IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

5 Pages V  « < 3 4 5  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
People showing how great their turntables sound, ...on YouTube!
2Bdecided
post Oct 20 2010, 13:00
Post #101


ReplayGain developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 5359
Joined: 5-November 01
From: Yorkshire, UK
Member No.: 409



QUOTE (Arnold B. Krueger @ Oct 18 2010, 12:21) *
TPDF dither when applied with sufficient ampltude is supposted to decorrelate the second moment.
Speaking from ignorance and still without the paper in front of me, I would venture to guess that in this case it's the third and higher moments which are not decorrelated by correct TPDF dither.

Ah, this probably helps if you have a spare month to follow it all...
http://audiolab.uwaterloo.ca/~rob/abstracts/ieee.pdf
QUOTE
It is shown that by the use of dither having a suitably-chosen probability density function, moments of the total error can be made independent of the system input signal, but that statistical independence of the error and the input signals is not achievable.

QUOTE
For many applications, controlling relevant error moments is just as good as having full statistical independence of the input and error processes.


I've never seen any evidence that this is audible. It just means that dither makes things audibly fine, but not statistically perfect.

Of course there's plenty of evidence that the noise/distortion/error of various analogue sources is highly dependent on the input signal - often in an audible way.

Cheers,
David.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Arnold B. Kruege...
post Oct 21 2010, 12:32
Post #102





Group: Members
Posts: 4451
Joined: 29-October 08
From: USA, 48236
Member No.: 61311



QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Oct 20 2010, 08:00) *
Of course there's plenty of evidence that the noise/distortion/error of various analogue sources is highly dependent on the input signal - often in an audible way.


Relevant example: modulation noise in magnetic tape. BTW, one can use a very high frequency tone as if it was dither to vastly reduce the audibility of quantizaiton distortion. Magnetic tape was arguably the first use of quantization as part of audio recording...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Woodinville
post Oct 21 2010, 22:18
Post #103





Group: Members
Posts: 1414
Joined: 9-January 05
From: In the kitchen
Member No.: 18957



QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Oct 20 2010, 05:00) *
QUOTE (Arnold B. Krueger @ Oct 18 2010, 12:21) *
TPDF dither when applied with sufficient ampltude is supposted to decorrelate the second moment.
Speaking from ignorance and still without the paper in front of me, I would venture to guess that in this case it's the third and higher moments which are not decorrelated by correct TPDF dither.

Ah, this probably helps if you have a spare month to follow it all...
http://audiolab.uwaterloo.ca/~rob/abstracts/ieee.pdf
QUOTE
It is shown that by the use of dither having a suitably-chosen probability density function, moments of the total error can be made independent of the system input signal, but that statistical independence of the error and the input signals is not achievable.

QUOTE
For many applications, controlling relevant error moments is just as good as having full statistical independence of the input and error processes.


I've never seen any evidence that this is audible. It just means that dither makes things audibly fine, but not statistically perfect.

Of course there's plenty of evidence that the noise/distortion/error of various analogue sources is highly dependent on the input signal - often in an audible way.

Cheers,
David.


To this point, consider what the ear can detect, which is a frequency analysis of sorts of the noise (and signal, of course).

When you have a white spectrum for the noise, you've accomplished what you needed to do. It is, of course, possible to use a gaussian dither, as well. But how far down the central limit theorem do we need to travel?


--------------------
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Axon
post Oct 21 2010, 23:47
Post #104





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1985
Joined: 4-January 04
From: Austin, TX
Member No.: 10933



QUOTE (Woodinville @ Oct 21 2010, 16:18) *
To this point, consider what the ear can detect, which is a frequency analysis of sorts of the noise (and signal, of course).

When you have a white spectrum for the noise, you've accomplished what you needed to do. It is, of course, possible to use a gaussian dither, as well. But how far down the central limit theorem do we need to travel?

That's not a rhetorical question, right?

I mean... the ear is at a very fundamental level sensitive to signal energy, which is intrinsically linked to the second moment. If any higher moments were to be audibly significant in and of themselves, that would suggest to me that phase distortion would be orders of magnitude more audible than it is observed to be.

QED?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
2Bdecided
post Oct 22 2010, 10:41
Post #105


ReplayGain developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 5359
Joined: 5-November 01
From: Yorkshire, UK
Member No.: 409



QUOTE (Axon @ Oct 21 2010, 23:47) *
That's not a rhetorical question, right?
I was hoping it was! wink.gif

What we're talking about is subjective - we know there's a difference, the question is whether humans can hear it.

Imagine trying to design a test to see if there is an audible difference between having a correlated vs decorrelated third moment of the error. It's "easy" because you can use 8-bits, and simply add yet another RECT PDF noise source to the dither. Problem is, you know people can hear that - it's more noisy - so ABX will be positive, but prove nothing about what you want to know!

You could flip to and from a higher bitdepth and do some gain twiddling there to match dither noise power between the two cases. That way, I think it would be possible to make a "fair" experiment, but people might argue that whatever method you used to match dither noise power (e.g. RMS level) wasn't quite justified, or may be problematic enough to give a false positive. If you're trying to ABX something which is generally believed to be inaudible, you'd better make damn sure the levels are matched - and in this case, it could be hard to say (hand on heart) that they were. Different PDFs. What is a "match". etc.

Even if the level matching seems justified, and there was a weak preference for adding 3 RECT PDF noise sources rather than 2, in the real world you don't get the luxury of level matching and the 3 noise source dither is louder, which is objectionable in itself. So overall it might be a bit pointless.

I know we could use Gaussian, but when people say that, they usually mean using it at a level far lower than I think is "correct" - i.e. a level at which it seems to work OK most of the time, but without the mathematical guarantee that it's even decorrelating the first and second moments of the error properly. If we move from RECT to TRI (2 * RECT) etc etc and keep adding RECT noise sources, we get a lot more noise by the time it's something like Gaussian.

(I'm not trying to speak with a position of authority here - I'm hoping other people here can help think this through and point out any misconceptions I might have)

Cheers,
David.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Paulhoff
post Oct 24 2010, 19:24
Post #106





Group: Members
Posts: 106
Joined: 3-June 05
From: Coconut Creek Fl
Member No.: 22486



It is funny how a friend of mine recorded a Vinyl record and made a CD of it. He could not get over how is sounded like the Vinyl he loved, with all its added distortion and noise. rolleyes.gif

Paul

smile.gif smile.gif smile.gif


--------------------
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." Albert Einstein
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Woodinville
post Oct 25 2010, 05:10
Post #107





Group: Members
Posts: 1414
Joined: 9-January 05
From: In the kitchen
Member No.: 18957



QUOTE (Paulhoff @ Oct 24 2010, 11:24) *
It is funny how a friend of mine recorded a Vinyl record and made a CD of it. He could not get over how is sounded like the Vinyl he loved, with all its added distortion and noise. rolleyes.gif

Paul

smile.gif smile.gif smile.gif


Almost like you can capture all that analog distortion on CD. Imagine.


--------------------
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

5 Pages V  « < 3 4 5
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th December 2014 - 18:34