Better-ear glimpsing efficiency with symmetrically-placed interfering talkers.

In listening tasks where a target speech signal is spatially separated from a masking voice, listeners can often gain a substantial advantage in performance by attending to the ear with the better signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). However, this better-ear strategy becomes much more complicated when a target talker located in front of the listener is masked by interfering talkers positioned at symmetric locations to the left and right of the target. When this happens, there are no long-term SNR advantages at either ear and the only binaural SNR advantages available are the result of complicated better-ear glimpses that vary as a function of frequency and rapidly switch back and forth between the two ears according to the natural fluctuations in the relative levels of the two masking voices. In this study, a signal processing technique was used to take the better-ear glimpses that would ordinarily be randomly distributed across the two ears in a binaural speech signal and move them all into the same ear. This resulted in a monaural signal that contained all the information available to an ideal listener using an optimal binaural glimpsing strategy. Speech intelligibility was measured with these optimized monaural stimuli and compared to performance with unprocessed binaural speech stimuli. Performance was similar in these two conditions, suggesting that listeners with normal hearing are able to efficiently extract information from better-ear glimpses that fluctuate rapidly across frequency and across the two ears.

[1]  DeLiang Wang,et al.  Isolating the energetic component of speech-on-speech masking with ideal time-frequency segregation. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Masanao Ebata,et al.  Spatial unmasking and attention related to the cocktail party problem , 2003 .

[3]  Guy J. Brown,et al.  Separation of speech from interfering sounds based on oscillatory correlation , 1999, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks.

[4]  K. D. Kryter Methods for the Calculation and Use of the Articulation Index , 1962 .

[5]  R L Freyman,et al.  Spatial release from informational masking in speech recognition. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  Harvey Dillon,et al.  The listening in spatialized noise-sentences test (LISN-S): comparison to the prototype LISN and results from children with either a suspected (central) auditory processing disorder or a confirmed language disorder. , 2008, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[7]  Robert S. Bolia,et al.  Aurally Aided Visual Search in Three-Dimensional Space , 1999, Hum. Factors.

[8]  R Plomp,et al.  The effect of head-induced interaural time and level differences on speech intelligibility in noise. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Douglas S Brungart,et al.  Precedence-based speech segregation in a virtual auditory environment. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  K. D. Kryter,et al.  ARTICULATION-TESTING METHODS: CONSONANTAL DIFFERENTIATION WITH A CLOSED-RESPONSE SET. , 1965, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  R L Freyman,et al.  The role of perceived spatial separation in the unmasking of speech. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  John F Culling,et al.  The spatial unmasking of speech: evidence for within-channel processing of interaural time delay. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  Gerald Kidd,et al.  The effects of hearing loss and age on the benefit of spatial separation between multiple talkers in reverberant rooms. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  DeLiang Wang,et al.  Time-Frequency Masking for Speech Separation and Its Potential for Hearing Aid Design , 2008 .

[15]  Guy J. Brown,et al.  Separation of Speech by Computational Auditory Scene Analysis , 2005 .

[16]  N I Durlach,et al.  Evaluation of response methods for the localization of nearby objects , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  DeLiang Wang,et al.  Speech intelligibility in background noise with ideal binary time-frequency masking. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  G. Kidd,et al.  The effect of spatial separation on informational and energetic masking of speech. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  R Plomp,et al.  Effect of multiple speechlike maskers on binaural speech recognition in normal and impaired hearing. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.