sorry to beat a dead horse, but from this 2019 paper's synopsis: https://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=20457
"Although dither methods for ameliorating quantization error have been well understood in the literature for some time, these insights are not always applied in practice. It is rare for an audio performance to be captured, produced, and played back with a flawless chain." no, we aren't in the dark ages of concert-going as the only way to experience music, and haven't been for quite some time. audio performances are never experienced in a flawless chain, and even at the event you have the potential of hearing the quantization error of a Behringer/Midas FOH board's DAC On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 6:51 PM Zhiguang Zhang <[email protected]> wrote: > Seeing that the president of MQA came from Warner, I'm sure he's well > aware of what goes on in the studio. It might just be a matter of your > average modern consumer's distribution / consumption habits and various > demographics > > On Mon, Jan 10, 2022, 6:47 PM vicki melchior <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Your confusion is different than Eric’s though. I was aiming to address >> his previous post about "well i'm not here to talk about whether or not >> i can discriminate dither from music” >> >> >> I agree with your comments. Subtractive dither is used in the MQA codec >> because Peter Craven is trying to salvage every last ounce of SNR, but it's >> not difficult to handle in a streamed file, and in a situation where the >> original file’s specs are measured during encoding. >> >> Vicki >> >> >> On Jan 10, 2022, at 5:53 PM, robert bristow-johnson < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 01/10/2022 1:37 PM vicki melchior <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> Okay. In the context of subtractive dither, I understand the confusion. >> >> >> I don't. I'm just confused. >> >> Yes, the purpose of subtractive dither is to reduce the total dither >> noise remaining in the output, typically after adding dither during bit >> reduction. Clearly, that will increase the SNR >> >> >> But only by 4.77 dB. But, hey, it's 4.77 dB. So if they can standardize >> how the dither is generated from the LSBs of the quantized signal, and, if >> noise shaping is done, what the transfer function is from dither to >> quantized output, then why not do this subtractive dither thing? >> >> The worst that can happen is that the receiver does not decode those LSBs >> and subtract the dither. Then you're no worse off than if it was just >> additive dither and you don't recover those 4.77 dB SNR. >> >> and allow you to hear more of the signal. >> >> >> only really makes a difference if the audio is living down by the noise >> floor (which it could be if it's a CD and classical or uncompressed >> acoustic music with a large dynamic range). >> >> but 4.77 dB is 4.77 dB. that's something. 96 dB dynamic range is better >> than 91 dB. >> >> -- >> >> r b-j . _ . _ . _ . _ [email protected] >> >> "Imagination is more important than knowledge." >> >> . >> . >> . >> >> >>
