Index
Search & RSS
Twitter Feed
« TWiRT 28 - NAB 2010 | Main | TWiRT 26 - Frequency Modulation »
Wednesday
Apr072010

TWiRT 27 - FSK and Loose Ends

What are FSK, BPSK, and QPSK?  Plus mic processing and an AES white paper.

Kirk Harnack - Executive Director, Int'l Business Development, Telos-Omnia-Axia
Tom Ray - VP, Engineering, Buckley BroadcastingWOR, New YorkW2TRR
Chris Tobin - CBS Radio, New York

Some web sites mentioned in this episode:

Frequency Shift Keying (FSK)

Phase Shift Keying, including BPSK and QPSK

EBU Evaluations of Multi-Channel Audio Codecs (pdf)

Audio Noise Reduction Techniques - Meenakshi Singhvi (pp 42-46)

Watch the Video at ODTV.me

Download the show here...

TWiRT 27 - FSK and Loose Ends

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (3)

Is the RSS feed broken?

My google reader can see the item but never download the file. Now, I cannot d/l this file: twirt 27 either.

April 8, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterListener

Thanks for the heads-up! There was a typo in the RSS feed (my fault). Fixed now.

If you subscribe using iTunes, you'll want to unsubscribe and resubscribe. Just do this from your iTunes "Podcasts" directory. No need to visit the iTunes Store to do this.

Best,

Kirk

April 8, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterKirk Harnack

Hi Guys,
I've just downloaded and read the EBU paper. This one refers to surround (not stereo) which is why the bitrates are higher than I'd have expected (200-312kbps for emission).
It's important to differentiate between production, distribution, and emission applications when establishing bitrates. (BTW the report on Phase 3 of these tests has just been released - http://tech.ebu.ch/webdav/site/tech/shared/tech/tech3339.pdf)
The most recent EBU tech report I've seen on stereo bitrates is from 2003 - before AAC so it is out of date. http://tech.ebu.ch/publications/tech3296
I recall that there is info out there that suggests a sweet spot for AACplus of 48 to 96kbps for emission, but I can't find it right now.

Also am I to infer from this that there are no objective tests to quantify codec performance? If not is any work being done on this?
These Mushra tests are very complex and expensive, so there's probably few organizations able to do this stuff.

Cheers,
Peter S.

April 11, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterPeter Smerdon

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>