|
Post by jeremygillespie on Sept 1, 2017 20:12:33 GMT -6
Well, just did my own test.
I had a song with about 35 tracks that I am Mixing at home. These gets thrown out to my 8 channel Dbox, into a pair of VP-28's, then to the Stam4000 bus comp.
I did a standard print, and then another with the Ozone6 dither plug as the last insert on each channel before it was output to the dbox.
The difference is NOT subtle at all. Somehow, the entire mix opened up and got wider. It almost sounds as if I was mixing at the studio with the ssl and the atr102...
I was actually so shicked at the difference in sound that I double and triple checked myself to make sure I wasn't screwing something up somehow.
I can't share the test yet as the track hasn't been released, but I will when it's out in the open.
I was a naysayer for a really long time with this. I still don't conpletely know what is actually going on, but I dig it for sure.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 1, 2017 21:18:28 GMT -6
What's going on is that the math is correct! I think truncation distortion and crappy analog stages are the main reasons analog frequently sounds better than digital.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Sept 2, 2017 7:19:37 GMT -6
What's going on is that the math is correct! I think truncation distortion and crappy analog stages are the main reasons analog frequently sounds better than digital. To be clear though, we can put 20 different plugins per channel, bus things around up the wazoo, add automation, etc. without having to worry about messing with any dither as long as we're still in the daw, right? It's only at the point that we're exiting the daw to go the da converters that we need to put on a dither plugin for every single output going to a separate converter channel, whether that be just two tracks for your mix bus, 16 channels for otb summing or outputs beings used for hardware inserts, right? And those dither plugins should be the absolute last thing in the chain for each output which is exiting the daw to go to a da converter channel, right? If all of this is correct, what am I still missing? Or is that it? And is there such a thing as too much dither? Does it hurt to err on the side of caution and add it in places where you're not sure if you need it, even if it turns out that you didn't need it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2017 8:07:08 GMT -6
Right, you're not missing anything.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Sept 2, 2017 8:41:38 GMT -6
Right, you're not missing anything. So there's no such thing as too much dither? If that's the case, I'll just apply it whenever in doubt and stop worrying about it. Now for deciding on which dither plugin to use and what particular settings to use on it, I'm still not quite there. I've used dither in the past but probably in an incorrect manner and with whatever dither options my daw provided.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 2, 2017 9:03:14 GMT -6
There will always be even louder distortion if you omit dither. It PREVENTS distortion. It doesn't just mask it.
So far I'm pretty impressed with GoodHz which has no added latency. TPDF is when it's set to high with no noise shaping.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Sept 2, 2017 9:14:15 GMT -6
There will always be even louder distortion if you omit dither. It PREVENTS distortion. It doesn't just mask it. So far I'm pretty impressed with GoodHz which has no added latency. TPDF is when it's set to high with no noise shaping. Right. So to be clear, there is no such thing as too much dither? There isn't a downside to applying it to a track which actually didn't need it due to no truncation occurring? I'm asking because, if that's the case, I'll just set 16 busses up (with a dither plugin on each) for each of my da channels on my converters (I'm summing otb) and send everything there from now on. I could just create a template with those busses already setup and just start each project with that already set up. Granted, it's likely that all 16 of those busses will have truncation going on anyway, but there could be a time where one doesn't. I just wanted to make sure that there wasn't a downside to applying dither when it wasn't needed. It would be nice to just apply it as a matter of course and not worry about if it is or isn't needed. Oh, and what about bouncing down or printing tracks within the daw? Does dither need to be added when doing that or does it literally ONLY need to be applied when you are exiting the daw to go to your converters? I'm inclined to believe that dither IS needed when bouncing down but I figured I would get some verification on that. Oh, and it looks like Goodhertz dither isn't in vst. But I can leave the "which dither plugin" discussion for another time.
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Sept 2, 2017 9:57:51 GMT -6
The difference is NOT subtle at all. Somehow, the entire mix opened up and got wider. It almost sounds as if I was mixing at the studio with the ssl and the atr102... This confuses me. How could adding dither- which from my understanding is low volume noise, introduced into digital audio when converting from a higher bit-resolution to a lower bit-resolution- make a mix sound wider?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2017 10:14:08 GMT -6
Because it's now preserving a lot more of the low level detail and information?
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Sept 2, 2017 10:43:02 GMT -6
Because it's now preserving a lot more of the low level detail and information? At a -90 dB noise level? Or am I misunderstanding something?
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Sept 2, 2017 11:07:44 GMT -6
I was actually so shicked at the difference in sound that I double and triple checked myself to make sure I wasn't screwing something up somehow. You mean I wasn't imagining things? ??
|
|
|
Post by matt on Sept 2, 2017 11:36:44 GMT -6
Bitter shows 32 bits at all of my output buses, and according to Apogee, Symphony has a 32 bit DAC: ESS Sabre32 DACSo in my case, it is pointless to dither at the outputs of my Pro Tools sessions. Is this correct?
|
|
|
Post by svart on Sept 2, 2017 12:04:40 GMT -6
Because it's now preserving a lot more of the low level detail and information? It can't. It's just masking the more obvious quantization noise with noise that's less obvious to the human ear, which allows the details to stand out better.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 2, 2017 13:20:20 GMT -6
I don't know where you got the idea of masking. You need to look into the IEEE and Bell Labs papers about this.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 2, 2017 13:23:47 GMT -6
Bitter shows 32 bits at all of my output buses, and according to Apogee, Symphony has a 32 bit DAC: ESS Sabre32 DACSo in my case, it is pointless to dither at the outputs of my Pro Tools sessions. Is this correct? How exactly does the Apogee connect to the DAW's output? That's the point of potential truncation. A "32 bit DAC" is meaningless hype.
|
|
|
Post by lcr on Sept 2, 2017 18:50:23 GMT -6
Im now really interested to do my own A/B, gotta find the time.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Sept 2, 2017 19:05:34 GMT -6
Bitter shows 32 bits at all of my output buses, and according to Apogee, Symphony has a 32 bit DAC: ESS Sabre32 DACSo in my case, it is pointless to dither at the outputs of my Pro Tools sessions. Is this correct? How exactly does the Apogee connect to the DAW's output? That's the point of potential truncation. A "32 bit DAC" is meaningless hype. My Symphony Mk1 attaches to Pro Tools 12.8.1 on Sierra 10.12.6 via Thunderbolt out of a late 2013 Mac Pro to their own Thunderbridge interface. From there the connection is the Avid-spec HD cable to the Symphony itself.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Sept 2, 2017 22:52:14 GMT -6
Bitter shows 32 bits at all of my output buses, and according to Apogee, Symphony has a 32 bit DAC: ESS Sabre32 DACSo in my case, it is pointless to dither at the outputs of my Pro Tools sessions. Is this correct? How exactly does the Apogee connect to the DAW's output? That's the point of potential truncation. A "32 bit DAC" is meaningless hype. The DAC can indeed receive a 32 bit float word. What it does with it exactly, is a bit of a mystery. These DAC have digital volume control capability, so that's part of it.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 2, 2017 23:25:10 GMT -6
Right, you're not missing anything. So there's no such thing as too much dither? If that's the case, I'll just apply it whenever in doubt and stop worrying about it. Now for deciding on which dither plugin to use and what particular settings to use on it, I'm still not quite there. I've used dither in the past but probably in an incorrect manner and with whatever dither options my daw provided. The only time I know of when there's too much dither is when you're late for an appointment!
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on Sept 3, 2017 7:01:31 GMT -6
This looks like it could be a good choice for a dither plugin, with plenty of information and options: goodhertz.co/good-ditherFrom what I read there, FabFilter and Ozone are using noise shaped dither. That would account for the sound changes that people are hearing. If we are going for pure math, the test should be done with flat TPDF dither. Or it could be a matter of using what sounds good, math be damned!
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 3, 2017 7:44:49 GMT -6
How exactly does the Apogee connect to the DAW's output? That's the point of potential truncation. A "32 bit DAC" is meaningless hype. The DAC can indeed receive a 32 bit float word. What it does with it exactly, is a bit of a mystery. These DAC have digital volume control capability, so that's part of it. The chip accepts i2s which as far as I know is not floating point but can be 32 fixed point. The built in sample rate converter and digital volume control are advertised as being 32 bit.
|
|
|
Post by jeremygillespie on Sept 3, 2017 8:18:14 GMT -6
The difference is NOT subtle at all. Somehow, the entire mix opened up and got wider. It almost sounds as if I was mixing at the studio with the ssl and the atr102... This confuses me. How could adding dither- which from my understanding is low volume noise, introduced into digital audio when converting from a higher bit-resolution to a lower bit-resolution- make a mix sound wider? Confuses me too, but that's why I did my own test. Id just suggest to try it and see what you hear.
|
|
|
Post by jeremygillespie on Sept 3, 2017 8:21:17 GMT -6
I was actually so shicked at the difference in sound that I double and triple checked myself to make sure I wasn't screwing something up somehow. You mean I wasn't imagining things? ?? I didn't think you were imagining things, I just wasn't quite ready for how much of a difference it made. How many different dither plugs did you try before settling on pro L? My only option for 24 bit dither with the plugs I have was ozone 6, so that's what I used. I also turned off all noise shaping.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Sept 3, 2017 8:26:34 GMT -6
You mean I wasn't imagining things? ?? I didn't think you were imagining things, I just wasn't quite ready for how much of a difference it made. How many different dither plugs did you try before settling on pro L? My only option for 24 bit dither with the plugs I have was ozone 6, so that's what I used. I also turned off all noise shaping. As Bob pointed out, I bet it's the conversion from float to integer rather than the dither itself.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 3, 2017 14:51:54 GMT -6
Float to integer requires dither. The effect varies a lot depending on the program material. If the audio was previously truncated it's really hard to hear. A very flat response monitor makes a difference in hearing it too. Oddly the noise level in the room not so much.
|
|