From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The ITU-R 468-weighting curve (originally defined in
CCIR recommendation 468) is widely used when measuring noise in
audio systems, especially in the UK, Europe, and former
countries of the British Empire such as Australia and South
Africa. It is less well known in the USA where
A-weighting has always been used.
|
Contents
-
1
Explanation
-
2
History
-
2.1
Original research
-
2.2
Standards
-
2.3
Uptake
-
3
Present usage of 468-weighting
-
4
See also
-
5
External links
|
Explanation
While most audio engineers are familiar with the
A-weighting curve, which is said to reflect the 'equal-loudness
contours' derived initially by
Fletcher and Munson (1933) and later
Robinson and Dadson (1956), few seem to realise that these
curves relate only to the subjective loudness of pure tones, not
noise.
Furthermore, recent experimental work casts doubt on their
accuracy (see entry for A-weighting and revised ISO 226 :2003).
In fact the human ear responds quite differently to noise,
and it is this difference that gave rise to the 468-weighting,
which arguably is the only valid weighting to be used for all
noise measurements, whether on audio equipment or in the
assessment of low-level environmental noise.
History
Original research
Developments in the 1960's, in particular the spread of
FM
broadcasting and the development of the
compact audio cassette with
Dolby-B Noise Reduction, alerted engineers to the need for a
proper weighting curve, and the fact that A-weighting was not
giving consistent results.
Preemphasis of high frequencies in all these systems was
resulting in increased noise readings that did not correlate
with subjective effect, and it was possible for a cassette deck
to measure worse and yet sound better!
Experiments in the
BBC
led to
BBC Research Department Report EL-17, The Assessment of
Noise in Audio Frequency Circuits, in which experiments on
numerous test subjects were reported, using a variety of noises
ranging from clicks to tone-bursts to 'pink' noise. Subjects
were asked to compare these with a 1 kHz tone, and final scores
were then compared with measured noise levels using various
combinations of weighting filter and quasi-peak detector then in
existence (such as those defined in a now discontinued German
DIN
standard).
Standards
CCIR
Recommendation 468-1 was published soon after this report, and
appears to have been based on the BBC work. Later versions up to
CCIR468-4 differed only in minor changes to permitted
tolerances. This standard was then incorporated into many other
national and international standards (IEC, BSI, JIS, ITU) and
adopted widely as the standard method for measuring noise, in
broadcasting, professional audio, and 'Hi-Fi'
specifications throughout the 1970's. When the CCIR ceased to
exist, the standard was officially taken over by the
ITU-R
(International
Telecommunication Union).
The CCIR curve differs greatly from A-weighting in the 5 to 8
kHz region where it peaks to +12.2 dB at 6.3 kHz, the region in
which we appear to be extremely sensitive to noise. While it has
been said (incorrectly) that the difference is due to a
requirement for assessing noise intrusiveness in the presence of
programme material, rather than just loudness, the
BBC
report makes clear the fact that this was not the basis of the
experiments. The real reason for the difference probably relates
to the way in which our ears analyse sounds in terms of spectral
content along the
cochlea. This behaves like a
set of closely spaced filters with a roughly constant
Q factor, that is, bandwidths proportional to their centre
frequencies. High frequency
hair cells would therefore be sensitive to a greater
proportion of the total energy in noise than low frequency hair
cells. Though hair-cell responses are not exactly constant Q,
and matters are further complicated by the way in which the
brain integrates adjacent hair-cell outputs, the resultant
effect appears roughly as a tilt centred on 1 kHz imposed on the
A-weighting.
Dependent on spectral content, 468-weighted measurements of
noise are generally about 11 dB higher than A-weighted , and
this is probably a factor in the recent trend away from
468-weighting in equipment specifications as cassette tape use
declines.
It is important to realise that the 468 specification covers
both weighted and 'unweighted' (using a 22 Hz to 22 kHz 18
dB/octave bandpass filter) measurement and that both use a very
special quasi-peak rectifier with carefully devised dynamics
(A-weighting uses
RMS detection for no particular reason). Rather than having
a simple 'integration time' this detector requires
implementation with two cascaded 'peak followers' each with
different attack time-constants carefully chosen to control the
response to both single and repeating tone-bursts of various
durations. This ensures that measurements on impulsive noise
take proper account of our reduced hearing sensitivity to short
bursts.
This was once important because outside broadcasts were
carried over 'music circuits' that used telephone lines, with
clicks from
Strowger exchanges. It now finds fresh relevance in the
measurement of noise on computer 'Audio Cards' which commonly
suffer clicks as drives start and stop.
Uptake
Engineers in the USA never 'caught on' to 468-weighting,
probably because for many decades they were part of a strong
independent manufacturing economy that tended to import little
from abroad. For the same reason they never adopted the PPM (Peak
programme meter), which also came out of BBC Research.
Nevertheless, 468-weighting is still demanded by the BBC and
many other broadcasters, and knowledge of its existence and
validity needs to spread. It is superior in allowing fair
comparison of specifications for all types of equipment, which
A-weighting cannot do because of differing noise
characteristics.
Present usage of 468-weighting
468-weighting is also used in weighted distortion measurement
at 1 kHz. Weighting the distortion residue after removal of the
fundamental emphasises high-order harmonics, but only up to 10
kHz or so where the ears response falls off. This results in a
single measurement (sometimes called
Distortion residue measurement) which corresponds well with
subjective effect even for power amplifiers where
crossover distortion is known to be far more audible than
normal THD(Total
harmonic distortion) measurements would suggest.
Measurements of
microphone noise are easier using 468-weighting because it
emphasises the audible noise more in comparison to low-frequency
noise. A-weighted
microphone measurements require quieter conditions to avoid
the effects of slow pressure variations caused by wind and air
conditioning.
See also
-
Standard:ITU-R 468 Full standard specification
-
Weighting filter
-
Equal-loudness contour
-
Noise weighting
-
A-weighting
-
Audio quality measurement
External links
-
Rane pro audio reference definition of ITU-R 468-weighting
-
The ITU-R 468-weighting curve (CCIR rec. 468) in detail
-
Weighting Filter Set Circuit diagrams
Categories:
Audio engineering |
Noise |
Sound |
ITU-R recommendations