Analysis and digital implementation of the talk box effect
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 14

Analysis and Digital Implementation of the Talk Box Effect PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 31 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Analysis and Digital Implementation of the Talk Box Effect. Yuan Chen Advisor: Professor Paul Cuff. Introduction. What is a talk box? Allows a musician to add diction and intelligibility to an instrument’s sound Motivation? Popular as an analog device Application of signal processing

Download Presentation

Analysis and Digital Implementation of the Talk Box Effect

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Analysis and digital implementation of the talk box effect

Analysis and Digital Implementation of the Talk Box Effect

Yuan Chen

Advisor: Professor Paul Cuff


Introduction

Introduction

  • What is a talk box?

    • Allows a musician to add diction and intelligibility to an instrument’s sound

  • Motivation?

    • Popular as an analog device

    • Application of signal processing

  • Goals?

    • Analyze output

    • Digital implementation

Figure 1 – Talk Box


Background speech and intelligibility

Background – Speech and Intelligibility

  • Human speech production of convolution between source and filter (1)

    • Not really time invariant

    • Only valid for voiced speech

  • Frequencies of formant peaks account for intelligibility of speech (Lingard, McLoughlin)

    • Most important are F2, F3 formants which occur in frequency band 800 Hz – 3 kHz


Complex cepstrum

Complex Cepstrum

  • Formant peaks arise from , need a way to “deconvolve”

  • Intuitively source excitation varies quickly in frequency, vocal tract response varies slowly in frequency (Deller)

  • Complex Cepstrum (eq. 2) (Deller):

  • Apply a low quefrency lifter to separate source and filter


Analysis results vowel sounds

Analysis Results – Vowel Sounds

  • Talk box most successfully impresses F2, F3 peaks

    • Relative Error in peak frequency: F1 – 19.6%, F2 – 9.33%, F3 – 6.22%

    • Error due to inability to replicate sound

  • For voice, ~90% of energy in 0 Hz – 1000 Hz

  • For talk box, ~10% of energy in 0 Hz – 1000 Hz


Design overview

Design Overview

  • Problem definition:

  • Implement in MATLAB


Vocal tract impulse response extraction

Vocal Tract Impulse Response Extraction

  • Calculate cepstrum (eq. 3):

  • Lifter: Eliminate all quefrency above cutoff nc (eq. 4)

  • From liftered cepstrum, invert to calculate impulse/frequency response (eq. 5):


Impulse response preprocessing

Impulse Response Preprocessing

  • Calculated impulse response has too high low frequency (0 – 1000 Hz) magnitude

  • Different frames of speech have different energy levels

    • Speech input should not directly determine output amplitude

  • Normalize, preprocess in frequency domain (eq. 6):


Synthesis

Synthesis

  • 50% overlap between successive frames

  • Define system response to be linear interpolation of vocal tract impulse responses in overlapping region (eq. 7):

  • α: relative index (eq. 8)

  • p: frame index (eq. 9)


Synthesis1

Synthesis

  • From causality, output at time n0 depends only on input occurring no later than n0

  • From finite-length impulse response, output at time n0 depends only on input occurring no earlier than n0 – M + 1

  • Closed Form expression for y(n) (eq.11):


Design summary

Design Summary


Performance

Performance

  • F2, F3 peaks on vowel speech inputs:

    • Static implementation relative error: 3.0% F2, 3.5% F3

    • Dynamic implementation relative error: 3.7% F2, 3.2% F3

  • Qualitatively, output has similar intelligibility to analog talk box

  • Dynamic implementation can produce voiced non-vowel phonemes and whole words

    • Not always consistent, depends on alignment in time


Performance issues

Performance Issues

  • Even with linearly-interpolated system impulse response, noticeable transitions between frames

  • Computationally expensive: 2 FFTs, 2 IFFTs per frame

    • In MATLAB, computation time takes longer than duration of the frame

  • Performance dependent on alignment of input signals


Conclusions and further considerations

Conclusions and Further Considerations

  • Dynamic implementation closely models performance of analog talk box:

    • Can produce vowels and voiced phonemes

    • Real-time setup

  • Demonstrate possibility of fully digital implementation of talk box using speech input

  • Further considerations:

    • Improve transitions between frames

    • Decrease calculation time

    • Physical implementation


  • Login