'Normalization' of PCM audio - subjectively benign? Reply #25 – 2006-08-30 16:16:51 Quote from: cliveb on 2006-08-30 15:47:33And the point here is that, IMHO, LP transfers don't need much DSP at all. The vast majority of the editing I do concerns the removal of impulse noise, which involves edits to small isolated sections of waveform. The changes made to the waveform at those locations vastly swamps any changes to the quantisation noise that may result.The only "global DSP" I do to LP recordings is normalisation (nearly always), some modest EQ (very rarely), and broadband noise reduction (sometimes, and only in moderation). Apart from normalisation, these other operations again make a much bigger change to the audible nature of the music than the minor change in quantisation noise they cause (which I still maintain will remain beneath the vinyl noise floor).I have to disagree - even the DSPs you list should be done at higher than 16-bit. If one is simply recording to PCM and perhaps remove (!) a few clicks, then straight to 16-bit is fine.But even normalization involves multiplying each sample by an arbitrary integer without regard to their values relative to each other, and rounding errors will certainly effect the resulting waveform and it's sound - I've heard this definitively. These tiny changes in the relative values of the samples might seem inconsequential in theory, but the ear/brain is a very sensitive 'device'. Further, it's the very low level (ambience and such like) signals which are brought into prominence, and which in the original waveform are quantized with too few bits to sound realistic. It's worth bearing in mind that when 16/44.1 PCM was 'invented', there was no such thing as DSP at all (even if it was envisaged), it didn't appear until well into the late 80's. The universal adoption of 24-bit resolution (and much higher sampling rates) was mainly to faciltate them.