benefit to dithering your audio before truncating it to a lower bit depth.

In some recording, yes, dithering a great benefit! Spacious productions, songs that fade out, etc, really do benefit from dithering being applied before truncating the file.

The real test is to try both. Really, if you can't hear the dither working for you, it is probably best NOT to add MORE NOISE to your recording eh? I mean, dithering is simply adding noise, and if you already have enough noise in your recording to keep your LSB "On", why add more noise?

Too often, dithering comes up as some magical "solution" to "grainy, harsh, stale" digital audio. Far too often, it isn't the fault of the LSB toggling on/off that is causing "grainy, harsh, stale" digital audio, it is a BAD WORD CLOCK, or just plain ol' poor converter designs! Just as often, it is just poor production in the first place!

Truthfully, you have plenty of other things to worry about LONG BEFORE you should worry about whether to dither or not. Really, in 99% of home recording and/or Rock music productions, dithering will make little to no noticeable difference.

Hope this clears it up a bit.
 
Thanks you explained that in a very sound manner. Right now I'm recording in 'real time' to a Pioneer CD recorder by going into the analog ins. I plan to do two things.
1.Record on a 24 bit machine and then just run the analog outs straight into the analog ins on the CD recorder.
2.Record on a 16 bit machine and run the digital optical out to the digital optical in on the CD recorder.
Is either or both of these ways dithering or truncating? I'm prefering dithering based on what you said as I'll be making some very spacious ambient jazzy guitar and piano music.
 
Again, JUST have "spacious" music alone doesn't suggest you NEED to apply dithering. If your equipments noise floor is higher than dither noise added, you really don't need dithering.

Again, try both ways and see if you hear a difference. If you don't, then forget about dithering the audio before reducing the bit depth.

In "1" above, you are doing a sort of truncating.

Dithering is a "process" that applied to an audio stream or file. Neither scenario you listed is "dithering".
 
Ok, I forgot that actually some digital recorders can add dithering to the audio being recorded. My Lynx One sound card has this option. But truthfully, I have not found much gear that offers dithering on the analog inputs.
 
When you use the analog out of your 24-bit machine, your converting the digital signal to analog, and then back into digital (most likely 16-bit) so this test would be meaningless with regard to dithering vs. just truncating.
 
Ok then what are some ways I could aquire the dithering process with a non computer set up(what I have).
How about running the 24 bit recorder into a converter, analog out from the converter and then into a 16 bit converter. I am probably complicating things. Is burning a CD on a Korg D1200 dithering so to speak?
 
Dither is strictly an algorithm which takes as its input a 24-bit stream of PCM audio data, and outputs a 16-bit stream of PCM Audio data. You are talking about converting audio back and forth between analog and digital, which complicates things if you are trying to compare dithering vs. truncating.

Check the manual for the Korg D1200, if it records in 24-bit, but then burns a 16-bit Red Book audio CD, it might be able to dither that signal down from 24 to 16 bits.
 
Back
Top