< Back to IRCAM Forum

Fundamental frequency estimate (Pm2 vs. SuperVP)

OpenMusic
#1

Hi,

I am comparing results from SuperVP’s f0-estimate and Pm2’s pm2-f0, and despite their similar description in the doc (‘fundamental frequency estimation’), their outputs are quite different. Despite the fact that they have a couple of different parameters, it looks like SuperVP is returning the most prominent pitch, whereas Pm2 would estimate a possible fundamental to what is heard (example tested: a trumpet sound starting around G4 returns the same with SuperVP, but around C3 with Pm2, as if G4 was considered a partial)…

Thanks for your insight!
Jimmie

#2

Cheers Jimmie,

In order to get real insights into the nuts and bolts of the Pm2 and SuperVP engines, if I were you I’d post any such questions in the “Audiosculpt” forum.

All the best,
António

#3

Indeed, you may be right :slight_smile:

I just forgot to mention that I was actually talking about OM-Pm2 1.3 and OM-SuperVP 2.8… and I’ve not seen so far that there would be two different F0 estimates (besides customizable settings) in Audiosculpt… But yes, I’ll try asking the other group as well, good idea!

Cheers,
Jimmie

#4

Hi – Audiosculpt uses SuperVP for the fundamental frequency estimation (you can see that in the log panel at the bottom of the AS window). I can not say what are the exact differences with the pm2 estimation method, but someone in the AudioSculpt forum can probably tell you.