The dynamic range of speech, compression, and its effect on the speech reception threshold in stationary and interrupted noise.

Changes in the speech reception threshold (SRT) after amplitude compression of speech or speech in noise may be due to changes in the dynamic range of the speech signal. However, current models set up to predict the speech intelligibility consider the dynamic range of speech to be fixed regardless of the type of compression. The present paper describes two experiments with normal-hearing subjects to examine the effect of the dynamic range on the SRT in stationary and interrupted noise after wide dynamic range compression. The dynamic range has been varied by compression or expansion of only the speech signal, leaving the masking noise unaltered, or by compression or expansion of the mixed speech-in-noise signal. The results show that compression affects the SRT, both in a positive or a negative direction, not only due to dynamic range but also due to distortion of the speech signal.

[1]  H. K. Dunn,et al.  Statistical Measurements on Conversational Speech , 1940 .

[2]  J. C. Steinberg,et al.  Factors Governing the Intelligibility of Speech Sounds , 1945 .

[3]  D. Gabor.  Acoustical Quanta and the Theory of Hearing , 1947, Nature.

[4]  L.L. Beranek,et al.  The Design of Speech Communication Systems , 1947, Proceedings of the IRE.

[5]  H. Fletcher,et al.  The Perception of Speech and Its Relation to Telephony , 1950 .

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

[7]  A. M. Mimpen,et al.  Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. , 1979, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[8]  T Houtgast,et al.  A physical method for measuring speech-transmission quality. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  B C Moore,et al.  Gap detection as a function of frequency, bandwidth, and level. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  C V Pavlovic,et al.  An evaluation of some assumptions underlying the articulation index. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  D D Dirks,et al.  Speech recognition and the Articulation Index for normal and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  D D Dirks,et al.  Articulation index predictions of contextually dependent words. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  C V Pavlovic,et al.  Derivation of primary parameters and procedures for use in speech intelligibility predictions. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  R M Cox,et al.  Distribution of short-term rms levels in conversational speech. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  R Plomp,et al.  The negative effect of amplitude compression in multichannel hearing aids in the light of the modulation-transfer function. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  A Boothroyd,et al.  Amplitude compression and profound hearing loss. , 1988, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[17]  D D Dirks,et al.  Auditory filter characteristics and consonant recognition for hearing-impaired listeners. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  Edgar Villchur.  Comments on ‘‘The negative effect of amplitude compression in multichannel hearing aids in the light of the modulation‐transfer function’’ [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 83, 2322–2327 (1988)] , 1989 .

[19]  G A Studebaker,et al.  Regression equations for the transfer functions of ANSI S3.5-1969. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  Articulation index: Importance function in the intensity domain , 1990 .

[21]  Brian R Glasberg,et al.  Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data , 1990, Hearing Research.

[22]  S F Bahgat,et al.  Envelope expansion methods for speech enhancement. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  J M Kates,et al.  On using coherence to measure distortion in hearing aids. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  D J Van Tasell.  Hearing loss, speech, and hearing aids. , 1993, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[25]  Dianne J. Van Tasell,et al.  Hearing Loss, Speech, and Hearing Aids , 1993 .

[26]  G A Studebaker,et al.  Frequency-importance and transfer functions for the Auditec of St. Louis recordings of the NU-6 word test. , 1993, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[27]  H. Dillon,et al.  An international comparison of long‐term average speech spectra , 1994 .

[28]  D J Van Tasell,et al.  Effect of Peak Clipping on Speech Recognition Threshold , 1994, Ear and hearing.

[29]  J M Kates,et al.  Quality ratings for frequency-shaped peak-clipped speech. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[30]  R Drullman,et al.  Temporal envelope and fine structure cues for speech intelligibility. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  D J Van Tasell,et al.  Quantifying the relation between speech quality and speech intelligibility. , 1995, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[32]  R Drullman,et al.  Speech intelligibility in noise: relative contribution of speech elements above and below the noise level. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  R. Freyman,et al.  Consonant confusions in amplitude-expanded speech. , 1996, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[34]  D D Dirks,et al.  Subjective judgements of clarity and intelligibility for filtered stimuli with equivalent speech intelligibility index predictions. , 1998, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[35]  C M Rankovic.  Factors governing speech reception benefits of adaptive linear filtering for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[36]  P G Stelmachowicz,et al.  Subjective effects of peak clipping and compression limiting in normal and hearing-impaired children and adults. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  T Houtgast,et al.  Compression and expansion of the temporal envelope: evaluation of speech intelligibility and sound quality. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[38]  T. Houtgast,et al.  Intensity discrimination of Gaussian-windowed tones: indications for the shape of the auditory frequency-time window. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[39]  T Houtgast,et al.  Preference judgments of artificial processed and hearing-aid transduced speech. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  G. Studebaker,et al.  Monosyllabic word recognition at higher-than-normal speech and noise levels. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[41]  T Houtgast,et al.  Method for the selection of sentence materials for efficient measurement of the speech reception threshold. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[42]  P E Souza,et al.  Effect of compression ratio on speech recognition and speech-quality ratings with wide dynamic range compression amplification. , 2000, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[43]  D Byrne,et al.  Maximizing Effective Audibility in Hearing Aid Fitting , 2001, Ear and hearing.

[44]  T Houtgast,et al.  Effects of degradation of intensity, time, or frequency content on speech intelligibility for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[45]  G. Studebaker,et al.  Intensity-importance functions for bandlimited monosyllabic words. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[46]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Speech dynamic range and its effect on cochlear implant performance. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[47]  Teresa Y C Ching,et al.  Methods and Applications of the Audibility Index in Hearing Aid Selection and Fitting , 2002, Trends in amplification.

[48]  Michelle R. Molis,et al.  Effects of high presentation levels on recognition of low- and high-frequency speech , 2003 .

[49]  G. Studebaker,et al.  Audibility-Index Predictions of Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners’ Performance on the Connected Speech Test , 2003, Ear and hearing.

[50]  Dean Keith Simonton.  Thar's Gold in Them Thar Hills! , 2003 .

[51]  Christian Lorenzi,et al.  Identification of envelope-expanded sentences in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners , 2004, Hearing Research.

[52]  James M Kates,et al.  Coherence and the speech intelligibility index. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[53]  Lorienne M Jenstad,et al.  Quantifying the effect of compression hearing aid release time on speech acoustics and intelligibility. , 2005, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[54]  K. S. Rhebergen,et al.  A Speech Intelligibility Index-based approach to predict the speech reception threshold for sentences in fluctuating noise for normal-hearing listeners. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[55]  Jont B. Allen,et al.  Consonant and vowel confusions in speech-weighted noise , 2007, INTERSPEECH.

[56]  Martin Hansen,et al.  Objectively measured and subjectively perceived distortion in nonlinear systems. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[57]  K. S. Rhebergen,et al.  Modeling the speech intelligibility in fluctuating noise , 2006 .

[58]  K. S. Rhebergen,et al.  Extended speech intelligibility index for the prediction of the speech reception threshold in fluctuating noise. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[59]  Lorienne M Jenstad,et al.  Measuring the acoustic effects of compression amplification on speech in noise. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[60]  James M Kates,et al.  Effects of noise and distortion on speech quality judgments in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[61]  Bryce E. Lobdell,et al.  A model of the VU (volume-unit) meter, with speech applications. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[62]  B. Moore,et al.  Quantifying the effects of fast-acting compression on the envelope of speech. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[63]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  Spectro-Temporal Characteristics of Speech at High Frequencies, and the Potential for Restoration of Audibility to People with Mild-to-Moderate Hearing Loss , 2008, Ear and hearing.

[64]  Wouter A. Dreschler,et al.  Quantifying and modeling the acoustic effects of compression on speech in noise , 2008 .

[65]  Arthur Boothroyd,et al.  The performance/intensity function: an underused resource. , 2008, Ear and hearing.

[66]  Wouter A. Dreschler,et al.  Learning effect observed for the speech reception threshold in interrupted noise with normal hearing listeners , 2008, International journal of audiology.

[67]  J. C. Steinberg,et al.  Factors Governing the Intelligibility of Speech Sounds , 1945 .