Does conversion to WMV exaggerate reverb?

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I made a WMV file to e-mail a short excerpt of a project to a friend. The
first thing he said was "there's too much reverb". I do notice that when
playing the WMV file sitting in front of the computer that I use for e-mail,
which has attached computer speakers of typical moderate to low quality on
either side of the monitor, the reverb is much more pronounced than playing
the actual original file through my editing computer going though the large
hi-fi speakers I use as monitors, or through headphones.

The sound card on the editing computer is a Soundblaster Audigy2, the
soundcard on the e-mail computer is a Soundblaster Live! No reverb effects
are turned on on either of these cards.

Is conversion to a WMV file known to somehow exaggerate reverb? If it makes
any difference, the reverb was added using the Acoustic Mirror plugin on
Soundforge.

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>Brian Alves
>
>Listen to the new podcast
>for DV creators- The DV Show!
>http://www.thedvshow.com

Hey Brian,
Just wanted to compliment you guys on a great website and concept.
These podcasts are very cool!!

We made the DV Show one of our featured Blog entry today on the
Videoguys Blog. http://www.videoguys.com/blog/

You guys definitely should check it out! http://www.thedvshow.com

Gary

The Electronic Mailbox http://www.videoguys.com
The Desk Top Video Editing & Production Experts
800 323-2325 or Free DTV tech advice (516) 759-1615

All DTV purchases include our 30 day customer assurance program
and FREE tech support

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 00:10:42 GMT, "Doc" <docsavage20@xhotmail.com>
wrote:

>I made a WMV file to e-mail a short excerpt of a project to a friend. The
>first thing he said was "there's too much reverb".

It does not necessarily have to be your problem

If you want to check a soundmix, you actually need to do this on a
variety of speakers; your high-end for the mix, and check, then a
couple of low-ends + a regular tv to check for stuff which might occur
on them, which your mixing-speakers don't show, because of their
quality. Finally you should also check in mono, because some stations
are still converted to mono somewhere in the path.
Now, what also could be the case is that he has reverb switched on in
the playback software of the soundcard mixer. This will add additional
reverb. Let him check for that. And of course it could be that the
amount of reverb, is simply too much for his liking.

cheers

-martin-

--
"Now I want you to say it thrice daily and don't dress a bun"

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"V Green" <vanceg@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:1119112824.162035@nnrp2.phx1.gblx.net...
>
> "Martin Heffels" <safeshop77@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> newsrj7b19nnvdogf16bjpva4ij9sckiu36md@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 00:10:42 GMT, "Doc" <docsavage20@xhotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I made a WMV file to e-mail a short excerpt of a project to a friend.
>> >The
>> >first thing he said was "there's too much reverb".
>

Perceptual coding by nature of what it keeps and throws away can change the
balance of elements in a recording. Oddly enough I've found I actually like
the lower bit rate (128) MP3s in my car versus even the original CD since
the encoding raises the important elements over the road noise, etc.

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Doc" <docsavage20@xhotmail.com> wrote in message news:91ote.7503$eM6.5852@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "David Morgan (MAMS)" <mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com> wrote in message
> newsZMse.8851$1q5.8652@trnddc02...
> >
> > "Doc" <docsavage20@xhotmail.com> wrote in message...
> >
> > > Is conversion to a WMV file known to somehow exaggerate reverb? If it
> makes
> > > any difference, the reverb was added using the Acoustic Mirror plugin on
> > > Soundforge.
> >
> > Can you send me a sample? Not that I can solve your problem as I'm
> > not into the video side of things, but I'm curious about the audio.
>
> Well, it's kind of a pain to do. I had it up on a quickie website for my
> friend to download it but have since deleted it. I'm on dialup and takes a
> long time to upload a file that large. If you want to hear it, I would guess
> it would be easy enough to reproduce. Here's what I did - took a 30 second
> video file and add reverb with acoustic mirror in soundforge, at
> about -15dbs on the wet side and 0 db on the dry side. You'll have to adjust
> of course, depending on the level of your file to avoid clipping. Then
> convert to WMV at a fairly high quality rate. You should hear it.


Offhand, that sounds like heavy verb to me. I find that on the same software
when I get the reverb levels above the -30's, it becomes very present, very
quickly.

I was curious about the webalized soundfile (as I think some others were)
in the event that it was an anomaly that occured in the conversion.

DM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I noticed many years ago that compression to MP3 tended to exagerate the
"ambience" of a track, Perhaps WMA does the same thing.
--
Lynn
Wobbly Music
"Supporting the Mature Artist"
=============================
http://www.wobblymusic.net
Latest Release... "Friends" by John McKeon
Order your copy now and get 2 FREE bonus tracks!
http://www.johnmckeon.wobblymusic.net

"Doc" <docsavage20@xhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:91ote.7503$eM6.5852@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "David Morgan (MAMS)" <mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com> wrote in message
> newsZMse.8851$1q5.8652@trnddc02...
>>
>> "Doc" <docsavage20@xhotmail.com> wrote in message...
>>
>> > Is conversion to a WMV file known to somehow exaggerate reverb? If it
> makes
>> > any difference, the reverb was added using the Acoustic Mirror plugin
>> > on
>> > Soundforge.
>>
>> Can you send me a sample? Not that I can solve your problem as I'm
>> not into the video side of things, but I'm curious about the audio.
>
> Well, it's kind of a pain to do. I had it up on a quickie website for my
> friend to download it but have since deleted it. I'm on dialup and takes a
> long time to upload a file that large. If you want to hear it, I would
> guess
> it would be easy enough to reproduce. Here's what I did - took a 30
> second
> video file and add reverb with acoustic mirror in soundforge, at
> about -15dbs on the wet side and 0 db on the dry side. You'll have to
> adjust
> of course, depending on the level of your file to avoid clipping. Then
> convert to WMV at a fairly high quality rate. You should hear it.
>
>

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Doc" <docsavage20@xhotmail.com> wrote in message news6%te.9597$VK4.4061@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "David Morgan (MAMS)" <mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com> wrote in message
> news:WRste.12467$kj5.662@trnddc03...
>
> > Offhand, that sounds like heavy verb to me. I find that on the same
> > software when I get the reverb levels above the -30's, it becomes
> > very present, very quickly.
> >
> > I was curious about the webalized soundfile (as I think some others were)
> > in the event that it was an anomaly that occured in the conversion.

> The particular file I used was Foelinger Great Hall.
>
> Doesn't sound too overbearing on the original (ergo, that's why I used it
> that way), perhaps mitigated by the fact that it's not a true stereo but
> redundant tracks. But regardless, the focus is on how the original and wmv
> files sound in comparison. The wmv file is clearly much more cavernous
> souding.

It's not as if I don't put the verb output into the ' - teens' every now
and then, but not as standard fare. I'd still like to hear the two files
(before and after WMV) if you have the opportunity. Someone esle
mentioned that the recipient may have had some SFX turned on
in WMP, did you ever ask the plaintiff about that?

DM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

daz[at]roughdiamondmarketing[dot]com wrote:
> okay, so I haven't heard it either, but could it simply be that the wmv
> conversion is applying compression that makes the reverb more dense ?
>
>

It's most likely adding phase distortion that accentuates the
'verb.

--
Les Cargill

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote in message
news:11c0i0074bqe8be@corp.supernews.com...
> "Doc" wrote ...
>> Is conversion to a WMV file known to somehow exaggerate reverb?
>
> Any lossy compression scheme is prone to make undesired changes
> to your audio. Your issue dosn't surprise me in the least. If you really
> care about audio quality, distributing it in WMV is not advisable.
>
> If you must distribute WMV, then tune the amount of reverb (and
> whatever other processing you are doing) so that it sounds right
> *AFTER compression to the distribution format*.

I think it's always been a given in our business that one must "master" for
the desired distribution format. In the heyday of vinyl and cassette, a
single master for both mediums did not cut the mustard and it's no surprise
that it does not cut it with today's multitude of lossy formats either.