Effects of Dynamic-Range Compression on the Spatial Attributes of Sounds in Normal-Hearing Listeners

Objectives: Dynamic-range compression is routinely used in bilaterally fitted hearing devices. The objective of this study was to investigate how compression applied independently at each ear affects spatial perception in normal-hearing listeners and to relate the effects to changes in binaural cues caused by the compression for different types of sound. Design: A semantic-differential method was used to measure the spatial attributes of sounds. Eleven normal-hearing participants responded to questions addressing certainty of location, diffuseness, movement, image splits, and externalization of sounds. Responses were given on seven-point scales between pairs of opposing terms. Stimuli included speech and a range of synthetic sounds with varying characteristics. Head-related transfer functions were used to simulate a source at an azimuth of −60° or +60°. Three processing conditions were compared: (1) an unprocessed reference condition; (2) fast-acting, wide-dynamic-range compression operating independently at each ear; and (3) imposition of a static bias in interaural level difference (ILD) equivalent to that generated by the compression under steady state conditions. All processing was applied in a high-frequency channel above 2 kHz. The three processing conditions were compared separately in two bandwidth conditions: a high-pass condition in which the high-frequency channel was presented to listeners in isolation and a full-bandwidth condition in which the high-frequency channel was recombined with the unprocessed low-frequency channel. Results: Hierarchical cluster analysis was used to group related questions based on similarity of participants’ responses. This led to the calculation of composite scores for four spatial attributes: “diffuseness,” “movement,” “image split,” and “externalization.” Compared with the unprocessed condition, fast-acting compression significantly increased diffuseness, movement, and image-split scores and significantly reduced externalization scores. The effects of compression were greater when listeners heard the high-frequency channel in isolation than when it was recombined with the unprocessed low-frequency channel. The effects were apparent only for sounds containing gradual onsets and offsets, including speech. Dynamic compression had a much more pronounced effect on the spatial attributes of sounds than imposition of a static bias in ILD. Conclusions: Fast-acting compression at high frequencies operating independently at each ear can adversely affect the spatial attributes of sounds in normal-hearing listeners by increasing diffuseness, increasing or giving rise to a sense of movement, causing images to split, and affecting the externalization of sounds. The effects are reduced, but not eliminated, when listeners have access to undisturbed low-frequency cues. Sounds containing gradual onsets and offsets, including speech, are most affected. The effects arise primarily as a result of relatively slow changes in ILD that are generated as the sound level at one or both ears crosses the compression threshold. The results may have implications for the use of compression in bilaterally fitted hearing devices, specifically in relation to spatial perception in dynamic situations.

[1]  F L Wightman,et al.  Interaural time discrimination ability of listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. , 1980, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[2]  Daniel P. W. Ellis,et al.  The auditory organization of speech and other sources in listeners and computational models , 2001, Speech Commun..

[3]  A Goedegebure,et al.  Compression and its Effect on the Speech Signal , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[4]  R. Häusler,et al.  Sound localization in subjects with impaired hearing. Spatial-discrimination and interaural-discrimination tests. , 1983, Acta oto-laryngologica. Supplementum.

[5]  W. Noble,et al.  Optimizing Sound Localization with Hearing Aids , 1998, Trends in amplification.

[6]  H. Charles Romesburg,et al.  Cluster analysis for researchers , 1984 .

[7]  Robert F Labadie,et al.  Interaural Time and Level Difference Thresholds for Acoustically Presented Signals in Post-Lingually Deafened Adults Fitted with Bilateral Cochlear Implants Using CIS+ Processing , 2007, Ear and hearing.

[8]  D W Grantham Discrimination of dynamic interaural intensity differences. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  B. Moore Cochlear hearing loss : physiological, psychological and technical issues , 2014 .

[10]  B. Moore,et al.  Syllabic compression: effective compression ratios for signals modulated at different rates. , 1992, British journal of audiology.

[11]  J. C. Middlebrooks,et al.  Listener weighting of cues for lateral angle: the duplex theory of sound localization revisited. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  W. Gaik,et al.  Combined evaluation of interaural time and intensity differences: psychoacoustic results and computer modeling. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  Brian C J Moore,et al.  The Choice of Compression Speed in Hearing Aids: Theoretical and Practical Considerations and the Role of Individual Differences , 2008, Trends in amplification.

[14]  J Blauert,et al.  On the lag of lateralization caused by interaural time and intensity differences. , 1972, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[15]  W Noble,et al.  Improvement in aided sound localization with open earmolds: observations in people with high-frequency hearing loss. , 1998, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[16]  B. Seeber The duplex-theory of localization investigated under natural conditions , 2007 .

[17]  Bernhard U. Seeber,et al.  Subjective selection of non-individual head-related transfer functions , 2003 .

[18]  Marc Moonen,et al.  Horizontal localization with bilateral hearing aids: without is better than with. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  Marcus Holmberg,et al.  Binaural hearing aid communication shown to improve sound quality and localization , 2009 .

[20]  Jens Blauert,et al.  The AUDIS catalog of human HRTFs , 1998 .

[21]  F. Wightman,et al.  The dominant role of low-frequency interaural time differences in sound localization. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  Brian C. J. Moore,et al.  Tolerable Hearing Aid Delays. V. Estimation of Limits for Open Canal Fittings , 2008, Ear and hearing.

[23]  Gitte Keidser,et al.  The effect of multi-channel wide dynamic range compression, noise reduction, and the directional microphone on horizontal localization performance in hearing aid wearers , 2006, International journal of audiology.

[24]  M. Akeroyd,et al.  Two-eared listening in dynamic situations , 2006, International journal of audiology.

[25]  C. Osgood,et al.  Factor analysis of meaning. , 1955, Journal of experimental psychology.

[26]  D. Markle,et al.  Hearing Aids , 1936, The Journal of Laryngology & Otology.

[27]  M. Walger,et al.  Influence of Dynamic Compression on Directional Hearing in the Horizontal Plane , 2006, Ear and hearing.

[28]  A. Macleod,et al.  A procedure for measuring auditory and audio-visual speech-reception thresholds for sentences in noise: rationale, evaluation, and recommendations for use. , 1990, British journal of audiology.

[29]  Hugo Fastl,et al.  Psycho-Acoustics and Sound Quality , 2005 .

[30]  W M Hartmann,et al.  On the externalization of sound images. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  Brian M. Kreisman,et al.  Improvements in Speech Understanding With Wireless Binaural Broadband Digital Hearing Instruments in Adults With Sensorineural Hearing Loss , 2010, Trends in amplification.

[32]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  A power primer. , 1992, Psychological bulletin.

[33]  L. A. Jeffress,et al.  Two-image lateralization of tones and clicks. , 1968, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.