Reverberation algorithms

Augusto Sarti

Summary
n  n  n 

The Reverb Problem Reverb Perception Acoustic impulse response:
¨  ¨ 

Formation mechanisms Parameters

n  n  n 

Early Reflections Late Reverb Numerical reverberation algorithms
¨  ¨  ¨ 

Schroeder Reverbs Feedback Delay Network (FDN) Reverberators Waveguide Reverberators

n 

Geometrical reverberation algorithms

Impulse response
n  n 

The sounds we perceive heavily depend on the surrounding environment Environment-related sound changes are of convolutive origin (filtering)
¨  Well-modeled

by a space-varying impulse response

Impulse response Amplitude Time Direct signal Early reflections Reverberations S S S R R R .

Reverberation tf Function Three sources. one listener (two ears) n  Filters should include pinnae filtering n  Filters change if anything in the room changes (exact model) n  .

therefore it works better than the amplitude’s envelope for defining the reverberation time ¨  In reverberant environments a large amount of the total energy is contained in the last portion of the impulse response ¨  n  Reverberation time T 60 = {t : EDC (t ) =EDC (0) − 60dB} .Global descriptors n  Energy decay curve (EDC) Introduced by Schroeder to define reverberation time ¨  It measures the total signal energy remaining in the reverberator’s impulse response at time t ¨  It decays more smoothly than the impulse response.

Global descriptors .

EDR of a violin body .

Global descriptors n  In the room’s transfer function we can single out resonant modes The spacing between two resonant modes is given by n  n  which is valid above the threshold frequency .

Global descriptors n  Number of echoes in the impulse response before time t n  Derivative of Nt: n  Clarity index: ratio btw early reflections energy and late reverberation energy .

Implementation .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Moorer reverberator n  accounts for late reverberations by placing an IIR filter after the FIR filter (tapped delay line) .

Binaural impulse response n  Our sound perception is affected by our own body ¨ Head Related Transfer Function (HRTF) Acoustic paths can be grouped together to reduce cost .

Comb filter .

Allpass filter .

.

.

while a comb filter has widely varying gains .Steady-state tones (sinusoids) really do see the same gain at every frequency in an allpass.

we must have .Comb filters and reverberation time n  n  The decay between successive samples in comb and allpass filters is described by the gain coefficient gi In order for the comb filter’s decay to correspond to a given reverberation time.

Combination of comb filters n  n  Single comb filters do not provide sufficient echo density In order to improve the echo density. we need to combine multiple comb filters Cascading comb filters corresponds to multiplying their transfer functions ¨  Frequency peaks not shared by all comb filters are cancelled by multiplication ¨  .

Combination of comb filters n  Better to place comb filters in parallel ¨ Example .

Parallel comb filters n  The poles of comb filters are given by n  The poles have the same magnitudes n  The modal density (No. of modes per Hz) is .

unlike real rooms Above a threshold frequency.Parallel comb filters n  n  n  Modal density turns out to be the same at all frequencies. the modal density is constant The modal density of the comb filters is then set to the modal density above the threshold frequency .

Parallel comb filters n  The echo density of the comb filters is approximatively given by n  Relating echo density and modal density provides: .

allpass filters must be cascaded ¨  Multiplying freq. responses corresponds to adding phase responses .Combination of allpass filters n  Unlike comb filters.

Schroeder’s reverberator (1) .

.

7 ms .Schroeder’s reverberator n  Delays of the comb and allpass filters are chosen so that the ratio of the largest and smallest delay is 1.5 (typically 30 and 45 ms) The gains gi of the comb filters are chosen to provide a desired reverberation time Tr according to n  n  Allpass filters delays are set to 5 and 1.

.

.

.

Feedback Delay Networks… …at a glance n  Unitary matrix: definition ¨  A matrix is unitary if : || M ⋅ u ||=|| u || ¨  We can also write that a matrix is unitary if || MMT ||=|| MT M ||= 1 .

FDN ⎡ a11 a12 ⎢a ⎢ 21 a22 A= ⎢a31 a32 ⎢ ⎣a41 a42 a13 a23 a33 a43 a14 ⎤ a24 ⎥ ⎥ a34 ⎥ ⎥ a44 ⎦ •  Stability of the feedback loop is guaranteed if A = gM where M is an unitary matrix and |g|<1 •  Outputs will be mutually incoherent: we can use the FDN to render the diffuse soundfield with a 4 loudspeaker system •  The early reverbeartions can be simulated by appropriately injecting the input signal into the delay lines .

Jot’s reverberator c =[ ] ⎡ a11 a12  a1N ⎤ ⎢ a a22  a2 N ⎥ 21 ⎥ A = ⎢ ⎢     ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ a N 1 a42  a4 N ⎦ ⎣ ⎡ b1 ⎤ b = ⎢  ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢bN ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎡ c1 ⎤ c = ⎢  ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢c N ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ .

Jot’s reverberator The input-output relation of Jot’s reverberator is given by with and .

Jot’s reverberator n  System transfer function: n  Zeros: n  Poles: .

Jot’s reverberator n  n  n  Moorer noted that convolving exponentially decaying white noise with source signals produces a very natural sounding As a consequence. by introducing absorptive losses into a lossless prototype. we should obtain a natural sounding reverberator This is accomplished by associating a gain with each delay: .

Jot’s reverberator n  The logarithm of the gain is proportional to the length of the delay: n  n  The above modification has the effect of replacing z with z/γ in the transfer function The lossless prototype response h[n] will be multiplied by an exponential envelope γn .

Modeling the Environment .

Modeling the environment n  Simulate reverberations due to environment .

Motivations Acoustical environment provides .. n  Sense of presence n  Comprehension of space n  Localization of auditory cues n  Selectivity of audio signals (“cocktail party effect”) ..

Geometric acoustic modeling n  Spatialize sound by computing reverberation paths from source to receiver .

Similarities to Graphics n  Both model wave propagatation .

Differences from Graphics I n  Sound has longer wavelengths than light ¨  Diffractions are significant ¨  Specular reflections dominate diffuse reflections ¨  Occlusions by small objects have little effect .

Differences from Graphics II n  Sound waves are coherent ¨  Modeling phase is important .

Differences from Graphics III n  Sound travels more slowly than light ¨  Reverberations are perceived over time .

Overview of approaches n  n  n  n  n  Finite element methods Boundary element methods Image source methods Ray tracing Beam tracing .

Finite element methods n  Solve wave equation over grid-aligned mesh .

Boundary element methods n  Solve wave equation over discretized surfaces .

Boundary Element Trade-offs n  Advantages ¨ Works well for low frequencies ¨ Simple formulation .

Boundary Element Trade-offs n  Disadvantages ¨ Complex function stored with each element ¨ Form factors must model diffractions & specularities ¨ Elements must be much smaller than wavelength .

Image source methods n  Consider direct paths from “virtual sources” .

Image source trade-offs n  Advantages ¨ Simple for rectangular rooms .

Image source trade-offs
n  Disadvantages
¨ O(nr)

visibility checks in arbitrary environments ¨ Specular reflections only

Path tracing
n  Trace

paths between source and receiver

Path Tracing Trade-offs
n  Advantages
¨ Models

all types of surfaces and scattering ¨ Simple to implement
Sampled reverberation s Incoming ray

Path Tracing Disadvantages n  Disadvantages ¨ Subject to sampling errors (aliasing) ¨ Depends on receiver position .

Beam Tracing n  Trace beams (bundles of rays) from source .

Beam Tracing Trade-offs n  Advantages ¨ Takes advantage of spatial coherence ¨ Predetermines visible virtual sources .

Beam Tracing Disadvantages n  Disadvantages ¨ Difficult for curved surfaces or refractions ¨ Requires efficient polygon sorting and intersection BSPs Cell adjacency graphs .

Complex 3D Environments n  Precompute beam tree for stationary source .

Interactive Performance n  Lookup beams containing moving receiver .

Summary n  FEM/BEM ¨ best ¨ best for low frequencies n  Image n  Path source methods for rectangular rooms (very common) for high-order reflections (very common) tracing tracing for precomputation ¨ best n  Beam ¨ best .

Current research in interactive audio spatialization .

Back to the problem n  n  Path/ray tracing according to the laws of geometric optics Applications to ¨  Simulation of acoustic reverberations in complex environments ¨  Prediction of EM propagation for wireless systems (multipath fading) 81 .

Beam tracing n  n  Construction of the beam tree through space subdivision Construction of paths through beam tree lookup 82 .

Using space subdivision 83 .

What is missing? n  Traditional ¨ Every beam tracing assumes that the source be fixed time the source moves. the BT needs to be rebuilt from scratch (lengthy process based on space subdivision) n  Is it possible to avoid space subdivision? n  Is it possible to settle all visibility issues in advance (irrespective of the source location)? n  Is it ultimately possible to build the BT through a simple lookup process? 84 .

Reformulating the problem n  Define environment’s visibility independently from the source’s location n  Compute the environment’s visibility n  Build the beam tree using ¨ Visibility info ¨ Source’s location n  Build the paths using ¨ Beam tree 85 ¨ Receiver’s location .

Environment’s characterization n  n  Sources and Receivers ¨  Assumed to be point-like Reflectors ¨  Oriented n  n  n  surface of a reflecting wall A reflecting wall defines two reflectors Assumed as flat Identified by an index n  Byproducts: ¨  Beams n  n  Compact bundle of rays originated by the same source Identified by a source (real or virtual) and the illuminated portion of a reflector ¨  Active n  n  reflectors That portion of a reflector illuminated by a beam Identified by a beam and a reflector 86 .

Visibility n  Visibility function ¨  Function that associates the index of the visible reflector to a viewpoint and a viewing direction ¨  Piece-wise constant function that takes on values in the parameter space that characterizes viewpoint and viewing direction n  Visibility function from a reflector ¨  Visibility function where viewpoints are constrained on the pts of the reflector of the visibility functions associated to all the environment’s reflectors n  n  Environment’s visibility description ¨  Set M reflecting walls => 2M visibility functions 87 .

y = a x + b.b) 88 . with reflecting surface facing x≥0 ¨  This way viewpoint and viewing direction can be described by the eq. where -1≤b≤1 describes the point on the reflector and a the viewing direction n  Parameter space: (a.Defining the parameter space n  Parameter space: viewpoint and viewing direction ¨  If the point lies on a reflector n  n  4D parameter space in the 3D case 2D parameter space in the 2D case ¨  Reflector’s n  normalization affine transformation (rigid motion + scaling) of the geometric space that remaps the reflector onto the segment that goes from (0.-1) to (0.1).

t. this region can be empty or made of a set of convex polygons n  The visibility region of reflector i is the region where the visibility function is equal to i 89 .r.b) that corresponds to viewpoints on the reference reflector from which the given one results as visible ¨ Due to occlusions. a reference reflector is the region of the parameter space (a.Visibility region n  The visibility region of a given reflector w.

h) g t + h = a (e t + f) + b.Visibility region n  A generic reflector can be described by (e+f. 0≤t≤1 -1≤b≤1 Visibility region: Intersection btw a bundle of rays (a beam in parameter space) and the strip -1≤b≤1 90 .g+h) x=et+f y=gt+h 0≤t≤1 Substituting in y=ax+b we obtain (f.

Examples 91 .

Visibility region n  n  n  n  Potential visibility region: visibility region with no other reflectors Potential visibility regions may overlap Actual visibility region is contained within the potential one ¨  Overlaps must be resolved considering occlusions Approach for evaluating visibility function ¨  Compute potential visibility regions ¨  Resolve overlaps and identify actual visibility regions ¨  Label actual visibility regions 92 .

Resolving overlaps n  When two potential visibility regions overlap. the reference reflector n  Who occludes who decides which region eats which on the overlap n  This can be done by tracing a sample ray within the overlapping region 93 .t.r. the corresponding reflectors exhibit a partial occlusion w.

Parameter space (dual space) 94 .

Reflectors in the dual space 95 .

Normalized dual space

96

Building a beam tree from visibility
n  Evaluating

the global visibility of the environment corresponds to building one visibility function per reflector
¨ This

corresponds to constructing and labeling all the actual visibility regions for each reflector

n  All

this ignores the location of the source n  Given source location and visibility, how do we build the beam tree?
97

Sources in parameter space

n  n 

A source in parameter space is a line (dual of a pt) Source and active portion of a reflector define a beam
¨  The

branching of a beam is defined by the intersection btw the line and the actual visibility regions
98

Beam tracing n  Given a beam reflected by the i-th reflector. use visibility to to determine its branching in sub-beams (one per visible reflector) ¨ Determine virtual source location in the warped space corresponding to i-th reflector ¨ Determine illuminated portion of reflector and the corresponding “narrowed” reference strip ¨ Scan actual visibility regions over the line corresponding to the source in parameter space ¨ Update beam tree 99 .

Beam tracing 100 .

Computational efficiency 101 .

Computational efficiency 102 .

103 .

Modeling diffraction n  Use geometric theory of diffraction n  Diffraction modeled by placing sources (and the relative beam trees) at diffracting wedges n  Beam trees computed in advance jointly with visibility information 104 .

A comparison btw imp. Meas. responses Sim. .

envelope: . ¨  Center Time (CT): centroid of squared impulse response ¨  n  Imp.Comparison n  Parameters: EDC ¨  Early Decay Time (EDT): time that imp. takes to dim down of 10 dB. resp. Resp.

EDC recorded Simulated refl. only Sim. of refl. + diffr. Complete simulation .

only Sim.EDT recorded Simulated refl. of refl. Complete simulation\ . + diffr.

only Sim. + diffr. of refl. Complete simulation .Centre Time recorded Simulated refl.

Auralization 110 .

Active Beamshaping .

Rendering beams   Physical approach: WFS   Geometric appraoch: Beam Tracing     Huygens principle data-based (needs wavefield acquisition) Works on wavefronts       Implements general solution according to geometric propagation principles Boundary conditions become components of the implementation 112 .

Goal
 

Reconstruction of an arbitrary source (arbitrary radiation function) in an arbitrary location using an array of speaker in close range

113

Signal transfer
=

NxM

Mx1 Nx1

Gh = b
Matrix form
114

Example (1) – central beam

n  M

= 16; n  f = 700Hz n  Δy = not uniform n  Gaussian mask

115

n f = 700Hz n Δy = 10 cm n Maschera Gauss 116 .Example 2 – skewed beam n M = 64.

Rendered beam .

of speakers n  N. of frequencies where we minimize n  M. No. of taps of the filter 118 . No. No. we apply them to multiple frequencies (wideband minimization) ¨ 4 parameters: n  F. No.Wideband extension ¨ Instead of setting constraints at a single frequency. of angles n  T.

Example 3 – skewed beam 119 .

Interface 120 .

Testing in a dry room Multiple audio cards in daisychain configuration 8-16-24 synchronized outputs 15-speaker non-uniform array 121 .

Results n  Expected ¨ Low contrasting needs frequencies require extensive arrays ¨ High frequencies require closely-spaced speakers ¨ Cost constrains limit the No. of speakers n  With 15-16 speakers we do not go beyond 17-18 db of attenuation btw main lobe and side lobes with a limited frequency range (300Hz-6kHz) 122 .

therefore it can be used as a geometric engine for synthesizing the response of the environment as well (early reverberation for spatial impression) 123 . Therefore we can ¨ Reconstruct an arbitrary source in an arbitrary location ¨ Combine multiple beams through superposition principle.Conclusions n  Results are comparable to those achieved with WFS but we control them in a geometric fashion.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful