> Dithering doesn't create resolution out of nowhere, it sacrifices temporal resolution for amplitude resolution.
Could you elaborate on that? As I understand it, dithering trades distortion for uncorrelated noise, under the assumption that the distortion is more objectionable than the noise. Where did you come to the conclusion that temporal resolution is affected? The temporal resolution is instead related to the frequency resolution.
I agree that 48kHz/24-bit is the most sensible for production, especially since (as you said) you don't have to worry about the levels too much. But when you master a track, you pay very close attention to the levels anyway, so those 8 extra bits don't do you any good. I think most people can't hear past 12 or 14 bits anyway, unless the audio has a particularly wide dynamic range.
The article talks about representing signals below the notional noise floor using dithering, which requires either temporal dithering or something morally equivalent to it - if your ear is detecting an average of dither + waveform, then it has to have several samples to average from.
Could you elaborate on that? As I understand it, dithering trades distortion for uncorrelated noise, under the assumption that the distortion is more objectionable than the noise. Where did you come to the conclusion that temporal resolution is affected? The temporal resolution is instead related to the frequency resolution.
I agree that 48kHz/24-bit is the most sensible for production, especially since (as you said) you don't have to worry about the levels too much. But when you master a track, you pay very close attention to the levels anyway, so those 8 extra bits don't do you any good. I think most people can't hear past 12 or 14 bits anyway, unless the audio has a particularly wide dynamic range.