nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cellphones and Audio (was Ghost Click, though I got no idea why)
From: Robert Bonomi <bonomi () mail r-bonomi com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 03:29:26 -0500 (CDT)
Adam Atkinson <ghira () mistral co uk> wrote;
Jay Ashworth wrote:Now, those codecs *are* specially tuned for spoken word -- if you try to stuff music down them, it's not gonna work very well at all...It was claimed to me many years ago that the 4kHz cutoff used in POTS serves women and children less well than it does adult males. I have never been aware that I have any greater problems understanding women or children on the phone than I do men, but my hearing is not great. I can't hear the difference between G.711 and G.729, for example, but some people can. Googling "PCM adult male voice", "4kHz adult male" and similar isn't finding me anything. Was I told nonsense?
Probably. "sort of." <grin> 'Way back when', at least in the U.S., the 'voice' passband was 300-3000Hz. Later, 300-3300Hz. For perspective, rf you know anything about music, the 'A' below "Middle C' is nominally 440Hz. 300Hz is roughly an octave below Middle C, and 3kHz is 2-1/2 octaves above it. That's the -high- end of the range for a piccolo, or coloratura Soprano. Now, absent the overtones that give a note it's 'color', one of those high-pitch sources will sound more than a little bit 'tinny' over a classical 'voice passband' channel. *HOWEVER*, the 'fundamental' frequencies for womens/childrens voices -is- higher than that of adult males. But you're talking less than an octave in 'most' cases. Less than 2 in 'extreme' (a guy with a _deep- bass voice -- "basso profundo", and a 'squeaky' female/child) cases. This mean that one does lose one to two additional 'overtones' of the fundamental on women/children, vs. men. This does, in general, *NOT* materially affect the 'intelligibility' of the voice, although it does have a measurable adverse effect on the 'identifiability' of one such higher-pitched voice vis-a-vis a different similarly-pitched voice. You lose more of the 'color' of their voices vs the lower-pitched male voice.
Current thread:
- Re: Operation Ghost Click, (continued)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Valdis . Kletnieks (May 02)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Jeroen van Aart (May 02)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Christopher Morrow (May 02)
- RE: Operation Ghost Click Eric Wieling (May 02)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Sean Harlow (May 02)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Jeroen van Aart (May 02)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Valdis . Kletnieks (May 02)
- Re: Operation Ghost Click Joe Hamelin (May 02)
- Cellphones and Audio (was Ghost Click, though I got no idea why) Jay Ashworth (May 02)
- Re: Cellphones and Audio (was Ghost Click, though I got no idea why) Adam Atkinson (May 02)
- Re: Cellphones and Audio (was Ghost Click, though I got no idea why) Robert Bonomi (May 03)
- Re: Cellphones and Audio (was Ghost Click, though I got no idea why) Jay Ashworth (May 03)
- Re: Cellphones and Audio (was Ghost Click, though I got no idea why) Valdis . Kletnieks (May 03)
- RE: Cellphones and Audio (was Ghost Click, though I got no idea why) Brandt, Ralph (May 03)
- RE: Cellphones and Audio (was Ghost Click, though I got no idea why) Brandt, Ralph (May 03)
- Re: Cellphones and Audio (was Ghost Click, though I got no idea why) Adam Atkinson (May 03)
- Re: Cellphones and Audio (was Ghost Click, though I got no idea why) Jay Ashworth (May 03)
- Re: Cellphones and Audio (was Ghost Click, though I got no idea why) Joel jaeggli (May 03)
- VoIP/Mobile Codecs (was Re: Operation Ghost Click) Sean Harlow (May 02)
- Re: VoIP/Mobile Codecs (was Re: Operation Ghost Click) Jeroen van Aart (May 02)
- RE: VoIP/Mobile Codecs (was Re: Operation Ghost Click) Brandt, Ralph (May 03)