Musepack Forums  

Go Back   Musepack Forums > Main > Tech

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08 October 2011, 12:45 pm   #1
Grunt's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Morava
Posts: 3
Default Suzanne Vega - Tonal component removed

Hi guys. Have you ever heard Tom's Diner(.mpc) without tonal component?

I just tried to replace all the "Samples data" with white noise and I was surprised myself how much information nontonal component carries and how good does it sounds despite the fact that polyphase filter bank used in MPEG/MPC has only 32-subbands (is like some equalizer bars with 32-taps (or bars) uniformly dispersed across the spectrum and with time resolution 1152 samples). I knew that for hearing/perceiving purposes, only matters on noise-envelope shape and that envelope shape can be approximated ([1]->[2] and some Monty's articles I think) but I never thought it can be so rough and yet sound so good. Do you know someone about some R&D activity concerning this phenomena (in example I'm interested in: How rough shape can be, what is sufficient frequency & time resolution, what are the relationships between tonal and non-tonal components, how does it all affects p-a masking and so on) best with results in form of papers?

Just out of curiosity: If I subtract from bitstream count of sample bits, I get for this clip 11.2kbps (standard preset and for pure bitstream (packets, their headers + resolution, SCF_types and SCFs)) because on sample data doesn't matter and can be replicated on decoder side. Interesting, isn't it?

Added:with more variations (i.E.: stereo, more Percussion). Tom's Diner is purely voice illustration. 10 meaningless points for every clip, which you identify.

Last edited by Grunt; 08 October 2011 at 01:49 pm. Reason: More examples
Grunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08 October 2011, 05:28 pm   #2
Shy's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 372

It's definitely an interesting topic. You know, regarding your surprise by this, I can tell for example something that surprised me even more: I have an old analog 10 band vocoder (SEV-66) and it's amazing that even such a seemingly simple processor can retain a huge amount of very comprehensible information from the source (speech for example) with just its noise generator (and with other wide-band input signals). Merely 10 bands and yet pretty much anything is interpreted with comprehensible accuracy. When I compared to 40-band vocoders, not only was there no real improvement, they were actually worse (hard to compare,though, since it's digital implementations).

I don't know about relevant research papers unfortunately, but there are a few here with technical knowledge who might.
Shy is offline   Reply With Quote

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

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:45 am.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 2
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.