[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: computational complexity of psychoacoustic models

The choice is, at least for all MPEG codecs, completely up to the
developer. You can decide not to use a psychoacoustic model at all, or
you can decide to use a complex model to gain as much quality as possible.

Oftenly used steps are:

Critical Band grouping
Conversion to dB
(Analysis of tonality of possible maskers)
calculation of masking threshold via masking model

Have a look at the psychoacoustic model 2 in the informative part of the
MPEG-1 standard.

Kind regards,

> Hi List:
> I’m interested to know the computational complexity (number of additions
> and multiplications) of psychoacoustic models used in audio coding.
> Well, to be more specific, let’s say if I’m targeting to build a “fast”
> psychoacoustic model, which existing model and/or what kind of
> computational complexity should I try to beat?
> Any help/suggestions/references in this direction will be highly
> appreciated.
> Best Regards,
> ~Arijit

dipl. ing.
alexander lerch

d-10965 berlin

fon: +49.30.854 09 15.0
fax: +49.30.854 09 15.5