Dr. Werner Fink schrieb:
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 01:17:11PM +0200, Prakash Punnoor wrote:
Dr. Werner Fink schrieb:
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 12:21:26PM +0200, Prakash Punnoor wrote:
We already had this disussion with "CD" and the "giant" 90dB they claimed to give.
IIRC, CD gives something like 114db with dithering...and 96db without.
Informations which are not recorded can not be recreated without guesssing. Therefore 16 bits are 96db and not more.
Nope, you obviously don't know how dithering works. Every heard of DSD? So you think Sony's SACD doesn't work? DSD is pure dithering...
-> http://www.hfm-detmold.de/eti/projekte/diplomarbeiten/2004/dsdpcm/23.htm
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 am not suggesting to add dither later to a signal, but if you have a 20bit source and dither down to 16bit, you will have a better signal than 16 bit truncated/rounded - which was my original claim.
" Von den DVD-A-Befürwortern wird die SACD mit ihrer Bandbreite und Dynamik oftmals mit einer DVD-A von 20 Bit und 96 kHz Samplingfrequenz verglichen, welche jedoch den geringen Noise-Floor über die gesamte Bandbreite bis 48 kHz beibehalten kann. Gerne wird darüber hinaus betont, dass auch bei der DVD-A aufnahmeseitig Noise Shaping verwendet werden und somit bei einer Quantisierung von nur 16 Bit der Rauschpegel der SACD (bei einem deutlich geringeren Gesamtrauschpegel) mühelos unterboten werden kann. "