adamdea;655913 Wrote: > > > For example "loss of low level resolution" and "distortion" are > notorious schoolboy errors, albeit ubiquitous ones. > see http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/inadither/Page1.html > >
If you carefully read the link that adamdea posted back on post #23, you will see that this discussion of dithering, like all others I have seen on the web, demonstrates how dithering works on a continuous signal that is sampled many, many times in the presence of random noise. This example uses 32,768 samples of the same 1kHz waveform, requiring 743 milliSeconds. The problem is that the music signal will not "sit still" for the 743 milliSeconds required for the dithering to work its magic. The fewer samples that can be made on a signal before it changes, the less effective dithering is. If you have a signal that is constantly changing, dithering has no effect whatsoever. Dithering is very much like averaging. If you average a large number of readings of a constant value in the presence of noise, you can effectively increase the resolution of the reading. But if the value is not constant for the entire time that is required to get the large number of readings, It doesn't work. That issue is not discussed in this or any other write up I have seen of dithering. It does work well for signals that are not constantly changing, but what about music signals that are always changing in amplitude and frequency? Terry -- TerryS ------------------------------------------------------------------------ TerryS's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=40835 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=89733 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
