On Thu, 2004-03-18 at 10:49, Anahata wrote: > On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 09:41:26AM -0800, Mark Knecht wrote: > > Of course! But that wasn't my point. My point was he should really be > > using a 24-bit external DAC. Of course, it's more money... > > As I said before, if the final product is going to be a 16 bit CD, you > need to be able to monitor what gets sent to that, complete with the > same dithering scheme that will be used for producing that CD. A 24-bit converter will accept the 16-bit dithered output inside of a 24-bit stream. The bottom 8 bits are zeros. The upper 16 bits are the same dithered bits that will get written to the CD. What's the problem? A 16-bit converter will NEVER let him hear the difference between the dithered stream and the original 24-bit audio. Even if you are only going to a CD, which today is increasingly unlikely, there is still a good reason to have more bits to listen to. > If it's > going to end up on DVD with more than 16 bits, then 16 bit isn't good > enough for mastering at all. Maybe master to 24 bits with 24 bit > moitoring, then separately test the conversion to 16 bits. Certainly.
