音乐制作质量测试中享乐偏好与音质的关系

A. Wilson, B. Fazenda
{"title":"音乐制作质量测试中享乐偏好与音质的关系","authors":"A. Wilson, B. Fazenda","doi":"10.1109/QoMEX.2016.7498937","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In many subjective listening tests, audio is evaluated on either “quality” or “preference”. These terms are often conflated. Little evidence has been gathered which explains the subtle differences between these terms in audio perception - we may not necessarily prefer high-quality audio samples. In the case of music, hedonic preference is strongly related to familiarity with the audio samples, which is informed by one's musical tastes, itself based on autobiographical memory. However, for unfamiliar music, the two concepts can overlap considerably. This paper will explore the relationship between these two concepts in three experiments - with familiar music, unfamiliar music and alternate mixes of an unfamiliar song. It was shown that quality ratings and like ratings become more correlated when familiarity is removed and also when inter-song variation is removed. For the case of music mixes, both concepts are strongly correlated (R2=0.82), although there are subtle differences in the ways these ratings were described by participants.","PeriodicalId":6645,"journal":{"name":"2016 Eighth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX)","volume":"144 1","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Relationship between hedonic preference and audio quality in tests of music production quality\",\"authors\":\"A. Wilson, B. Fazenda\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/QoMEX.2016.7498937\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In many subjective listening tests, audio is evaluated on either “quality” or “preference”. These terms are often conflated. Little evidence has been gathered which explains the subtle differences between these terms in audio perception - we may not necessarily prefer high-quality audio samples. In the case of music, hedonic preference is strongly related to familiarity with the audio samples, which is informed by one's musical tastes, itself based on autobiographical memory. However, for unfamiliar music, the two concepts can overlap considerably. This paper will explore the relationship between these two concepts in three experiments - with familiar music, unfamiliar music and alternate mixes of an unfamiliar song. It was shown that quality ratings and like ratings become more correlated when familiarity is removed and also when inter-song variation is removed. For the case of music mixes, both concepts are strongly correlated (R2=0.82), although there are subtle differences in the ways these ratings were described by participants.\",\"PeriodicalId\":6645,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2016 Eighth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX)\",\"volume\":\"144 1\",\"pages\":\"1-6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2016 Eighth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/QoMEX.2016.7498937\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2016 Eighth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/QoMEX.2016.7498937","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

在许多主观听力测试中,音频是根据“质量”或“偏好”来评估的。这些术语经常被混为一谈。几乎没有证据可以解释这些术语在音频感知方面的细微差异——我们可能不一定更喜欢高质量的音频样本。就音乐而言,享乐偏好与对音频样本的熟悉程度密切相关,这是由一个人的音乐品味决定的,而音乐品味本身是基于自传式记忆的。然而,对于不熟悉的音乐,这两个概念可能会有很大的重叠。本文将在三个实验中探讨这两个概念之间的关系-熟悉的音乐,不熟悉的音乐和不熟悉的歌曲的交替混音。研究表明,当去除熟悉度和歌曲间的变化时,质量评级和喜欢评级变得更加相关。对于音乐混合的情况,这两个概念是强烈相关的(R2=0.82),尽管参与者在描述这些评级的方式上有细微的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Relationship between hedonic preference and audio quality in tests of music production quality
In many subjective listening tests, audio is evaluated on either “quality” or “preference”. These terms are often conflated. Little evidence has been gathered which explains the subtle differences between these terms in audio perception - we may not necessarily prefer high-quality audio samples. In the case of music, hedonic preference is strongly related to familiarity with the audio samples, which is informed by one's musical tastes, itself based on autobiographical memory. However, for unfamiliar music, the two concepts can overlap considerably. This paper will explore the relationship between these two concepts in three experiments - with familiar music, unfamiliar music and alternate mixes of an unfamiliar song. It was shown that quality ratings and like ratings become more correlated when familiarity is removed and also when inter-song variation is removed. For the case of music mixes, both concepts are strongly correlated (R2=0.82), although there are subtle differences in the ways these ratings were described by participants.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Perception and automated assessment of audio quality in user generated content: An improved model Software to Stress Test Image Quality Estimators Closing the gap: Visual quality assessment considering viewing conditions Towards training naïve participants for a perceptual annotation task designed for experts Spatio-temporal error concealment technique for high order multiple description coding schemes including subjective assessment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1