Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

Difference between dither in Audition CC and Izotope

Nov 13, 2013 7:02 AM

Hi,

 

I there an advantage to dithering in Audition CC vs dithering in RX3 Advanced?  I have read that Adobe has licensed Izotope's dithering algorithms.

 

Thanks.

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 13, 2013 9:58 AM   in reply to Steve C2

    While I encourage someone with less bias and more facts to comment on the differences between Audition and RX3 dithering, Audition does rely on its own dithering algorithms and does not license this technology from iZotope.  Audition does license several effect plug-ins from iZotope, including the wonderful Multiband Compressor and the Radius time-stretch algorithm.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • SteveG(AudioMasters)
    5,593 posts
    Oct 26, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 15, 2013 3:55 AM   in reply to Steve C2

    Let's just clear this up a bit, just in case anybody else reads it and gets confused... One of the things that Adobe licenced from iZotope was some (very) restricted versions of Ozone components for use in the Audition mastering plugin. This doesn't include any dither options.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • SteveG(AudioMasters)
    5,593 posts
    Oct 26, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 15, 2013 11:24 AM   in reply to Steve C2

    Steve C2 wrote:

     

    Thanks, Steve.  Is there anything you can share regarding the licensed technologies, if there is anything new there.  Some things have been licensed since, I think, AA 3.

    As far as I'm aware, this hasn't altered. But hey, I don't use it - I have Ozone...

     

    But, do you have any thoughts regarding Audition CC's dithering?  I don't want to re-install AA 3, but there seem to be more options available in CC, regarding things such as an adaptive mode and an ability to control the crossover.  I am curious to know how well the adaptive mode works, or what its particular strengths are.  I would guess that adaptive mode works better for certain material than for others.

    Hard to say, really. Audition's adaptive mode takes rather longer to implement, but technically the results are indisputably more 'accurate' (considering that dither otherwise works by a devious statistical mechanism...), but does it sound any better? Hmm... Really, the only way you are going to notice any difference at all is if you have signals like reverb tails that would otherwise disappear into silence at about -96dB. What it's going to do there is determined by the type of noise that it transitions into. But if your file gets anywhere close to 0dB, then the chances of you actually being able to hear what happens at -96dB immediately afterwards - er, non-existent. Your ears only have a dynamic range of about 85dB. Louder sounds get attenuated by the middle ear hammer/anvil/stapes mechanism, so your response to quieter sounds immediately afterwards is depressed artificially. What that means is that if you have a series of quieter sounds disappearing into silence, then yes it might make a difference, so one of the 'shaped' responses would be a better bet. Subjectively, when tested a lot of people claimed to prefer MBIT - and that's a shaped system which shoves the higher bit depth of noise further up the frequency band where human ears aren't so sensitive. But hey, you can do this with Audition's shaped responses too, and in a blind test I reckon it would be pretty damn difficult to tell them apart.

     

    So:- Louder material, I don't think it makes a lot of difference. Much quieter material - go for one of the shaped responses or the Adaptive setting (if you have time!).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • SteveG(AudioMasters)
    5,593 posts
    Oct 26, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 16, 2013 6:35 AM   in reply to Steve C2

    Steve C2 wrote:

     

    I have a couple of guesses, though.  The first one is that adaptive mode would work better on material where there is a gradual and sustained change in dynamics, such as a slowly building crescendo. 

    Don't think it would make any difference, myself...

     

    Adaptive mode probably would't work as well, or possibly would on material with transients.  The second guess is that the option to change the crossover is conceptually similar to MBIT and possibly offers greater control over the end-result.

    You have to remember that this only applies to incredibly low level signals - the presence of transients won't affect this in the slightest. The whole point of dither is that it should be completely inaudible throughout the 'normal' hearing range - which is why I wonder why people make such a fuss about it!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 16, 2013 9:25 PM   in reply to Steve C2

    NOTE on side about iZotope:

    try to apply any of iZotope plug ins to only 1 channel of your stereo recording, and listen what you get !!!

    nobody from iZotope is willing to respond on this issue since Ozone 3 came out.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • SteveG(AudioMasters)
    5,593 posts
    Oct 26, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 17, 2013 3:09 AM   in reply to nahravka

    nahravka wrote:

    try to apply any of iZotope plug ins to only 1 channel of your stereo recording, and listen what you get !!! nobody from iZotope is willing to respond on this issue since Ozone 3 came out.

    I'm not surprised you don't get a response. I just tried this with Ozone 5 and it works perfectly.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 17, 2013 4:46 PM   in reply to SteveG(AudioMasters)

    Maybe you are right, and maybe iZotope Ozone5 was fixed, somehow it's hard to believe

    that it would happen without any major announcement from iZotope. Version 3 & 4, when

    applied only to 1 channel, it flip polarity to opposite amplitude and Stereo sounds horrible, of course there is simple work around this issue, but major problem, if you don't know about it.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • SteveG(AudioMasters)
    5,593 posts
    Oct 26, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 18, 2013 1:44 AM   in reply to Steve C2
    I would go ahead and contact Izotope, or, contact them again.  While my experiences may not reflect others, I have been able to get responses from them, through email.  I might get the response the same day or the next day.

    This is true - iZotope are actually pretty good at responding, and also at fixing things!

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points