Skip to main content
Topic: Scaling down 96 kHz/24 bit to 44.1 kHz/16 bit? (Read 18399 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Scaling down 96 kHz/24 bit to 44.1 kHz/16 bit?

Reply #25
Interesting. So it's a kind of lossy algorithm that meets the average ear? Can it be adjusted a bit lower within the source code so that it would meet those golden ears as well?

You can only change the "shape" by modifying the noise shaping filter (*). The average level (logarithmic) will always be the same unless you change the target bit depth as well.

(* you can also increase the level by using non-minimum-phase filters. But that'd be a stupid idea.)

Cheers!

Scaling down 96 kHz/24 bit to 44.1 kHz/16 bit?

Reply #26


I started to sketch a Mac OS X GUI frontend for the Shibatch sampling rate converter command line tool. One question. What does that p.d.f. in the commandline help text actually stand for?

Code: [Select]
          --pdf <type> [<amp>]       select p.d.f. of noise
                                       0 : rectangular
                                       1 : triangular
                                       2 : Gaussian



Scaling down 96 kHz/24 bit to 44.1 kHz/16 bit?

Reply #29
It's not clear what actually happens if you set the slider under "attenuation" to -0.3 dB.
Is the signal attenuated by -0.3 dB (= +0.3 dB boost) or attenuated by 0.3 dB (= -0.3 dB gain change)?

AFAIK SSRC increases the gain when you attenuate "by negative values".
This is probably not what you had in mind.

Sebastian

Scaling down 96 kHz/24 bit to 44.1 kHz/16 bit?

Reply #30
Ok, I changed the label to »Likelihood dither signal» now.
AFAIK that's a very unusual term in the audio world and will likely cause confusion.
Why not simply use "Dither type", as described in wikipedia?

Scaling down 96 kHz/24 bit to 44.1 kHz/16 bit?

Reply #31
AFAIK SSRC increases the gain when you attenuate "by negative values".
This is probably not what you had in mind.

No, I didn't. In fact that behaviour was quite a surprise given that there is the normalize function as well.

AFAIK that's a very unusual term in the audio world and will likely cause confusion.
Why not simply use "Dither type", as described in wikipedia?

Changed that »Dither signal type» now.

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2020