An excellent series of videos just started here clears some more of the bogey man myths around digital signals in a straight forward clear manner.
 
Recommended for the fart-skinners here of which I am most definitely one.
 
http://xiph.org/video/
If choosing the 'right' dither algorithm still keeps you awake at night the 2nd video should help you recover your sleeping pattern.
 
In fact either video is probably a useful aid to sleep, still worth a watch though if these things interest you.

Good find, Jon. I think it probably puts to rest a bunch of arguments.

Ya, I watched it, but may have to watch it again. Something I thought was happening but always the interference comes from some others then, and then the gossip starts and it always seem to be wrong when put to a test. (the second video that is).

WOW.

THE 2ND ONE IN PARTICULAR.

ok 


cassette tape  =  6-9 bits deep at best.


the very best open reel analog tape recordings, with advanced noise reduction  =  13 bits.

so what the heck are all the 'audiophiles' really hearing?

batsbrew


so what the heck are all the 'audiophiles' really hearing?

That there has always been my argument. I knew for a fact that even a 2 inch tape machine spinning at 30ips wouldn't be 16 bit. I didn't know it was roughly 13 bit but have always wondered what it would be. (which is good to know!) Yet we get all these guys trying to sell us on 32 bit float points and excessive dithering conversations due to "math not being right". If my ears don't hear an issue that bothers me when comparing something, there IS no issue worth talking about in my realm. My rule of thumb is, if I can't hear a difference while listening 3 times to something while being super focused, it's nothing worth changing or discussing.
 
Dithering: I do it because I'm told I'm supposed to. When I've not used any dithering in a project and have just set it for 16/44 within the 24/48 realm during an export....nothing has ever sounded wrong or out of place to me. Have any of you heard any weird anomalies?
 
Dithering selections: I've not heard anything super blatantly obvious, however, on certain material, the type of dithering *can* make a difference. I dither using something completely different than most people...and it works for everything, so I don't stress about it at all. :)
 
It all turns out to be more hype for us to be sold on in my opinion.
 
-Danny

yep...
and the dithering part of that video is really informative.
i mean, it just makes sense.

and not only can they show you what you are hearing, they can measure it.

oh yea....

i always use the waves IDR dither when i render my files to 16 bit....
it does SOMETIMES sound better with the noise shaping.

i was discriminated against for having IE8,need firefox to watch/
im on it,thanks for the link sir.

jamesyoyo


Good find, Jon. I think it probably puts to rest a bunch of arguments.

Nah, folk will just try to create new arguments...
 
 
It was our own DrewFX that put the stair-stepping myth to bed for me quite awhile ago now, but seeing it shown here really brought home the idea that you can't plot a wave of a certain bandwidth without getting the resultant equation exactly right at any point in time.
 
Karyn also corrected me fairly recently in an excellent post she made in a thread about modelled DSP, when I said digital was cold and stark and she said no, think of it as being 'pure'.  A distinction that made a huge difference to me in how I approach the idea of adding 'coloured' signals to a mix.  It will save me a fortune in expensive 'modelled' plug-ins as I've really moved away from those things these days, and look to add colour as a seperate process in itself not as a by product of using an ecclectic mix of these kinds of things.  I regain control of when, where what kind and how much character I introduce as a result without thinking I have to add the latest marketing snake oil to make magic.
 
Which shows again there ARE some bright, clued up people around this place it's just a case of sifting the wheat from the chaff.