Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Legacy Products > Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-23-2005, 11:33 PM
Loudnoize Ent. Loudnoize Ent. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 483
Default TPDF vs. POW-r Dithering

Anyone use TPDF dithering and how does it compare to POW-r?

Thanks...
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-24-2005, 12:43 AM
Monte McGuire Monte McGuire is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Malden, MA USA
Posts: 292
Default Re: TPDF vs. POW-r Dithering

I personally think POW-r sounds better than simple TPDF for "large" dithering, such as going from 24 to 16 bit where you have a chance of actually hearing it. For situations where I'm dithering to 24 or 20 bit, usually in the middle of some sort of operations between processors, I'll use unshaped dither (essentially TPDF) just to reduce the amplitude of the dither but to make sure it's sufficient to avoid nonlinearity. For me, this seems to work the best.

For example, I usually follow L2 with a POW-r insert set for 16 bit. I set L2 to unshaped 24 bit dither and let POW-r go to 16 bit. Back when SpectraFoo was working on my rig, it seemed that L2 behaved better at microscopic signal levels with unshaped 24 bit dither, so I decided to stick with that. (Now that there's an OSX version of 'foo, I'll have to revisit this!)

As always, take a listen and see if it matters for you or your material. Sometimes, different dithers can impart a very subtly different timbre to a mix, so it's worth choosing a dither that matches the timbre you're aiming for. Might as well line your ducks up in a straight line... maybe it mattters, but it probably won't hurt.

Specifically, POW-r type 3 is more apt to lend a glossy, focused or 'hard' presentation, which could go well where you're trying to make something glossy and bright. Type 1 is a lot more gentle, so it seems to work better for me when i want the result to be less hyped.

I do find POW-r to be preferable to any other dither for going to 16 bit though. It really is good...

Best of luck,

-monte-
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-24-2005, 10:03 PM
Loudnoize Ent. Loudnoize Ent. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 483
Default Re: TPDF vs. POW-r Dithering

Thanks for your response Monte. Out of curiosity, would you sometimes use Digi's POWr dither or 3rd party software, that is if not sent to a mastering house?

Thanks again.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-25-2005, 11:09 AM
Alécio Costa's Avatar
Alécio Costa Alécio Costa is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Florianópolis, Magic Island - Brazil
Posts: 2,835
Default Re: TPDF vs. POW-r Dithering

I totally agree with MCguire. Power level1 more subtle, Power Level seems to reveal a hyped top end.

BTW... do you guys bounce to disk, bounce internally with bussing or mix to an extrenal 2 track machine (analog/digital).

I am a little off topic but more and more guys are repoting some "frying high ends" after ordinary bouncing.

Thanks
__________________
Alécio Costa Studio
High-End e-Mastering & Music Production
www.aleciocosta.com

http://www.facebook.com/alecio.costa

PT HD2 Accel - 10.3.10 OS 10.6.8 - Mac Pro 1,1 16GB RAM and Mac Pro 2,1 GB
Mastering Gear: Pendulum Audio, Crane Song, Avalon, Great River, Sebatron, Sonnox, Izotope, PSP, TC, Fab Filter.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-25-2005, 11:23 AM
minister's Avatar
minister minister is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 4,807
Default Re: TPDF vs. POW-r Dithering

i am have been reprinting more and more and bouncing less and less. even on simple things. i have begun to dither and SRC in BARBABATCH.

i have been messing with the Dither on the Sony Limiter. it has Type 1, 2, 3, 4 & TPDF. they have their different applications. TPDF, for me, does not work on just voice. Type 1 does. but i got TPDF to be the preferred method on a music mix. it is nice that you can adjust the percentage of shaping from 0-100%. a lot about the dithers are explained in the sony manual.

as for POW-r, i roughly agree with what has been said. i rarely use 2 because i often find that the high end sounds a little harsh. 1 is OK, 3 sounds best to me on most things.

...but it depends on the material...
__________________
Tom Hambleton CAS
Ministry of Fancy Noises
IMDb
Undertone on Facebook
Undertone Custom Sound Libraries

"Groupable markers would be epochal!"
-Starcrash
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-10-2019, 03:17 PM
Jeezer Jeezer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: GB
Posts: 66
Default Re: TPDF vs. POW-r Dithering

Old post but in 2019 there's no difference between bouncing to disk or printing to a track in PT12+ at least...

As for the Dither question, for me.. POW-R2 for most things, but it can be program dependent.

TDPF = slight smearing and coldness (reduced bass, hyped top)
POWr1 = increased bottom reduced top - more mushy
POWr2 = the closest to source and any minute change is 'for the better' but really... hardly there if at all
POWr3 = Reduced bottom increased top (opposite of POWr1) mix becomes lopsided and hypes the high freqs.

Given all this, POWr2 seems the best if you want it as close to the Pro Tools master as possible. You may want to use 1/3 if you find it somehow improves a less than already perfect master.
__________________
Windows 10 | i7 8700k Coffee Lake 6c/12t @ 5GHZ all cores | 3333mhz 32GB CL14 GSkill RJ Ram | 970 Evo SSD | PT12 HD @ 88.2k | ICON D-Command | Prism Titan Converters
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-11-2019, 12:12 PM
JFreak's Avatar
JFreak JFreak is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 17,221
Default Re: TPDF vs. POW-r Dithering

Just for kicks, try the Apogee UV22HR dithering. Easiest to buy Logic and dither there. I have no idea why there is no AAX plugin but is included in LX anyway. Much better than any POW-r version out there
__________________
Janne
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-11-2019, 12:32 PM
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
Bob Olhsson Bob Olhsson is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Songwriter Gulch, Nashville, TN
Posts: 3,335
Default Re: TPDF vs. POW-r Dithering

The real-world test is what sounds best after being converted with a lossy encoding codec or adjusted with today's digital volume controls. Almost nobody outside a studio is ever going to hear our dithering choices and theoretically, TPDF accepts additional processing better than anything other than floating-point files.
__________________
Bob's room 615 562-4346
Georgetown Masters 615 254-3233
Interview
Artists are the gatekeepers of truth! - Paul Robeson
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-11-2019, 12:52 PM
JFreak's Avatar
JFreak JFreak is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 17,221
Default Re: TPDF vs. POW-r Dithering

Sad but true
__________________
Janne
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dithering JohnChancey Tips & Tricks 2 01-13-2007 04:27 PM
Dithering tomdiek 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 1 12-12-2006 07:43 AM
Dithering on PT... hed 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 4 06-12-2006 04:42 PM
Which one has the better dithering? TiPo Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) 4 04-26-2003 10:17 AM
Dithering away peppertree 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 1 12-31-1999 01:50 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:18 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com