Skip to main content
Topic: Does DRC make ABX easier? (Read 3398 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Does DRC make ABX easier?

Hey guys,

I've been looking at waveform displays of some of the files in my music collection. I've noticed that some of them exhibit DRC, and others do not. I was wondering whether tracks that are DRCd have greater susceptibility to the kind of artifacts that make ABX easier. For example, if I have a DRCd flac file, and I ABX it with its MP3 version, would I stand a better chance of ABX than with a non DRCd file?

Thanks.

Does DRC make ABX easier?

Reply #1
Dynamic range compression adds more noise and compressing noise transparently is one of the challenges for lossless audio encoders.

Does DRC make ABX easier?

Reply #2
Dynamic range compression adds more noise and compressing noise transparently is one of the challenges for lossless audio encoders.

Don't you mean lossy? All lossless compression is transparent.

Does DRC make ABX easier?

Reply #3
I see. Thanks for the info.

Does DRC make ABX easier?

Reply #4
I've been looking at waveform displays of some of the files in my music collection. I've noticed that some of them exhibit DRC, and others do not. I was wondering whether tracks that are DRCd have greater susceptibility to the kind of artifacts that make ABX easier. For example, if I have a DRCd flac file, and I ABX it with its MP3 version, would I stand a better chance of ABX than with a non DRCd file?


By DRC do you mean dynamic range compression, or do you mean daa rate compression? Both have the initials DRV, right?

From your context, I presume that you mean dynamic range compression.

I would then state your question as being: "Does compressiing the dynamic range of music make it more likely to excite or stimulate audible artifacts in other parts of the reproduciotn chain."

The answer to that queswtion is yes and no, because some artifacts are more likely to be audibly stimulated by music with compressed dynamic range, and other artifcats are less likely to be audibly stimumated by music with compressed dynamic rnage.

For example, the family of artifacts we call clipping are both more likely and less likely to be stimulated audibly by music with compressed dynamic range. 

If you raise the level of the music to the point where it is clipped, music with compressed dynamic range will be clipped more of the time, and thus the clipping is more likely to be heard.

However, music with compressed dynamic range is likely to be perceived as being at a similar loudness, even though its peak level is less. The lower peak level is less likely to be clipped much of the time. Therefore the clipping is less likely to be heard.

I therefore conclude that music that has been processed with dynamic range compression is both more and less likely to audibly stimlate clipping artifacts. It all depends on how you pick your listening levels.



 

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2020