Joerg Knitter schrieb: > Prakash Punnoor wrote: > >> But what do you want to tell me? You are right or me? I am not an audio >> expert, but if I may quote following, I think it rather backs me up, >> as AFAIk >> noise shaping is a form of dithering, too. I understand: >> >> 96kHz, 20 bit pcm ~ SACD ~ 96kHz, 16 bit pcm w/ noise shaping >> >> So dithering does help to reduce noise levels. Or did I completely >> misunderstand anything? > > > I think, yes. > > Dithering does add noise to get a smoother sound at low volumes. I have > read that the reason for dithering has something to do with > psychoacoustics: Human ear does not like distortion like it is produced > with quantisation noise, so "analogue" noise is added which makes the > sound smoother while at the same time the noise is ignored or filtered > by our mind. So in result, it sounds better even if we have added noise. Oh yes, I know about this. I didn't want to say "dithering is all great". It is a tradeoff. Dithering adds unwanted frequencies, right. For that you get better snr. Question is just, which is better. I case of 1bit (SACD, PC-Speaker, C64 digitized sounds...) you definately want better snr. ;-) -- Prakash Punnoor -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature Url : http://www.linuxtv.org/pipermail/vdr/attachments/20050613/f5ba1b47/signature.pgp
