About Dynamic Processing in Mainstream Music

Deruty, Emmanuel; Tardieu, Damien

doi:10.17743/jaes.2014.0001

Cited by 17 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1 for samples from each decade between the 1980s and 2000s. While the "loudness war" has been welldocumented [9][10][11]42] and has been observed by plotting individual amplitude-based variables over time, one can now see that the effect is visible on a factor level in a feature reduced space. The samples from the 1980s display more variation across dim.…”

Section: Insight Into Music Production Trendsmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…Often, non-linear distortion has been considered, where the intensity of the distortion has been shown to degrade the quality of both speech and music signals [4][5][6][7][8]. Similar considerations have been made regarding the use of dynamic range compression on music signals [9][10][11] as well as bandwidth and quantization distortion [12].…”

Section: Assessment Of Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In previous studies regarding the analysis of music releases, samples were included from the 1950s [26] or 1960s [9,11] onwards. In these studies, music samples that pre-date the commercial release of the CD (1982) would have been remastered for release in a digital format at a later date.…”

Section: Audio Datasetmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Perception of Audio Quality in Productions of Popular Music

Wilson¹,

Fazenda²

2016

J. Audio Eng. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The quality of recorded music is often highly disputed. To gain insight into the dimensions of quality perception, subjective and objective evaluation of musical program material, extracted from commercial CDs, was undertaken. It was observed that perception of audio quality and liking of the music can be affected by separate factors. Familiarity with stimuli affected like ratings while quality ratings were most associated with signal features related to perceived loudness and dynamic range compression. The effect of listener expertise was small. Additionally, the sonic attributes describing quality ratings were gathered and indicate a diverse lexicon relating to timbre, space, defects, and other concepts. The results also suggest that while the perceived quality of popular music may have decreased over recent years, like ratings were unaffected. INTRODUCTIONIn the context of recorded sound there is great debate over which parameters influence the perception of quality or how quality should be defined. In the context of product development, sound quality has been defined as the "result of an assessment of the perceived auditory nature of a sound with respect to its desired nature" [1]. In order to assess the audio quality of a recording, the requirements for quality must be identified as well as the inherent characteristics of the audio signal. These characteristics must then be measured and used to estimate quality, which is then optimized subject to various constraints, e.g., the available budget, human resources, and projected time-to-market. This paper details the findings of a study into the perception of quality in commercial music productions, attempting to ascertain which objective and subjective parameters are involved as well as the relative importance of these parameters. ASSESSMENT OF QUALITYA variety of theories and methodologies exist for the assessment of quality in many different fields. A number of these can be applied to reproduced sound. In this context, quality judgments can be considered to be based on technical properties of the signal, such as bandwidth or distortion, or based on hedonic preference, which might be influenced by personal aspects of familiarity.International standards exist regarding the measurement of audio quality based on determining the level of degradation from a reference [2]. These procedures are formulated under the assumption that a reference item exists, which can be used as an example of greatest quality, and test items are then compared against this reference. This usually applies to systems where the reference is formed from the original version of the program material and the test samples under evaluation are copies that have undergone some form of processing. The evaluation of systems such as audio codecs [3] is a good example of this type of approach. In these circumstances, it is not strictly the inherent quality of the program material that is being measured but rather the perceived degradation in quality of the signal, after being subject to destructive pr...

show abstract

Section: Insight Into Music Production Trendsmentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Assessment Of Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Perception of Audio Quality in Productions of Popular Music

Wilson¹,

Fazenda²

2016

J. Audio Eng. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Whereas a majority of early automatic mixing systems were concerned with setting levels, recent years have also seen automation of increasingly "complex" processors such as dynamic range compressors (Maddams et al, 2012;Giannoulis et al, 2013;Hilsamer and Herzog, 2014;Mason et al, 2015;Mimilakis et al, 2016b) and reverb effects Reiss, 2016, 2017;Benito and Reiss, 2017). Research on such systems has also inspired several works on furthering understanding of the complex mix process and its perception (De Man et al, 2014a;Deruty and Tardieu, 2014;Pestana and Reiss, 2014b;Wilson and Fazenda, 2016b). Recently, we have also seen significant activity in exploring these techniques for live performance in a diversity of manners (Leeuw, 2009(Leeuw, , 2012Fasciani, 2014;Brandtsegg, 2015;Baalman et al, 2018;Brandtsegg et al, 2018a).…”

Section: The Automatic Mixing Revolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Applications of Cross-Adaptive Audio Effects: Automatic Mixing, Live Performance and Everything in Between

Reiss

Brandtsegg

2018

Front. Digit. Humanit.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides a systematic review of cross-adaptive audio effects and their applications. These effects extend the boundaries of traditional audio effects by potentially having many inputs and outputs, and deriving their behavior based on analysis of the signals. This mode of control allows the effects to adapt to different material, seemingly "being aware" of what they do to signals. By extension, cross-adaptive processes are designed to take into account features of, and relations between, several simultaneous signals. Thus a more global awareness and responsivity can be achieved in the processing system. When such a system is used in real-time for music performance, we observe cross-adaptive performative effects. When a musician uses the signals of other performers directly to inform the timbral character of her own instrument, it enables a radical expansion of the human-to-human interaction during music making. In order to give the signal interactions a sturdy frame of reference, we engage in a brief history of applications as well as a classification of effects types and clarifications in relation to earlier literature. With this background, the current paper defines the field, lays a formal framework, explores technical aspects and applications, and considers the future of this growing field.

show abstract

“…Additionally, each final stimulus defined in Table 2 (including NC) was subject to one final RMS-normalization to −15dbFS. RMS-loudness, rather than the Loudness Unit (LU) metric specificed in ITU-R BS-1770 [43], was used due to the ongoing debate concerning the suitability of LU for musical signals [14], [44], the wide availability of RMS loudness in music production software, and its consequent widespread use by professional sound engineers. However, the LUFS of our processed stimuli had a mean of -17.68 LUFS with SD = 0.09, showing very little variance between stimuli and good agreement (in terms of dispersal) between LU and RMS loudness for our stimulus set.…”

Section: Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

Listener Preferences for Alternative Dynamic-Range-Compressed Audio Configurations

Campbell¹,

Paterson²,

Linde³

2017

J. Audio Eng. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some audio experts have proposed that using Dynamic Range Compression (DRC) to increase the loudness of music compromises audio quality. Conversely, in listening tests, researchers sometimes find that audio subjected to DRC is preferred over uncompressed audio. We test the hypothesis that it is DRC configuration, rather than the use of DRC per se, that determines listener preferences. In this study, 130 listeners completed 13 A/B preference trials using pairs of RMS loudness-equalized stimuli subjected to different DRC configurations: viz., two magnitudes (heavy, moderate) and two compression types (limiting, compression) applied at three different points in the mix chain (track, subgroup, and master buss, here termed full-sum), along with an uncompressed control stimulus. Our results suggest that listeners prefer audio in which moderate compression has been applied to fewer signals simultaneously and dislike heavy limiting, particularly when applied to the full-sum, presumably because heavy DRC (and particularly limiting) applied to pre-mixed signals produces disagreeable distortion or because tracks whose amplitude characteristics would not have reached the DRC threshold alone may be deleteriously affected (e.g., attenuated) as a consequence of amplitude peaks in other tracks with which they are grouped.

show abstract

About Dynamic Processing in Mainstream Music

Cited by 17 publications

References 6 publications

Perception of Audio Quality in Productions of Popular Music

Perception of Audio Quality in Productions of Popular Music

Applications of Cross-Adaptive Audio Effects: Automatic Mixing, Live Performance and Everything in Between

Listener Preferences for Alternative Dynamic-Range-Compressed Audio Configurations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About