[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: MFCC method

To: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: MFCC method
From: Laszlo Toth <tothl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 10:39:11 +0100
Approved-by: tothl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Comments: To: Arturo Camacho <acamacho@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri Jan 9 04:41:47 2009
In-reply-to: <20090109080153.A2AF96531@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-archive: <http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>
List-help: <http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>, <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTS.MCGILL.CA?body=INFO AUDITORY>
List-owner: <mailto:AUDITORY-request@LISTS.MCGILL.CA>
List-subscribe: <mailto:AUDITORY-subscribe-request@LISTS.MCGILL.CA>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:AUDITORY-unsubscribe-request@LISTS.MCGILL.CA>
References: <20090107214829.5E1664784@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090107221249.5404461AF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090109054755.C04002A73@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090109080153.A2AF96531@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Laszlo Toth <tothl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: AUDITORY - Research in Auditory Perception <AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

On Thu, 8 Jan 2009, Arturo Camacho wrote:

> I wonder if it would not be an even better idea to use the Greenwood
> function (see entry in Wikipedia), which was explicitly created with
> that purpose.

I'm pretty sure I've seen papers comparing various frequency warping
scales in MFCC, but none of them made a significant difference compared to
the mel scale (at least, with respect to speech recognition performance).
I can't name an exact reference, though.

               Laszlo Toth
        Hungarian Academy of Sciences         *
  Research Group on Artificial Intelligence   *   "Failure only begins
     e-mail: tothl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx            *    when you stop trying"
     http://www.inf.u-szeged.hu/~tothl        *

Prev by Date: Re: MFCC method
Next by Date: STI or SII index calculation
Previous by thread: Re: MFCC method
Next by thread: Re: MFCC method
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread