Virtual bass synthesis and balancing bass in pop music

(1)

Virtual bass synthesis and balancing bass in

pop music

Edward Swords

Ljudteknik, kandidat 2019

Luleå tekniska universitet

(2)

1

Abstract:

(3)

2 Innehåll Abstract: ... 1 Introduction: ... 3 Background: ... 3 Balancing a mix... 3

Problems with small speakers ... 3

Possible solutions ... 3

Different methods of VBS ... 4

Phase-Vocoder Experiment ... 5

VBS in different genres ... 5

Maxxbass in depth... 6

Consumer headphones vs professional headphones ... 7

The research question ... 7

Method ... 8

Software for VBS processing ... 8

Sound reproduction systems ... 8

The Stimuli: ... 8

Pre study: ... 9

Adjustments of the stimulus ... 9

Pre study results: ... 9

Primary Study... 11

The test subjects ... 11

Primary Study in depth... 11

Experiment configuration... 12

The written survey... 13

Method for analyzing the quantitative data ... 13

Method for analysis qualitative data ... 13

Results ... 14

Analysis ... 16

Analysis quantitative data ... 16

Analysis qualitative data ... 17

Discussion: ... 19 Critique of methodology ... 20 Conclusions ... 20 Further research ... 21 Acknowledgements ... 22 References ... 23 Appendix: ... 24 Frequency response: ... 24

The written survey: ... 25

Results quantitative raw data: ... 27

Orginal qualitative Table... 28

(4)

3

Virtual bass synthesis and balancing

bass in pop music

Introduction:

There is an increasing amount of consumers that use speakers with a limited frequency bandwidth. They might for example listen to music or consume other media on a laptop. When describing the low frequency spectrum in this essay the term bass is used, it does not mean the instrument bass guitar. So how can the lack of bass be improved in small speakers? One very important factor is what the mix engineer does to balance the bass.

Background:

Balancing a mix

The mix engineer typically works in a control room with large studio monitors. For a mix engineer it is very important to get a good balance between instruments and to balance the frequency content of a song. The low end of the song should fit in with the rest of the mix and not be to low or high in volume. An engineer uses different tools such as, compression, equalization and more to make the balancing adjustments. When mixing bass, engineers usually think about, timbre, attack, sustain and other attributes of the low end. A lot of these decisions are made while listening on large speakers with a full-spectrum frequency response. Nowadays a mix engineer also must think of how it will read in smaller speakers, this is not just a problem for music. When an engineer mixes a movie one can assume that a lot of consumers are going to watch it on a laptop and not just in a cinema or in their super

expensive 5.1 set up at home. Making it too bass heavy or putting informational sounds in the low end can decrease the quality of the consumers experience for the film, while watching it on a unit with small speakers. The bass heavy mix won't read in small speakers thus the balance will seem off for a consumer that listens to it.

Problems with small speakers

The big challenge with small speakers is to get a well sounding bass enhancement. But how do we produce a well sounding bass using a loudspeaker that doesn’t have low-frequency capability? Some might try to squeeze out all the bass there is with equalizers and increase the bass content using low shelving filters. This method requires a lot of system headroom and can be pushed too much. This sort of bass boost can result in nonlinear distortion and damage the loudspeakers (Bai & Lin, 2006). It’s important to find a solution that doesn’t damage the loudspeakers, but still make the low-end more perceivable. Another problem with this lack of bass is that a lot of small speaker systems try to compensate by letting the consumer adjust the bass content using equalizers and other techniques by themselves. This can be difficult to do for a person that isn’t experienced in audio and could have a negative impact on the listening experience. That is a big reason why an engineer should try to control what the consumers will hear in their small speakers. What can a mixing engineer do to control and improve bass perceivability in small speakers?

Possible solutions

(5)

4

so-called linear boost (Enlund, 2018). However, there are different methods for improving the bass perception e.g. using nonlinear boost. This is a technique that reproduces the sound of lower frequencies by producing their harmonics, this is the concept of the missing

fundamental. There are different methods applying the idea of the missing fundamental. One idea that makes use of this concept is VBS (Virtual bass synthesis). VBS is an algorithm used to trick the human ear into hearing more bass in speakers that has a limited frequency

bandwidth. There are different kinds of VBS. All of them are based on the missing

fundamental concept, but use different algorithms and processing to achieve their result. A general algorithm for the making of VBS has two branches. One branch where the input signal is delayed, and one with the VBS, see figure 1. The VBS processing is made up by a bandpass filter (FIL1). This filter makes a selection of the audio signal that is going to be affected by the NLD (nonlinear device). The NLDs function is to shift the frequencies higher and create harmonics. After the NLD there is another band p ass filter (FIL2). The function of this filter is to form the timbre and spectrum of the harmonics created. All of this VBS signal goes through an amplifier and is added back to the delayed input signal.

Figure 1 Bandwidth extension (reproduced from Larsen & Aarts. 2002) Different methods of VBS

As stated before there are a lot of different ways to create VBS. There are already commercial products using VBS, one famous example is the Maxxbass plugin waves (2018). The

Maxxbass system uses a nonlinear device that converts frequencies to different harmonically related high frequencies. The NLD that Maxxbass uses has a feedback loop, an infinite number of harmonics can be created with this feedback loop. A problem that can occur from this type of processing is artifacts, created from intermodulation distortion. The problem with using this type of VBS that Maxxbass uses is that the phase coherence (Coherence means a constant phase relationship) can become problematic and create phasing issues. This creates artifacts in the audio. Applying VBS with a phase vocoder solution can be one way to solve this problem. This solution has been presented by Bai and Lin (2006). They propose a method that is affecting the frequency-domain to create VBS. The NLD in their method uses a

different approach than MaxxBass, the harmonic creator is based on a pitch shifting phase vocoder. Bai and Lin (2006) explains their kind of pitch shifting like this:

”It should be clear that pitch shifting is different from frequency shifting. By definition, frequency shifting applies a constant addition to every frequency component, whereas pitch shifting performs a constant multiplication with every frequency component. Pitch shifting alters the instantaneous frequency by a constant factor while maintaining phase coherence.” Bai and Lin (2006) (p. 4)

The Maxxbass on the other hand is based on a NLD that uses time-domain processing of the signal, not frequency-domain. Bai and Lins phase-vocoder approach should have the

(6)

5

Phase-Vocoder Experiment

To see if the Phase-Vocoder solution can be more effective when creating VBS than

Maxxbass, both an objective test and a subjective test were conducted by Bai and Lin (2006). The objective experiment was a preliminary test where pitch shifting using a phase vocoder was used. A sinusoid at 1 kHz was pitch shifted to create the second, third, and fourth harmonics. The point of the preliminary test was to make sure that the fundamental tone was shifted in frequency and that the method didn’t affect the time domain while implementing this type of VBS. The primary test was the subjective test, which used 16 subjects. The experiment was made with three different speaker setups, so basically three different listening tests was conducted. The tests were made using Multistimuli with both a hidden reference and an anchor. An anchor is a stimulus processed to be worse than the other stimuli and is used to make sure the listeners can hear a relevant difference between stimuli. The first part of the experiment used loudspeakers with a 120-Hz cutoff frequency. The second test used two different sets of loudspeakers with different stimuli in each setup. One speaker setup in test two, used the VBS-processed stimuli which were reproduced in (76-mm) loudspeakers, but the unprocessed signal was reproduced with (127-mm) loudspeakers. What bai and Lin wanted to test in the second listening test was the subjective perception of bass in the

proccesed signal played on small loudspeakers, compared to the unprocessed signal played on larger loudspeakers. The third and final listening test used a handset that had two micro speakers (diameter 16 mm). All the loudspeaker arrangements and the listening room followed ITU-R BS.1116.

The subjects had to rate two attributes while doing these tests: 1) Bass impression Dominance of low-frequency sound. 2) Audio quality in terms of noise and distortion. The audio quality attributes were defined (Bai and Lin, 2006): “Any extraneous disturbances to the signal are considered noise. Effects on the signal that produce new sound or timbre change are

considered distortion.” (p 10). The subjects of the test got to hear these definitions of the attributes before conducting the test. The scale that was used in the tests was graded from 1 to 5, where 1= bad, 2= poor,3= fair, 4= good, and 5= excellent. Four pop music excerpts were used as stimuli. The stimuli were processed in different ways, one using the phase vocoder VBS, one using the Maxxbass VBS, the unprocessed signal was used as a reference and an Anchor was also created. The anchor was a high-pass-filtered version of the excerpt. The presented VB system using a phase vocoder was revealed as an effective way to create better bass impression and with acceptable audio quality. In all the subjective tests that was made in this study, their phase-vocoder approach VBS outperformed the Maxxbass VBS.

VBS in different genres

An important factor to think of when applying VBS is how the songs genre should be

considered and if VBS works as smoothly with different genres. This has been investigated by Hoffman & Kostek (2015). They used an algorithm that takes genre into account when

(7)

6

laptops. In the test there was a pretest where they eliminated subjects that couldn’t reliably differentiate the processed signal, using the Mushra test model as a basis. 24 cleared that phase and was deemed reliable.

Table 1 Is a result of the listening test Hoffman & Kostek conducted. The table shows the efficiency of the virtual bass synthesis compared to the normal bass boosted signal and compared to the original signal. The higher the score, the more people rated the SVBS better than the other signal. If the score was under 1 the SVBS was rated lower than the compared signal.

Table 1. Data from the listening tests

Music genre classical Jazz pop rap rock electronic

Smart VBS compared with the original signal

0.89 7.02 9.08 9.98 12.31 10.5

Smart VBS compared with the bass boosted signal

5.04 12.83 9.27 11.6 12.39 9.56

The listeners Show that they for the most part enjoy the Smart VBS more compared to the other ones. When tested with different laptops the difference between results was not

impactful, so it was enjoyed by the test subjects in different laptops as well. If a Mix engineer is to balance the bass while using VBS it can be said that the genre that they are mixing has a big impact on how they will mix it. The automated SVBS built in the console most likely has a harder time analyzing what genre it is and won't be as effective, compared to a mix

engineers ears and subjective classification of the genre. That’s a reason to why an engineer should have the control of how much VBS should be distributed to the mix. So, if an engineer should have control of the VBS they need tools to do such a thing. The most famous plug-in that uses this and that has also been mentioned before in this essay is the Maxxbass plugin, but how does such a tool work and how does an engineer use it to its best advantage?

Maxxbass in depth

The Maxxbass plugin-in creates harmonics that you can add to the signal as mentioned earlier in this paper. Waves make use of the missing fundamental technique. This illusion for bass can be used for both mixing and mastering. The Maxxbass plugin use controls that lets the user mix created Harmonics with the original signal. In the Maxxbass manual they give some recommendations when using the plug-in.

“You might lower the Original Bass level a few dB as you replace its signal with the MaxxBass signal. Try to make the mix have the same amount of bass as you normally would, otherwise you run the risk of over-using the effect, just as you might with any processor in your studio.” Waves (2018).

There is a lot of different adjustable parameters in this plug-in, so it can be good to understand in depth how they work. Waves (2018):

• Frequency:The crossing point of the area that will be affected by the NLD. All frequencies below this will be converted to harmonics. all frequencies above this will not be affected and go to the output.

• Harmonics fader: Level control for the created harmonics. Has the range +12dB to

(8)

7

• Original Bass fader:Level control for the original bass signal in the output mix. Has the range +12dB to -infinity.

• Monitor button:You can choose what to monitor, the mixed signal, only the Harmonics created, and the Original Bass signal.

• Highpass filter toggle: removes the low end from the harmonics. It can be set to

24dB/oct filter at 16Hz or a 12dB/oct filter at the frequency that is set in the graph or a 24dB/oct filter at the frequency that is set in the graph. Default setting is 12dB/oct.

• Decay: Sets the decay rate on each harmonic in the series. A bigger rate (going

towards zero) means that the harmonic is “richer”, which can sound blurry depending on the system; lower rate (More toward lower negative numbers) sounds more natural in full-range systems, but may not sound so audible in smaller systems.

• Ratio:To vary the compression of the generated harmonics. It’s an upward

compressor, so the higher the ratio the more level the harmonics get, and it gets more compressed. The ratio 1:1 means no compression, the harmonics have the same dynamic as the Original Bass.

• Response:Changes the attack and release of the compressed harmonics in milliseconds. Faster times makes the harmonics be compressed quicker.

Do these parameters give the engineer sufficient controls? Or which parameters are most important for translation to smaller speakers? The phase-vocoder approach mentioned earlier in this paper was more preferred than the Maxxbass method. Maybe it’s time to try to create a lot more different types of VBS based plug-ins, so that an engineer can control the mix as effectively as possible. Because in the end the goal is to get a good balanced mix that also translates in different listening systems.

Consumer headphones vs professional headphones

Olive, Khonsaripour and Welti (2018) explains what the differences between consumer headphones and professional headphones like this:

Both types had similar frequency responses except consumer headphones had 2dB more bass below 300 Hz than professional ones. Otherwise, both approximate the Harman target curve but with less energy between 3-10 kHz. Professional headphones have slightly better

performance and less variance than consumer headphones at lower prices.

This must be accounted with when testing VBS in headphones.

The research question

Several different approaches for evaluating VBS in different applications have been

suggested. Something that is important to test is how the VBS affects a mix in larger types of loudspeakers and how the VBS affect a mix in headphones. One might enjoy the VBS

(9)

8

Method

A listening test was conducted, specifically it was a type of A/B test. The subjects listened to one stimulus with and without VBS in three different types of sound reproduction systems, laptop, headphones and studio monitors. The two versions of the stimulus were separately compared in all the three different systems; the VBS mix in laptop compared to the Non VBS mix in Laptop and VBS in loudspeakers compared to non VBS in loudspeakers and the same with the headphones.

Software for VBS processing

For the bass enhancement, the MaxxBass plugin was chosen. Waves (2018). The reason for choosing Maxxbass for the bass enhancement is that it is one of the more commonly used VBS plug-ins and it uses the concept of the missing fundamental.

Sound reproduction systems

AKG k702 (headphones): These headphones were chosen for the experiment because they

are not as colored in the frequency response as consumer headphones can be. Consumer headphones can also have a bass boost compared to these mixing headphones that are intended to be flatter in the frequency response, as mentioned in the background. The frequency response can be found in the appendix. These headphones are open-back.

Klein & Hummel O410 (Loudspeakers):These Studio monitors are used a lot for mixing and mastering and can represent to some degree what a mixing engineer listens to while mixing. They are mostly used as mastering monitors, the frequency response seems to be flat, the frequency response can be found in the appendix.

Laptop mac book pro 2015 13inches:The decision to choose a representative laptop was difficult. The reasoning was that it represents a large part of the consumer market. There is a lot of people using mac book pros. This laptop has a mechanism that most likely has affected the results for this experiment the speakers in it was hidden. It’s hard to find where they are hidden, but most likely there are other Laptop models that has their speaker in a similar position, but it’s varied between different companies. The speakers of the laptop can not really be seen, but acoustically it must be from the back ventils and from the room between the keyboard that the sound comes from. Most 15-inch laptops have their speaker at the front or sides of the laptop. The positioning of the test laptops speakers might make it not as representative of a consumer laptop, but this 13-inch laptop is still widely used. There is no Information about VBS already affecting the mac book, but it’s likely that there is some kind of VBS processing in the laptop.

The Stimuli:

(10)

9

Pre study:

Before the pretest could start some calibration had to be done. The laptops volume had to be calibrated by trying to go as loud as possible without getting noticeable distortion. To

determine the crossing point of the area that will be affected by the NLD, a measurement for the frequency response of the laptop was done using a frequency sweep and a measurement microphone. When this was completed the pretests could begin. Three Sound engineers were chosen for this and did both the pretests. The instruments that the engineers were asked to adjust was the kick drum and the Bass guitar. The instruments were separated and got their unique instance of the Maxx bass plug-in and their unique settings. The pretests are summed up below:

Pretest 1:The Assignment for the engineers was to balance the volume between the sound reproduction systems using the laptop that was calibrated earlier as a reference. Three sound engineers did the balancing between the sound reproduction systems and the average of their balancing was the chosen listening level.

Pretest 2: In the second pretest the engineer’s assignment was to adjust chosen parameters in

the Maxxbass plug-in. When choosing what parameters that should be adjustable in the Maxxbass plug-in, the simpler and more affecting parameters was adjustable. The parameters chosen were the original Bass, the harmonics and the ratio. The other parameters in the plug-in was set beforehand and was not adjustable durplug-ing the pretest. The results of the three engineers settings, were averaged and became the chosen settings for the main listening test.

Adjustments of the stimulus

After the pre-study the stimulus signal level was lowered with -2.3 dB, this was adjusted because the in signal in the MaxxBass plug-in clipped. To compensate for this change an increase in the listening systems was adjusted to match the lowering of the input signal. In this case 2.3 dB. The outcome of the pretest might have been affected by this distortion. However, when this distortion was noticed by the main researcher, the pretest engineers was asked if they heard any distortion while completing their tasks and all of them answered no. Before the main study was conducted the stimulus intro part was cut. The intro had no bass frequencies and thereby did not contain the essential qualities/properties in order to

investigate the question of interest.

Pre study results:

Table 2 results Maxxbass parameters bass guitar: MaxxBass (Bass

guitar)

Original Bass Harmonics Ratio

Test Subject 1 0.0 4.8 4:1

Test Subject 2 0.0 -14.9 1.65:1

Test Subject 3 -8.4 - 1.5 2.89:1

(11)

10

Table 3 results Maxxbass parameters Kick drum:

MaxxBass (Kick)

Original Bass Harmonics Ratio

Test Subject 1 0.0 -1.8 3.17: 1

Test Subject 2 0.0 - 14.2 1.04:1

Test Subject 3 -3.7 -10.3 1.36:1

Average: -1.2 -8,8 1.86:1

Screenshots Maxxbass parameters:

Figure 2. Screenshots Maxxbass parameters Bass guitar.

(12)

11

Primary Study

In the primary study the test subjects compared a mix with and without VBS in 3 different types of sound reproduction systems (A laptop, headphones and big loudspeakers). The listening volume of the test was fixed, to make sure that the perceived spectral balance in the mix always stay the same and not affected by a higher volume thus changing the frequency response. While comparing these sounds the subjects were rating four different attributes. The attributes were bass perception, sound quality, preference and clarity. They were comparing them in a 7-step grading scale, for example when it was the preference they were comparing 0 was no preference, 3 meant sound B was more preferred than sound A and -3 the other way around. The questionnaire and scale can be found in the appendix. The test subjects also got to write qualitative information about the reason for their rating. They also had to answer questions about how the mix was perceived and why they might prefer one before the other.

The test subjects

The test subjects that was chosen for this study was naïve listeners and not trained. The reasoning for this choice is because the result that is intended in the study is more focused on the average consumer. All of the subjects were students in “Musikhögskolan I Piteå”. They were classified as untrained listeners, because they were not sound engineers. Musicians took part but was for this experiment classified as an untrained listener, mostly because the

differences are more about mix than about music. However, the musicians might have some expertise with mixing and critical listening, so it was hard to determine if they should have been classified as trained listeners or not.

Primary Study in depth

(13)

12

Figure 4. Screenshot the Pro Tools environment the subjects could see.

Experiment configuration

The order of the sequence can be seen in table 4. The test was done in the order table 4 were written. After the first six test subjects the order numbers was randomized, and then the next six persons could do the test.

A= Laptop speakers B= Headphones C= Loudspeakers.

Table 4. The order number for the experiment.

Order number Sequence

(14)

13

The written survey

The subjects graded the different qualities and answered questions about the stimuli. They got to write the survey while doing the test, so they could write down more clear differences between the stimuli. The written survey can be found in the appendix.

Method for analyzing the quantitative data

When analyzing the data for the experiment a paired test was conducted. There was 12 t-tests conducted, aimed to investigate the differences between VBS and NON-VBS. This was done for the four themes: bass perception, sound quality, preference and clarity.

Method for analysis qualitative data

The qualitative data was analyzed and categorized. This was done according to Denscombe (2016). There it was said to first code the words used for to describe the information and then put them in more broad categories that can describe the information. The categories that was chosen was Bass perception, Sound quality, Clarity, Treble and Other. All of these

(15)

14

Results

To show the results of the experiment boxplots was created. Figure 5 through 8 shows the four different attributes that was investigated: Bass perception, Sound quality, Preference and Clarity. Sound A and Sound B was in the listening test either VBS or ORG changing for each listener, but all of that has been converted and clearly renamed to VBS and ORG. VBS is the VBS affected mix. ORG is the original mix without VBS.

Figure 5. The Y axis shows the difference between VBS and ORG, for the different playback systems. Zero means no difference between the sounds. The difference was calculated as VBS - ORG The purple line indicates the median.

(16)

15

(17)

16

Analysis

Analysis quantitative data

When analyzing the data from the experiment a paired t-test was performed for all the rated attributes. This was done in all three of the listening systems. The results of these T-tests have been sorted in color: Blue: Loudspeakers. Red: Headphones. Yellow: Laptop. When a T-value is critical it will be marked with an asterisk sign.

Table 5 Loudspeaker T-test results

Attribute Mean _difference Standard _error Observations T-value T-Critical:

Bass perception 0.80 0,46 15 1.72 2.145

Sound quality 0.47 0,25 15 1.89 2.145

Preference 0.53 0,39 15 1.38 2.145

Clarity -0.27 0,33 15 -0.80 2.145

Table 6 Headphone T-test results.

Attribute Mean _difference Standard _error Observations T-value T-Critical:

Bass perception 1.53 0,21 15 7.37* 2.145

Soundquality 0.87 0,34 15 2.56* 2.145

Preference 1.27 0,38 15 3.31* 2.145

Clarity 0.40 0,31 15 1.29 2.145

Table 7 Laptop T-test results. Attribute Mean

difference

Standard

error Observations T-value T-Critical:

Bass perception 1.20 0,19 15 6.21* 2.145

Soundquality 0.93 0,31 15 3.06* 2.145

Preference 0.87 0,35 15 2.47* 2.145

(18)

17

Analysis qualitative data

The analysis of the qualitative data was translated from Swedish and was coded with different sets of criteria. The original table is available in Swedish in the appendix. All the original data will be in the appendix as well. In the following paragraphs, more detailed information will be given on how the coding was done for each theme.

Every time someone wrote VBS had more bass than ORG it has been counted and

interpreted as the same answer, even if the test persons used different phrases to describe the bass. In all the Tables, each sentence is followed by a number. The number signifies the number of phrases that was interpreted as having the same meaning. When bass is described as fat in the VBS example it was interpreted as more bass than the ORG. The hashtag number in the table will show how many times the phrase has been written.

Clarity has been interpreted and summarized so that you can count how many times VBS has been said to be clearer than the ORG version and also the other way around how many times the ORG version has been said to be clearer than the VBS version.

(19)

18

Table 8 Qualitative analysis (the number indicates how many times it was mentioned) Iistening

devices:

Bass Treble Sound

quality

Clarity Other Loudspeakers (14) VBS has More

bass than ORG.

(3) VBS has less bass

than ORG.

(1) VBS impelled me

more. The bass was more comfortable.

(1) VBS is more

forward. Feels heavier and rounder

(1) VBS feels deeper,

or the depth is greater.

(1) Still VBS as a

favorite, feels richer.

(1) VBS was less

sharp.

(1) Because the

VBS is more perfect, the sound is crunchier, and it goes well with the bass

(1) I thought

sound VBS sounded kind of fatter than ORG.

(1) VBS is Airier

than ORG.

(1) voice was

perceived as more Cutting and the sound felt more clean VBS. (1) Worse sound quality in VBS than ORG, especially in the beginning. (1) Still ORG because of the sound quality (1) VBS felt as several sounds together

(1) ORG felt like a

fused sound.

(1) The Voice felt

less clean on VBS

(5) VBS sounds

clearer than ORG

(6) VBS Sounds less

clear than ORG.

(2) VBS sounds a bit

boxy, as if something is in the way in the lower middle register.

(1) VBS feels

wider and more dispersed. (1) Also feels like a better panning. The sound is too centered in ORG VBS, better sound image

Headphones (24) VBS has More

bass than ORG.

(1) VBS has more

depth, the details are also clearer ORG feels scaled-down in comparison. (1) Listening to the audio in VBS feels like adding a frequency band. (1) Richer

bass feeling in the VBS

(1) Whole of VBS

appeals to me more. Feels deeper.

(1) VBS feels

Less sharp. Less treble

(1) Felt a cut on

the bass that made the assessment different. (VBS worse) (1) VBS feels like it is too distanced (1) VBS is more annoying to listen to. (2) ORG due to better sound quality (2) VBS sounds more canny. (12) VBS sounds

clearer than ORG.

clear than ORG.

(1) ORG feels

smaller and nasal. VBS sometimes feels a bit boxy-

(1) The sound feels

better mixed on ORG, less sharp bass.

(1) VBS also

feels more balanced

Laptop (17) VBS has More

bass than ORG.

(1) VBS is rounder and softer. (1) VBS due to deeper picture I experienced more bass in VBS and slightly more compressed and "loudness" VBS is also less "middy".

The mids felt more controlled in VBS.# 2

(1) VBS Feels

much less sharp.

(1) Less treble in

VBS

(1) Less crisp in

example VBS VBS sounded fatter. through the computer speakers # 2 (1) Heard something like a noise in VBS (4) VBS sounds

more clear than ORG

(20)

19

Discussion:

In the analysis the measurements for some attributes in some listening devices show a

significant difference between the VBS treated mix and the Non VBS treated mix. This shows that the test subjects could hear a difference between the stimuli. In laptop speakers and headphones, the VBS version was preferred before the non-VBS version. In the loudspeakers a statistic significance could not be found in any attribute. So, no effect was found for the VBS factor when the stimuli were compared in speakers. Maybe this could be because the loudspeakers already have a lot of bass and that the difference in bass is not as obvious in loudspeakers as in the headphones and the laptop speakers.

The qualitative data showed a lot of attributes that was mentioned and pointed to similar findings as the quantitative data. For example, a lot of people noticed the increase in bass with the VBS mix. Interestingly the subjects got no significant result on the quantitative data of the loudspeaker’s bass perception however the subjects described overwhelmingly with the qualitative data that the VBS mix have more bass than the ORG mix with loudspeakers. So, there are still a possibility that the VBS mix adds bass in the loudspeakers. The big spread in the answers when comparing the qualitative and the quantitative data might be because of the ones that heard more bass wrote about it, but the ones that did not perceive more bass from the VBS mix might have not written about it. As one can see in figure 5 and table 5 there is a spread in the answers that can be assumed as an uncertainty from the subjects.

The possible intermodulation distortion that was mentioned by Bai and Lin (Sec. different methods of VBS) when they researched the Maxxbass plug-in should affect the sound quality. This might be true, but the tests conducted during this research does not conclude this. At least there is not a significant difference in sound quality when using the Maxxbass plug-in to create VBS compared to no VBS when listening to them with loudspeakers. There might be no significant difference because of the genre the song is in, because of the chosen listening group, too few subjects in the study or some other reason. However, there was a statistical significance that the subjects thought the VBS mix had a better sound quality in the headphones and on the laptop speakers, but this might also have something to do with the genre and the test subjects’ interpretation of the word sound quality. What’s even more confusing is that in the qualitative data most of the subjects described the VBS version to have worse sound quality in all the systems e.g. “Heard something like a noise in VBS” this was written when listening to the laptop speakers. The quantitative data had a T- value over the T- critical value showing that the sound quality was more preferred in the quantitative data in both headphones and the laptop. How can this be? It’s hard to answer this for certain, but it could be because of the broad term “sound quality” it could mean a lot of things, and a lot of people may have interpreted it completely different in the two different assignments.

One of the main research questions for this report was “How can a mix engineer utilize VBS in mixing to improve the bass perception in laptops and how will it affect the perception of the mix in full range speakers and headphones? “. To summarize the most important results: The Loudspeaker had no significant difference in any of the attributes, there was a lot of qualitative data pointing towards differences though e.g. It has been mentioned 14 time that the VBS version has More bass than ORG version when listened to with loudspeakers and it has only been mentioned three times that the ORG had more bass than the VBS in

loudspeakers. This may not be solid proof that the VBS plug-in has affected the bass

(21)

20

tool to get a better bass perception in laptops without affecting the loudspeakers balance too much.

Critique of methodology

There are a lot of different things that could have been different in the method. For example, the decision of having untrained listeners have affected all the results. They might not hear a big difference between the mixes. It would be very different if it were trained listeners, they might have pinpointed more exact differences between the stimulus which could lead to more precise answers and detailed answers.

There is a lot of different ways to research the subject of VBS. All the small decisions that has been made has affected the results. Where in the mixing chain the VBS was applied will affect how It treats the instrument, e.g. if it’s before an eq or after. The decision of which instruments that was chosen to be affected by the VBS plug-in have colored the study in many ways. The decision to put it on the bass and kickdrum only might be limiting the possibilities of the plug-in maybe it is viable to use on guitar etc. A VBS plug-in could also have been tested being applied to the entire mix instead. This might have made the colored the frequency response of the mix more, but maybe in appreciated way. The decision to use a specific VBS- plugin makes this study mostly valid for the Maxxbass, however as a representant of all VBS type of plug-ins of the concept of VBS.

Something that would have made the experiment more controlled and precise is to maybe have a time limit, so that all the subjects got to listen to the differences with the same time limit. In this experiment there was no time limit completing the tasks and this might have made some peoples decisions more thoughtless. On the other hand, giving the subjects all the time, they want might give a more precise answer.

When the subjects made the test, they got preset attributes e.g. Bass, sound quality, clarity and preference. Maybe it would have been better to have a more open-ended task where they got to choose themes themselves so they wouldn’t get colored by the preselected themes. This would give more broad answers which could lead to a better understanding of what to look for when testing VBS in the future.

It needs to be mentioned that the qualitative analysis was colored by how the specific researcher who commits the coding of the results interpreted it, all researchers would

probably choose to highlight different attributes when reviewing the qualitative answers. So, the conclusions that are drawn from the Qualitative should be read with that in mind. The researcher has colored the results and analysis, but it’s also almost unavoidable when interpreting qualitative data.

Conclusions

(22)

21

Maxxbass plug-in which possibly could affect the clarity of the mix. However, the results don’t point to a significant difference in any of the listening systems. Maybe the differences are too small in Loudspeakers and the artifacts isn’t that noticeable.

Further research

There are a lot of possible further research in the subject of VBS. The research that has been in this report has been broad and hasn’t explored deeply into one specific attribute. It has been more about finding out which attributes is noticeably getting affected when using VBS and how people describe the differences. It would be interesting to have more extensive data collection on one specific attribute for example the sound quality. How is this affected by the VBS plug-in more depth? There is some research on this, but there could be a lot more. As mentioned before the stimuli used in the listening test was the same mix with different processing, the plug-in was only tested in one genre. It would be interesting to see how relevant mixing with VBS plug-ins in other genres would be. It would also be interesting to test this out with a different kind of listening group, such as sound engineers or other relevant groups.

(23)

22

Acknowledgements

(24)

23

References

Bai, M. R., & Lin, W. C. (2006). Synthesis and implementation of virtual bass system with a phase-vocoder approach. Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, 54(11), 1077-1091.

Ben-Tzur, D., & Colloms, M. (1999). The Effect of MaxxBass Psychoacoustic Bass Enhancement System on Loudspeaker Design. In 106th Convention of the Audio Engineering Society,(Abstracts), 47, 517.

Denscombe, M. (2016). Kvalitativa data. Forskningshandboken (3rd ed.) (pp 396–398). Spain: GraphyCems.

Enlund. A.E. (2018). How do bass enhancment algorithms impact mixing decisions when monitoring on headphones? (Bachelor thesis, Luleå Tekniska Universitet, Piteå). Retrieved from http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-71449

Hoffmann, P., & Kostek, B. (2015). Evaluation of a Novel Approach to Virtual Bass Synthesis Strategy. In Audio Engineering Society Convention 138. Audio Engineering Society.

Larsen. E.L. & Aarts. R.A. (2004).Audio Bandwidth Extension. (chapter 1 From physics to Psychophysics.) Retrieved 2018 Dec 11 from:

https://books.google.se/books?id=ZAKPqsC8HAQC&pg=PA230&dq=Audio+Bandwidth+Exte nsion+erik+larsen+ronald+m+aarts+pdf&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwitkZ_m7JDfAhUIKywK HWY9D_kQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=Audio%20Bandwidth%20Extension%20erik%20larse n%20ronald%20m%20aarts%20pdf&f=false

Olive, S. Khonsaripour, O. & Welti, T. (2018). A Survey and Analysis of Consumer and Professional Headphones Based on Their Objective and Subjective Performances. In Audio Engineering Society Convention 145. Audio Engineering Society.

ITU-R (1996): Recommendation BS. 1116, Methods for the subjective assessment of small impairments in audio systems including multichannel sound systems. International

Telecommunication Union

(25)

24

Appendix:

Frequency response: O410 K&H:

Graph found: http://www.neumann-kh-line.com/neumann-kh/home_en.nsf/root/prof-monitoring_discontinued-monitors_studio-products_O410_20141219101938#

AKG k702:

(26)

25

The written survey:

Lyssnings Test

Gradera skillnaden mellan Ljudexempel A och Ljudexempel B utifrån attributen nedan. Du kan bara kryssa i ett värde.

Bas upplevelse (med bas menas låg registret och inte som instrumentet)

A mer än B B mer än A

mycket mer lite ingen lite mer mycket mer mer skillnad mer mer

Ljudkvalité

A bättre än B B bättre än A

mycket bättre lite ingen lite bättre mycket bättre bättre skillnad bättre bättre

Preferens

Föredrar A mer än B Föredrar B mer än A

mycket mer lite ingen lite mer mycket mer mer preferens mer mer

Tydlighet

(27)

26

mycket tydligare lite ingen lite tydligare mycket

tydligare tydligare skillnad tydligare tydligare

Frågeformulär

Nedan kommer det finnas frågor där du ska beskriva skillnader mellan ljudexemplena du hört. Ifall du inte hört någon skillnad så kan du skriva det som svar.

Beskriv skillnaderna du har hört mellan ljudexemplena

(ifall du

hörde någon skillnad)

Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra,

motivera varför.

Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvalitén? (ifall du

bedömde dem olika)

(28)

27

Results quantitative raw data:

Högtalare

Bas upplevelse Ljudkvalite Preferens Tydlighet

Subject 1 2 -1 2 1 Subject 2 2 1 -1 -2 Subject 3 1 1 2 2 Subject 4 2 0 1 -2 Subject 5 2 2 2 2 Subject 6 -3 1 -2 -1 Subject 7 1 1 -1 -1 Subject 8 2 0 2 0 Subject 9 -2 -1 -1 -1 Subject 10 3 2 3 -1 Subject 11 -2 0 -1 -1 Subject 12 1 1 1 1 Subject 13 2 0 1 -1 Subject 14 2 1 1 1 Subject 15 -1 -1 -1 -1 Hörlurar

(29)

28

Subject 1 1 0 1 -1 Subject 2 0 -1 0 -1 Subject 3 1 1 2 2 Subject 4 2 -1 -3 -1 Subject 5 2 2 2 2 Subject 6 1 0 0 1 Subject 7 2 2 0 -1 Subject 8 1 2 2 -2 Subject 9 1 2 1 1 Subject 10 1 2 2 2 Subject 11 1 1 1 1 Subject 12 0 0 0 0 Subject 13 1 0 1 0 Subject 14 1 1 1 1 Subject 15 3 3 3 1

Orginal qualitative Table

(30)

29

Högtalare

VBS har Mera bas register gng 14 ORG har mer bas register gng 3 VBS stimulerade mig mer. Basen var mer behaglig. VBS ligger ”mer frammåt”. Känns tyngre och rundare. VBS känns djupare, eller att djupet är större. Fortfarande VBS som favorit känns mustigare. ORG var spetsigare För att VBS är mer fulländad, ljudet mycket mer krispigt och det går bra ihop med basen. Tyckte ljud ORG lät typ grundare ”lutftigare” än ORG

Rösten upplevdes som mer slipad och ljud kändes ”cleant” VBS. Bättre ljudkvalite i ORG än VBS, speciellt i början. Fortfarande ORG p.g.a. ljudkvaliten VBS kändes som flera ljud tillsammans ORG kändes som ett sammansmält. Rösten kändes renare på ORG VBS tydligare än ORG gng 5 ORG tydligare än VBS Gng 6 VBS upplevs burkig, som att någonting ligger i vägen i nedre mellanregistret. VBS upplevs burkig, som att någonting ligger i vägen i nedre mellanregistret. ORG känns jämnare VBS känns bredare och mer utspritt. känns också som en bättre panorering. Ljudet är för centrerat i ORG VBS , bättre ljudbild

Hörlurar

VBS har Mera

bas register gng 24 VBS har mer djup, detaljerna är även tydligare ORG känns bortskalad i jämförelse. Att koppla på ljud VBS känns som att lägga till register. Mustigare baskänsla i VBS Helheten i VBS tilltalar mig mer. Känns djupare. ORG känns spetsigare. Mer diskant

Kände ett hack på basen som gjorde bedömningen olik. (ORG bättre) VBS känns som att det är distat för mycket.

VBS är jobbigare att lyssna på. ORG p.g.a. bättre ljudkvalite gng 2 VBS har ”burkigheten” gng 2 VBS tydligare än ORG Gng 12 ORG tydligare än VBS Gng 4 ORG känns mindre och nasal. VBS känns ibland lite burkigt. Ljudet känns bättre mixat på ORG, mindre skarp bas. VBS känns också mer balanserad

Laptop

VBS har Mera

bas register 17 gng VBS är rundare och mjukare. ORG Känns mycket spetsigare. för att basen inte fanns. Mer diskant(i ORG.

(31)

30 VBS p.g.a ” djupare bild” Jag upplevde mer bas i VBS och aningen mer komprimerat och ”loud” VBS är också mindre ”midig”. Miden kändes mer kontrollerad i VBS. Gng 2 Mer krisp i exempel ORG ORG lät lite tunn genom

datorhögtalarna ORG lät lite tunn genom

datorhögtalarna.

Qualitative raw data

Grön = bas kategori Röd = tydlighet Orange = diskant Blå = störljud Subject 1: Högtalare:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: VBS kändes som flera ljud tillsammans, ORG kändes som ett sammansmält.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: VBS stimulerade mig mer. Basen var mer behaglig.

(32)

31

Svar: Rösten kändes renare på ORG

Fråga 4: Varför tyckte du att det ena ljudexemplet var med tydligt än det andra? (ifall du

tyckte att de hade olika tydlighet)

Svar: Kände som att VBS hade fler tydliga ”ingridienser” medan ORG kändes mer som en smet.

Hörlurar:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Upplevde bas mer på VBS, medan ORG kändes renare.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: ORG kändes lite renare, lättare att höra

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Det kändes lättare att ta in. VBS

Svar: Kändes som att ljuden gick in i varandra mer på VBS.

Laptop

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: VBS kändes tyngre. ORG kändes ytlig, som när man lyssnade på mobiler för 10 år sedan.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: VBS kändes mer närvarande, medan ORG kändes längre bort.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Hörde ingen skillnad.

Svar: ORG Basen kändes mer närvarande. Blev Bättre kontrast. Subject 2

Högtalare:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Hörde ingen skillnad

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: Det kändes mer från VBS, men inte tydligt.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: ingen skillnad

Svar: ingen skillnad

Hörlurar:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Känner lite tydligare vid ORG än VBS. Mer bas i VBS än ORG

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: Hördes mer vad personen sjöng, skönare då. (VBS Bättre)

(33)

32

Svar: Kände ett hack på basen som gjorde bedömningen olik. (ORG bättre)

Svar: Mindre bas vid ORG vilket gjorde det mer tydligt. Laptop

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Tydligheten mest var olik

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: ingen preferens

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Mer tydlighet i den andra ORG Hördes som ett brus i VBS

Svar: Ett brus i VBS gör ORG mer tydlig Subject 3

Högtalare:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: VBS ligger ”mer frammåt”. Känns tyngre och rundare. VBS känns bredare och mer utspritt.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: Föredrog VBS känndes mer omslutande. ORG var spetsigare

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Känsla

Svar: VBS kändes mer utspritt och därför framkom alla delar tydligare.

Hörlurar:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: ORG känns spetsigare. Mer diskant. VBS känns mjukare. ORG känns mindre (storlek).

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: Mer bas i VBS vilket jag gillar. VBS känns också mer balanserad

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Mycket i bas som avgör! ORG känns plattare.

Svar: VBS var tydligare. ORG kändes mer ihop tryckt

Laptop

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: VBS är rundare och mjukare. Mer balanserad. ORG känns plattare

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: Föredrar VBS. Skönare att lyssna på. ORG Känns mycket spetsigare.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Det var mycket svårare att höra skillnad nu. Allt flöt liksom ihop.

(34)

33

Svar: VBS är tydligare. Mer sorterat och delarna hörs tydligare. Subject 4

Högtalare:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Tycker VBS är basigare, att det är den stora skillnaden.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: Blir mer tryck i VBS och det känns som att tempot flyter bättre.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Märker ingen skillnad

Svar: P.G.A. basens lite mindre påverkan gör att ORG blir tydligare

Hörlurar:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Jätteskillnad i nivå och tempo framförallt även stor basskillnad. Mest sång i ORG.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: För att VBS är mer fulländad, ljudet mycket mer krispigt och det går bra ihop med

basen.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: VBS blir mycket mer flytande och ett tempo jag uppskattar.

Svar: Inte så stor skillnad med de olika komponenterna kommer fram mer i VBS.

Laptop

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: VBS är mer basig och blir lite stadigare, medans den andra flyter.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: Föredrar ORG för att den känns renare.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Nog för att jag gillar en mer sångröst som inte fastnar i basen.

Svar: För att man mer kan separera de olika delarna i ORG

Subject 5 Högtalare:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: VBS har Mera bas register/lågt mellan register

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: Föredrog VBS Mera bas register/lågt mellan register

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: VBS Mera bas register/lågt mellan register

(35)

34

Hörlurar:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: VBS hade mera bas och mellan register

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför.

Svar: Föredrog VBS p.g.a. VBS hade mera bas och mellan register. Mjukare och varmare. Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Föredrog VBS p.g.a. VBS hade mera bas och mellan register. Mjukare och varmare. Fråga 4: Varför tyckte du att det ena ljudexemplet var med tydligt än det andra? (ifall du

Svar: Föredrog VBS p.g.a. VBS hade mera bas och mellan register. Mjukare och varmare.

Laptop

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Mera bas och lågt mellan register på VBS.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: Föredrog VBS p.g.a. VBS hade mera bas och lågt mellan register.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Föredrog VBS p.g.a. VBS hade mera bas och lågt mellan register.

Svar: Föredrog VBS p.g.a. VBS hade mera bas och lågt mellan register. Subject 6

Högtalare:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: ORG är mer definierad i bas, rösten får inte lika stor plats.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: ORG är mer medryckande då en känner basen i kroppen, större helhets bild

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Rösten upplevdes som mer slipad och ljud kändes ”cleant” VBS.

Svar: Bara min spontana upplevelse, som sagt helhetsbilden var tydligare. (ORG bättre)

Hörlurar:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Större variation i ljud, ORG är svårare att urskilja de olika delarna. Basen är tydligare i VBS

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: Hör alla komponenter i låten tydligare i VBS, svårare att lyssna in sig på ORG.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Beatsen är renare och mer definerade på VBS. ORG låter mer distanserat.

(36)

35

Laptop

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Upplevde basen som tydligare i ex VBS spontant.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: ingen tydlig preferens mellan VBS o ORG.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Spontant ingen skillnad.

Svar: De små ljuden i samklang med rösten upplevdes som mer i samspelnivåmässigt. VBS Subject 7

Högtalare:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: VBS känns djupare, eller att djupet är större. Däremot känns det ibland som att det register blir som ett lock över sången. (I VBS exemplet).

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: VBS upplevs burkig, som att någonting ligger i vägen i nedre mellanregistret. Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: VBS är fortfarande djupare, och känns större.

Svar: VBS upplevs burkig, som att någonting ligger i vägen i nedre mellanregistret. ORG känns jämnare.

Hörlurar:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: VBS har mer djup, detaljerna är även tydligare

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: VBS har mer detaljer, ORG känns som en liten radio i jämförelse.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: ORG känns bortskalad i jämförelse. Att koppla på ljud VBS känns som att lägga till register.

Svar: ORG känns mindre och nasal. VBS känns ibland lite burkigt.

Laptop

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: VBS har tydligare botten, och lite mer djup. Samtidigt är definitionen lite lägre.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: ingen skillnad.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Djupet framförallt. Känns större och fetare. VBS

(37)

36

Svar: ORG känns mer komprimerat, känns lite mer enhetligt som en klump typ.

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Skillnaderna är inte lika stora. Fortfarande mer bas i VBS.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: Fortfarande VBS som favorit känns mustigare.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: ingen skillnad

Svar: ingen skillnad

Hörlurar:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Mustigare baskänsla i VBS

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: Helheten i VBS tilltalar mig mer. Känns djupare.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: jag hör allt tydligare i VBS

Svar: Tidigare tyckte jag att ORG var tydligare. I Hörlurar upplever jag mer tydlighet i VBS.

något fattas i ORG.

Laptop

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Mer bas och tyngd i exempel VBS. Tydligare i ex ORG

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: Föredrar VBS för basen.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: ingen skillnad.

Svar: ORG kändes tydligare för att basen inte fanns. Mer diskant. Subject 9

Högtalare:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Bättre ljudkvalite i ORG än VBS, speciellt i början.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: VBS känns svagare i bas. Men rätt likt.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Gillade ljudet mer på ORG. Känns bättre mixtrat.

(38)

37

Hörlurar:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: ORG sämre bas, nästan för mycket på VBS.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: VBS känns som att det är distat för mycket.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: VBS är jobbigare att lyssna på.

Svar: Ljudet känns bättre mixat på ORG, mindre skarp bas.

Laptop

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: VBS har mer brett ljudspektra än ORG.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: ORG känns svagare än VBS.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Bättre bas på VBS

Svar: ORG känns mer komprimerat, VBS är skönare för öronen.

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Alla instrument känns i båda exemplen som långt bak i rummen, men en synt i VBS är längre fram vilket jag verkligen föredrar.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför.

Svar: Jag föredrar VBS pga mer fyllighet, alltså mer bas och mid, känns också som en bättre panorering. Ljudet är för centrerat i ORG

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: ORG känns mer genomarbetat i mina öron och ljudproduktionen/kvaliten mer stilenlig. Fråga 4: Varför tyckte du att det ena ljudexemplet var med tydligt än det andra? (ifall du

Svar: ORG Mer tydlighet i mid och diskant. Kanske för att ljudbilden upplev bas fattig.

Hörlurar:

Fråga 1 Beskriv skillnaderna du hört mellan ljudexemplena (ifall du hörde någon skillnad) Svar: Mer rikt på basfrekvenser VBS men även midregister upplever jag mer.

Fråga 2: Om du föredrog det ena ljudexemplet framför det andra, motivera varför. Svar: VBS har mer fyllighet (mer umami) och är mer tillfredställande.

Fråga 3: Vad ligger bakom din bedömning av ljudkvaliten? (ifall du bedömde dom olika) Svar: Med ljudkvalité tänker jag ljudupplevelse och då föredrar jag mer botten, speciellt i en poplåt som denna. Alltså föredrar jag VBS