View Full Version : Dither methods to get to 16-bit master...?

05-09-2002, 06:35 AM
Just got the L2. Sounds great. Infinitely better than the L1. The tech guy at Waves told me that beyond the ARC control that the L2 also has 9th order noise shaping on IDR, as opposed to 2nd order on the L1. (That's 7 more, isn't it?)

I still need to do a "shootout" I guess, but I was wondering what other folks do. Anyone using L2 dither to get to 16-bit? My inclination is to dither on the L2 to 24-bit, then have a dedicated, quality plug like POWr or Master Tools do the dither.


05-09-2002, 07:18 AM
Hi Knewbie,

The Pow-R dither seems to work best for me. Am curious about whether the L2 dithers straight from 48 to 16 or whether it goes from 48 to 24 and then to 16. Waves' new Linear Multiband i think is even better than the L2. Very very hi-fi.

05-09-2002, 07:04 PM
Yeah, the L2 dithers from it's internal 48 to 24. It's also a different beats than the linear multiband, which does rock, from what I hear...

Mark Haliday
05-10-2002, 02:21 PM
I use L2 all the time, both for dithering and more or less heavy level control depending on the style of music (my work covers anything between classical music and heavy metal...!)
This tool differs greatly from multiband compression in that MB comp will change tonal balance even with very conservative settings.
This can be desirable, but when you have a great sounding mix and you feel you want to keep the tonal balance as it is, L2 will often make it even better without tampering with the sound.
The dither tools is no doubt one of the best. Wave was actually one of the first companies to have a proper dithering plugin.
How it compares to PoW I cannot say. I suppose it will take some music with soft parts to be able to tell the difference.
The nice thing about dithering in L2 is going straight from it's internal resolution to 16 bit, without doing a first truncation or dither to 24 bit.

Alécio Costa
05-10-2002, 11:39 PM
I use MASTERX but i have felt that for more acoustic sound, it is not quite good. however, for more pop/sequenced sound, it does right. I used myself at my soon to be released CD.

what about latency with the Masters series? L2, linear...?
Do you recommend me any chain insert change?

Q10 > L1 > TC >
Power dither (final bounces)

thanks in advance
nice weekend

05-12-2002, 09:36 AM
Latency shouln't matter when you're in the mastering phase.

Wondering who else has thoughts on the dither in L2 vs. POWr vs. MasterTools. It's a hard thing to pick up using just my ears, but if someone else has gotten all scientific and obsessive about it, I'd love to hear what they think...

05-12-2002, 11:00 AM
Hi knewbee,

Don't mean to appropriate this thread, but I just wanted to expand on my reasons for choosing PowR dither over some of the others.

Frankly, I gravitated to PowR in the first place because of the collective pedigrees of the design team and the number of golden-eared folks (working in pristine monitoring environments) that rave about it.

There are many factors that come into play when evaluating the effectiveness of an oft-times subtle process like dither:

The noise-floor of your raw tracks
The complexity of your mix -- ie how many plugs, how much gain manipulation (and where in the signal-path you change the gain), etc.
The nature of the music -- ie synthesized, panpotted and rhythmically dense vs acoustic, stereo miced, and sparse
The quality of your convertors, monitors, and acoustical treatment.

In my own work, I can tell the difference about 20% of the time-- but its that 20% when all of the above-mentioned factors are dilligently accounted for that the quality of the PowR dither really becomes apparent.

Mark Haliday
05-14-2002, 01:09 PM
Interesting, will have to try that...