4.4 Article

Dynamic Range Across Music Genres and the Perception of Dynamic Compression in Hearing-Impaired Listeners

Journal

TRENDS IN HEARING
Volume 20, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/2331216516630549

Keywords

dynamic range; music genre; compression; hearing loss; hearing aids

Funding

  1. Ethics Committee Zurich, Switzerland [KEK-ZH. Nr. 2014-0520, NCT02373228]
  2. ETH Zurich, Phonak AG
  3. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Dynamic range compression serves different purposes in the music and hearing-aid industries. In the music industry, it is used to make music louder and more attractive to normal-hearing listeners. In the hearing-aid industry, it is used to map the variable dynamic range of acoustic signals to the reduced dynamic range of hearing-impaired listeners. Hence, hearing-aided listeners will typically receive a dual dose of compression when listening to recorded music. The present study involved an acoustic analysis of dynamic range across a cross section of recorded music as well as a perceptual study comparing the efficacy of different compression schemes. The acoustic analysis revealed that the dynamic range of samples from popular genres, such as rock or rap, was generally smaller than the dynamic range of samples from classical genres, such as opera and orchestra. By comparison, the dynamic range of speech, based on recordings of monologues in quiet, was larger than the dynamic range of all music genres tested. The perceptual study compared the effect of the prescription rule NAL-NL2 with a semicompressive and a linear scheme. Music subjected to linear processing had the highest ratings for dynamics and quality, followed by the semicompressive and the NAL-NL2 setting. These findings advise against NAL-NL2 as a prescription rule for recorded music and recommend linear settings.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available