Steve Harris wrote: > On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 06:49:03AM -0800, Mark Knecht wrote: > >>I will also point out that you would not, I think, be able to hear the >>direct effects of your choice of dither in this setup. All audio you >>send to this unit would have to be dithered so all you could do would be >>make a comparitive judgement. While that might suit your needs, it's not >>optimum and as far as mastering goes really a pretty big limitation >>depending on the source material you might be working with. > > > Thats a very good point - the dithering used by jackd to produce 16bit > output should be reproducable when you go to burn CDs, otherwise the sound > on the final CD will be subtly different. > > Hmm... thinking... > > - Steve > > Yeah. See part of my thought is that I *want* to master at 24-bit, get things right with EQ and compression, then add dithering and make sure it doesn't mess things up. To do that last step I want to go back and forth between 24-bit and 16-bit dithered, most especially on fade outs and in quiet passages, etc. I don't see how Daniel could do this with the setup he's proposing. What he could do is choose different dithering algorhythms and compare how each sounded, which is important, but if they *all* mess things up he won't know that. Dithering is a really interesting issue. One a few things I've done it's been important. On many type of source material it seems to make little or no difference. Much to learn. Bob Katz's book has some really interesting sections on this subject. If you don't do everything right in front of the dither, then dithering will make no difference at all. Anyway, it's just an observation about the system he's proposing to build. - Mark
