This series is one of the best ways I’ve seen fundamentals be explained as of recent. I assumed this had millions of views, im shook. I know it’ll get there, keep up the good work
This is because the real explanation is complicated. Simple explanations are preferred, hence more popular. It doesn’t make the simple explanation right.
Thanks from Brazil, you've help me a lot on my research, it's about to pre-diagnose lung diseases with machine learning, and knowing how the audio process works... well, that's a change maker! Thank you again!
What a marvel of an educational video. The animation, accenting previously made points, careful explanation...it all together makes obtained information stick. Thank you for all the hard work that must went into making this series!
Excellent video! I like how you explain in a clear and not overly complicated language, the speed and tone of your voice also makes it easy to follow along!
Cool Vid! I've been working on creating layered, more modern sounding drum samples for use in vintage digital drum machines. I've been converting my samples from 24bits/48kHz mono to 8bit/48kHz mono, but I've been plagued by quantization noise. This video goes a long way to help me understand things a whole lot better.
Ah mate! That's mighty kind of you. It doesn't have to be behind a paywall for me, since I have other avenues of income. It makes sense that fundamental videos like this are more accessible, and more niche and specific implementation videos be behind a paywall.
@@akashmurthy yeah i can understand that, still this is just miles beyond any other source ive sought to use, to learn on the subject. The dif between this series' take on Dither and other stuff thats available is unreal
You said that at hight bit rates there are less troubles with sound tears and digital errors, does this mean that when converting a 32-bit audio to a 24-bit depth I will not ran into digital/ analogue problems?
You will, but the artifacts won't be audible. It'll be several dBFS below the audible limit. Unless the audio track was recorded at really low levels and there's a lot of signal-to-noise ratio in the track, and it's driven up quite high, you won't notices these artifacts at 24 bits of resolution.
@@akashmurthy Found your series just now, and loving it! If I downsample from 32 bits to 24 and then from 24 another generation to 16 bits, would that final signal be reproduced identically to a version where I went from 32 straight to 16? Would dithering 32 --> 24, or 24 --> 24 make sense for archival purposes? Many thanks, this has been a great refresher so far.
Your videos are simply the best! I've read that dither is also applied at the input stage of an analog to digital converter, but I didn't hear you mentioning it... is it true? or am I wrong?
Thanks a lot my man! You're right, dither is sometimes applied to analog signals to reduce quantisation noise when passing through an ADC. I'm not sure why though, because analog signals have enough noise withing themselves to self dither! I haven't dug too deep into it, it's probably worth exploring more. Thanks!
Digital saw waves will sound 'metallic' when they're above a certain frequency. I understand that's because when the frequency increases the accuracy of sampling diminishes. A saw wave contains many overtones, so I assume those overtones become aliased. I've downloaded a couple of samples of the basic oscillator sounds from analog substractive synths. The samples are 48000 sps and 16bit. And from around C5 the saw waves already starts to sound metallic. Is dithering or adding noise a way to improve this? A noisy saw wave sounds better than a saw wave with dissonant overtones. Or do you have other suggestions?
So you mentioned when frequency increases, the accuracy of sampling diminishes. That's not true. The sampling accuracy will remain more or less accurate from 0Hz to the Nyquist frequency. It depends on the ADC ofcourse, but good quality converters can do this with ease. The second point is true! A pure sawtooth wave contains many overtones, so the overtones become aliased. Now, dithering is not really a technique used for anything other than masking quantization noise. I can understand why you may prefer it. Because broadband noise is more pleasing to the ears than dissonance. But honestly, a well created sawtooth wave should not contain any "metallic" dissonance. The higher the fundamental frequency of the sawtooth wave, the more it should sound like a Sine wave. But if you already have a few sawtooth sample files, and if they already contain aliased components, then tough luck. It's very difficult to get rid of aliasing after it's been recorded onto a file. You can watch videos 2 - 4 from this series which talks about sampling and aliasing!
what's the different between mp3 and wav, bit depth and bit rate ? should you always turn on dithering while export the project for the low quality product like mp3 ?
That's an interesting question. Should you dither when exporting to MP3? MP3 is a fundamentally different compression and encoding scheme. You don't have a constant bit depth throughout the entire recording. You have variable bit depth for different frequency bands based on the amount of spectral content in that band, and the psychoacoustics influence of that band for human hearing. So, as you can imagine, MP3 compression and encoding, is quite complex, and I can't explain it in a comment. There is definitely other resources out there which you can check out, which explains MP3. Coming to the question, I don't know! I tried looking for the answer for a little while, and didn't find anything conclusive. Seems like different people have opinion, and to find the fact, I need to dig much further and do some experiments. So, I might take a look at it later.
1 Bit - 2 Amplitude Levels - Minimal Quantiz 2 Bit - 4 Amplitude Levels - Super Low Quaniz 3 Bit - 8 Amplitude Levels - Very Lower Quantiz 4 Bit - 16 Amplitude Levels - Very Low Quantiz 5 Bit - 32 Amplitude Levels - Very Lowean Quantiz 6 Bit - 64 Amplitude Levels - Lower Quantiz 8 Bit - 256 Amplitude Levels - Low Quantiz 10 Bit - 1'024 Amplitude Levels - Lowean Quantiz 12 Bit - 4'096 Amplitude Levels - Lower Mid Quantiz 16 Bit - 65'536 Amplitude Levels - Medium Quantiz 20 Bit - 1'048'576 Amplitude Levels - Mean Quantiz 24 Bit - 16'777'216 Amplitude Levels - Average Quantiz 32 Bit - 4'294'967'296 Amplitude Levels - High Quantiz - Big CPU Usage 40 Bit - 1'099'511'627'776 Amplitude Levels - Higean Quantiz - Significant CPU Usage 48 Bit - 281'474'976'710'656 Amplitude Levels - Higherage Quantiz - Gross CPU Usage 64 Bit - 18'446'744'073'709'551'616 Amplitude Levels - Super High Quantiz - Gross CPU Usage 80 Bit - 1.208'926e24 Amplitude Levels - Very Higean Quantiz - Great CPU Usage 96 Bit - 7.922'816e28 Amplitude Levels - Very Higerage Quantiz - Large CPU Usage 128 Bit - 3.402'824e38 Amplitude Levels - Very Super High Quantiz - Huge CPU Usage 160 Bit - 1.461'502e48 Amplitude Levels - Super Highean Quantiz - Vast CPU Usage 192 Bit - 6.277'102e57 Amplitude Levels - Super Higherage Quantiz - Sizable CPU Usage 256 Bit - 1.157'921e77 Amplitude Levels - Hyper High Quantiz - Massive CPU Usage 320 Bit - 2.135'987e96 Amplitude Levels - Very Super Highean Quantiz - Extensive CPU Usage 384 Bit - 3.940'201e115 Amplitude Levels - Very Super Higherage Quantiz - Enormous CPU Usage 512 Bit - 1.340'781e154 Amplitude Levels - Very Hyper High Quantiz - Giant CPU Usage 640 Bit - 4.562'441e192 Amplitude Levels - Hyper Highean Quantiz - Ultimate CPU Usage 768 Bit - 1.552'518e231 Amplitude Levels - Hyper Higherage Quantiz - Superior CPU Usage 1 KBit - 1.797'693e308 Amplitude Levels - Super Hyper High Quantiz - Gigantic CPU Usage
how do you convert to analog signal after you have applied dithering to samples, weren't the data just getting corrupted? few videos ago , the samples can have unique solution when sampled at correct position. does this still get unique solution? maybe it will still get unique solution at a given frequency, but dithering will spread noise across multiple frequency? by the way , can i have your email.
Dithering manifests as noise. You could call that 'corruption', but it's being done for a reason right. Any set of sampled points which constrained to a nyquist frequency will give you a single solution. The solution that is achieved with the original signal dithered, is the original signal with noise added. If dithered correctly, the noise is spread evenly across the entire frequency range, up until the nyquist frequency. Atleast, that's the desirable outcome. You can contact me on any of the social channels I've listed in the description.
could you make a video talk about how eq's phase shift result unexpected frequency change？for example, low cut may cause a boost of frequency of low mid...
Hmm, someone else had requested something similar. Must be a hot topic! Linear phase EQs solve the problem of unintentionally colouring the sound, since they use Finite Impulse Response (FIR) filters, which are computationally more expensive than the more commonly used IIR filters. Cool choice, I'll definitely try to make a topic on this when I get into filtering. But in this series on the fundamentals of digital audio, it's too specific a topic to be covering over here. I hope you understand. Thanks for the suggestion.
Wait, I thought the noise is a function of the audio, not white noise? But here it's uncorrelated unless the signal is fairly simple. What am I missing?
You're right, quantization noise is a function of the audio signal, and correlated. But you can only hear the correlation in the error in simple signals, or if the bit depth is low, or if the signal is sufficiently low in level. But for rich, loud signals at a commonly chosen audio bit depth, the noise "sounds" uncorrelated and random, since there are no descernible patterns which develop in the error signal.
There is a desirable quality to the 12-bit samplers and drum machines of the 80's and 90's such as the E-Mu sp1200 and Emulator II. A lot of this love comes from the analog filter designs of the era, 2 pole and 4 pole, but there are some new pieces of gear that allow you to sample at 12-bit, 22k intentionally.. It would be cool if you could do a video where you could speak to the psychology of what we are liking when we hear that 12-bit in music - being preferable to the sterile 16-bit. I don't know if the musical equipment (specific samplers, synthesizers, and sampling drum machines) is beyond the scope of your expertise, but some of the vintage gear is getting pricey due to the desirability of their character. Could it be the harmonics and inharmonic frequencies bouncing off each other that draws us to that sound? Or is it the rudimentary DACs? thank you. If you want to hear what im driving at, Alex Ball has a new short video on the SP1200 drum machine "the lo-fi dream machine" where he touches on this. Easily found here on RUclips. Thanks! LOVE your work.
Hello again! As you have correctly guessed, I have little to no expertise in analog synthesizers and older analog gear. But what you say is quite right. The desirable quality of the audio output of these older analog devices are usually combination of all those factors: low bit depth, inaccuracies in ADC/DAC conversion, the typically non-flat frequency response of the filters used, etc. It's got a characteristically "warm" sound that digital plugins tend to try and simulate. These are usually done by explicitly adding extra band filters to shape the frequency response of the output, or by saturating the signal (intentionally clipping the signal) and shaping the clipping curve to introduce low level harmonic distortion. Thanks for the info! I'll check out the device you mentioned!
@4:38 You said, "any place where audio leaves the digital domain and enters the analog domain is where truncation happens" Question If your session is 24-bit 96kHz and you intend the final mix to be 24-bit 96kHz, and also the Playback medium is 24-bit 96kHz, Should you enable Dither to help other converters Playback the track with no Quantization errors? or will other converters be able to Playback with quantization errors without Dither?
This series is one of the best ways I’ve seen fundamentals be explained as of recent. I assumed this had millions of views, im shook. I know it’ll get there, keep up the good work
Thanks for taking the time out to leave me a comment man!
This is because the real explanation is complicated. Simple explanations are preferred, hence more popular. It doesn’t make the simple explanation right.
this series of videos are pure gold.
:)
Thanks from Brazil, you've help me a lot on my research, it's about to
pre-diagnose lung diseases with machine learning, and knowing how the audio process works... well, that's a change maker! Thank you again!
That's sounds very interesting and complicated! But I'm glad my videos were helpful! Good luck with you research..
What a marvel of an educational video. The animation, accenting previously made points, careful explanation...it all together makes obtained information stick. Thank you for all the hard work that must went into making this series!
Thanks so much for checking it out and commenting! It really validates the time spent on these videos!
Well done. You were able to bring us along without losing everyone in the usual details about dither. Thanks!
Thank you if you thought that it was consumable and not boring!
Excellent video! I like how you explain in a clear and not overly complicated language, the speed and tone of your voice also makes it easy to follow along!
Thanks for the feedback!
really great video man , form the information, explanations, examples, and overall quality. thank you for your effort in this videos
Thanks so much for checking it out man!
Absolutely Beautiful. Please don't stop making videos like this.
Thanks man! I'll try to keep making more.
Man, this is pure quality! Definitelhy going to watch the entire series. Thank you very much!
Thanks mate! I hope you like the rest of the series!
Cool Vid! I've been working on creating layered, more modern sounding drum samples for use in vintage digital drum machines. I've been converting my samples from 24bits/48kHz mono to 8bit/48kHz mono, but I've been plagued by quantization noise. This video goes a long way to help me understand things a whole lot better.
The best explanation on dither I've ever seen. Thanks for your videos!
Aww, cheers man!
Fantastically helpful and well done video. This saved me a lot of reading time. Thank you.
You're welcome mate!
On my journey to better masters. This was well explained
Thanks !
All the best on your journey!
Amazing video! For the first time I can HEAR what the dithering does and how it really affects the sound!
Your videos are superb. This video series should be the introduction to any audio engineering class!
Thank you! :)
This has to be the highest production value on a leture ive seen in my life. I honestly cant believe this isnt behind a paywall.
Ah mate! That's mighty kind of you. It doesn't have to be behind a paywall for me, since I have other avenues of income. It makes sense that fundamental videos like this are more accessible, and more niche and specific implementation videos be behind a paywall.
@@akashmurthy yeah i can understand that, still this is just miles beyond any other source ive sought to use, to learn on the subject. The dif between this series' take on Dither and other stuff thats available is unreal
wait how does this video have so few likes? This is top quality youtube here!
Getting there ;)
Fantastic explanation!! Hope this goes viral between the audio community!
Thanks mate!
This is perfect, thank you very much for the detailed animation and your vivid explanations!
You're welcome! Thanks for checking it out!
Never thought that noise is useful until I saw this video. Great explanation!
Superb!
your videos will help me with a test next week, thanks!
Good luck with the test mate!
Briliant explanation, the best I found
Amazing video! Congratulations! Excelent explanation.
Thanks mate!
A really cogent explanation.
Best explanation Ive ever seen , thx
Thanks mate! :)
explained very well, thanks!
Thanks for checking it out!
Finally a good explanation.. awesome man, thank you!! I understood you better than Bob Katz :)
Thanks for your effort man😊
So basically we can say that ditherkng does cancle out the unwanted noise inthe diwn sampled audio,right?
Excellent video Akash 👌
Thank you!
I feel dirty watching this for free... This series are incredible.
Haha! Thanks, I feel clean giving it for free.
Super helpful
thanks
You said that at hight bit rates there are less troubles with sound tears and digital errors, does this mean that when converting a 32-bit audio to a 24-bit depth I will not ran into digital/ analogue problems?
You will, but the artifacts won't be audible. It'll be several dBFS below the audible limit. Unless the audio track was recorded at really low levels and there's a lot of signal-to-noise ratio in the track, and it's driven up quite high, you won't notices these artifacts at 24 bits of resolution.
@@akashmurthy Found your series just now, and loving it! If I downsample from 32 bits to 24 and then from 24 another generation to 16 bits, would that final signal be reproduced identically to a version where I went from 32 straight to 16? Would dithering 32 --> 24, or 24 --> 24 make sense for archival purposes? Many thanks, this has been a great refresher so far.
Your videos are simply the best! I've read that dither is also applied at the input stage of an analog to digital converter, but I didn't hear you mentioning it... is it true? or am I wrong?
Thanks a lot my man!
You're right, dither is sometimes applied to analog signals to reduce quantisation noise when passing through an ADC. I'm not sure why though, because analog signals have enough noise withing themselves to self dither! I haven't dug too deep into it, it's probably worth exploring more. Thanks!
Digital saw waves will sound 'metallic' when they're above a certain frequency. I understand that's because when the frequency increases the accuracy of sampling diminishes. A saw wave contains many overtones, so I assume those overtones become aliased.
I've downloaded a couple of samples of the basic oscillator sounds from analog substractive synths. The samples are 48000 sps and 16bit. And from around C5 the saw waves already starts to sound metallic.
Is dithering or adding noise a way to improve this? A noisy saw wave sounds better than a saw wave with dissonant overtones. Or do you have other suggestions?
So you mentioned when frequency increases, the accuracy of sampling diminishes. That's not true. The sampling accuracy will remain more or less accurate from 0Hz to the Nyquist frequency. It depends on the ADC ofcourse, but good quality converters can do this with ease.
The second point is true! A pure sawtooth wave contains many overtones, so the overtones become aliased.
Now, dithering is not really a technique used for anything other than masking quantization noise. I can understand why you may prefer it. Because broadband noise is more pleasing to the ears than dissonance.
But honestly, a well created sawtooth wave should not contain any "metallic" dissonance. The higher the fundamental frequency of the sawtooth wave, the more it should sound like a Sine wave.
But if you already have a few sawtooth sample files, and if they already contain aliased components, then tough luck. It's very difficult to get rid of aliasing after it's been recorded onto a file.
You can watch videos 2 - 4 from this series which talks about sampling and aliasing!
@@akashmurthy Thanks for replying!
I shall continu watching your videos.
It's mainly used to make a soft sound easier to hear or seem more quite...increase the noise floor....whisper.
your videos are very well done,congratulations!
i also notice a similarity with Dan Worral's videos
Cheers! Thank you. I have checked out Dan Worral's video on dither, it's really good and in-depth!
HI! Can you tell me what software is it at 12:13 ? Looking for a software to show the precise graph of freq-amplitude. Thank you!
Sure, it's called Sonic Visualizer and it's a free software.
@@akashmurthy Thank you ! 'cuz my audacity's "Frequency Analysis" is so poorly working and doesn't have a realtime response.
Maestro!
Conclusion: Marilyn is beautiful at any resolution.
hehe, even when he calls her Grace Kelly ;)
😁😂
what's the different between mp3 and wav, bit depth and bit rate ? should you always turn on dithering while export the project for the low quality product like mp3 ?
That's an interesting question. Should you dither when exporting to MP3?
MP3 is a fundamentally different compression and encoding scheme. You don't have a constant bit depth throughout the entire recording. You have variable bit depth for different frequency bands based on the amount of spectral content in that band, and the psychoacoustics influence of that band for human hearing.
So, as you can imagine, MP3 compression and encoding, is quite complex, and I can't explain it in a comment. There is definitely other resources out there which you can check out, which explains MP3.
Coming to the question, I don't know! I tried looking for the answer for a little while, and didn't find anything conclusive. Seems like different people have opinion, and to find the fact, I need to dig much further and do some experiments. So, I might take a look at it later.
So does it means that we always should edit audio in 24 or 32 bits and only go 16 bit on final export?
@@joaomarcelobadu ideally yes. On your daws, when editing, you're always on 32 bit floating point format anyway.
Thank u so much Brother
You're welcome mate!
1 Bit - 2 Amplitude Levels - Minimal Quantiz
2 Bit - 4 Amplitude Levels - Super Low Quaniz
3 Bit - 8 Amplitude Levels - Very Lower Quantiz
4 Bit - 16 Amplitude Levels - Very Low Quantiz
5 Bit - 32 Amplitude Levels - Very Lowean Quantiz
6 Bit - 64 Amplitude Levels - Lower Quantiz
8 Bit - 256 Amplitude Levels - Low Quantiz
10 Bit - 1'024 Amplitude Levels - Lowean Quantiz
12 Bit - 4'096 Amplitude Levels - Lower Mid Quantiz
16 Bit - 65'536 Amplitude Levels - Medium Quantiz
20 Bit - 1'048'576 Amplitude Levels - Mean Quantiz
24 Bit - 16'777'216 Amplitude Levels - Average Quantiz
32 Bit - 4'294'967'296 Amplitude Levels - High Quantiz - Big CPU Usage
40 Bit - 1'099'511'627'776 Amplitude Levels - Higean Quantiz - Significant CPU Usage
48 Bit - 281'474'976'710'656 Amplitude Levels - Higherage Quantiz - Gross CPU Usage
64 Bit - 18'446'744'073'709'551'616 Amplitude Levels - Super High Quantiz - Gross CPU Usage
80 Bit - 1.208'926e24 Amplitude Levels - Very Higean Quantiz - Great CPU Usage
96 Bit - 7.922'816e28 Amplitude Levels - Very Higerage Quantiz - Large CPU Usage
128 Bit - 3.402'824e38 Amplitude Levels - Very Super High Quantiz - Huge CPU Usage
160 Bit - 1.461'502e48 Amplitude Levels - Super Highean Quantiz - Vast CPU Usage
192 Bit - 6.277'102e57 Amplitude Levels - Super Higherage Quantiz - Sizable CPU Usage
256 Bit - 1.157'921e77 Amplitude Levels - Hyper High Quantiz - Massive CPU Usage
320 Bit - 2.135'987e96 Amplitude Levels - Very Super Highean Quantiz - Extensive CPU Usage
384 Bit - 3.940'201e115 Amplitude Levels - Very Super Higherage Quantiz - Enormous CPU Usage
512 Bit - 1.340'781e154 Amplitude Levels - Very Hyper High Quantiz - Giant CPU Usage
640 Bit - 4.562'441e192 Amplitude Levels - Hyper Highean Quantiz - Ultimate CPU Usage
768 Bit - 1.552'518e231 Amplitude Levels - Hyper Higherage Quantiz - Superior CPU Usage
1 KBit - 1.797'693e308 Amplitude Levels - Super Hyper High Quantiz - Gigantic CPU Usage
goated video!
how do you convert to analog signal after you have applied dithering to samples, weren't the data just getting corrupted? few videos ago , the samples can have unique solution when sampled at correct position. does this still get unique solution? maybe it will still get unique solution at a given frequency, but dithering will spread noise across multiple frequency? by the way , can i have your email.
Dithering manifests as noise. You could call that 'corruption', but it's being done for a reason right.
Any set of sampled points which constrained to a nyquist frequency will give you a single solution. The solution that is achieved with the original signal dithered, is the original signal with noise added.
If dithered correctly, the noise is spread evenly across the entire frequency range, up until the nyquist frequency. Atleast, that's the desirable outcome.
You can contact me on any of the social channels I've listed in the description.
could you make a video talk about how eq's phase shift result unexpected frequency change？for example, low cut may cause a boost of frequency of low mid...
Hmm, someone else had requested something similar. Must be a hot topic! Linear phase EQs solve the problem of unintentionally colouring the sound, since they use Finite Impulse Response (FIR) filters, which are computationally more expensive than the more commonly used IIR filters. Cool choice, I'll definitely try to make a topic on this when I get into filtering.
But in this series on the fundamentals of digital audio, it's too specific a topic to be covering over here. I hope you understand. Thanks for the suggestion.
@@akashmurthy Thanks, I will wait lol
Thank you sir..🔥🔥👍
You're welcome, and no "sir" please!
Wait, I thought the noise is a function of the audio, not white noise? But here it's uncorrelated unless the signal is fairly simple. What am I missing?
You're right, quantization noise is a function of the audio signal, and correlated. But you can only hear the correlation in the error in simple signals, or if the bit depth is low, or if the signal is sufficiently low in level. But for rich, loud signals at a commonly chosen audio bit depth, the noise "sounds" uncorrelated and random, since there are no descernible patterns which develop in the error signal.
@@akashmurthy I see, thank you for explaining. Thank you also for making this awesome series!
👍
There is a desirable quality to the 12-bit samplers and drum machines of the 80's and 90's such as the E-Mu sp1200 and Emulator II. A lot of this love comes from the analog filter designs of the era, 2 pole and 4 pole, but there are some new pieces of gear that allow you to sample at 12-bit, 22k intentionally.. It would be cool if you could do a video where you could speak to the psychology of what we are liking when we hear that 12-bit in music - being preferable to the sterile 16-bit. I don't know if the musical equipment (specific samplers, synthesizers, and sampling drum machines) is beyond the scope of your expertise, but some of the vintage gear is getting pricey due to the desirability of their character. Could it be the harmonics and inharmonic frequencies bouncing off each other that draws us to that sound? Or is it the rudimentary DACs? thank you. If you want to hear what im driving at, Alex Ball has a new short video on the SP1200 drum machine "the lo-fi dream machine" where he touches on this. Easily found here on RUclips. Thanks! LOVE your work.
Hello again! As you have correctly guessed, I have little to no expertise in analog synthesizers and older analog gear. But what you say is quite right. The desirable quality of the audio output of these older analog devices are usually combination of all those factors: low bit depth, inaccuracies in ADC/DAC conversion, the typically non-flat frequency response of the filters used, etc.
It's got a characteristically "warm" sound that digital plugins tend to try and simulate. These are usually done by explicitly adding extra band filters to shape the frequency response of the output, or by saturating the signal (intentionally clipping the signal) and shaping the clipping curve to introduce low level harmonic distortion.
Thanks for the info! I'll check out the device you mentioned!
this explans why my SDR can pickup signals below the -48dBfs 😅 i thought noise is useless
11:28 5-sec countdown
Wow ,,
@4:38 You said, "any place where audio leaves the digital domain and enters the analog domain is where truncation happens"
Question
If your session is 24-bit 96kHz and you intend the final mix to be 24-bit 96kHz, and also the Playback medium is 24-bit 96kHz,
Should you enable Dither to help other converters Playback the track with no Quantization errors? or will other converters be able to Playback with quantization errors without Dither?
24 bit, 192 KHz!
I had to stop watching because of all the saliva sounds. Made me feel sick.
Why did you think anyone would care