Comparative study of two geometrical acoustic simulation models

Simulations based on the concepts of geometrical acoustics are today well-established tools for acousticians, being widely used for evaluation of sound quality in rooms and urban spaces. However, although a lot of different models are available and have been evaluated in the past, it is still very important to guarantee the validity and quality of simulated data and reproduced sound. This work presents a comparison between the signal processing strategies in two acoustic simulators based on geometrical models. Obvious expectation was that both simulators would produce the same results when fed by exactly the same input data. However, issues related to model assumptions, propagation methods characteristics and signal processing techniques adopted by each simulator introduce differences which alter the final results, i.e., the simulated acoustic impulse responses. This papers aims to present such deviation and helps to understand the influence of each component over the results. Firstly, both simulators are described in detail, presenting their acoustic models and the signal processing approaches. In addition, an extensive analysis of early reflections is performed, considering pressure levels, reflection order, their arrival time and directional characteristics. Next, simulated energy decay curves, monaural room acoustic parameters and spectra are objectively compared to measured data of a reverberant chamber, in two different conditions. The differences are then pointed out and minimized by unifying the signal processing of both simulators. The results of this comparison reveal that signal processing and inherit method characteristics still have strong influence over the simulated impulse responses, mainly for the late part. Some consequences are energy misbalance between early and late parts of impulse response, leading to differences over the room acoustic parameters, mainly clarity and definition.

[1]  Michael Vorländer,et al.  Simulation and Evaluation of Acoustic Environments , 2014 .

[2]  Lauri Savioja,et al.  Overview of geometrical room acoustic modeling techniques. , 2015, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  Jont B. Allen,et al.  Image method for efficiently simulating small‐room acoustics , 1976 .

[4]  Michael Vorländer,et al.  Combined wave and ray based room acoustic simulations of small rooms : [challenges and limitations on the way to realistic simulation results] , 2012 .

[5]  C. Jeong Absorption and impedance boundary conditions for phased geometrical-acoustics methods. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  Dirk Schröder,et al.  Physically based real-time auralization of interactive virtual environments , 2011 .

[7]  Chen Ke-an,et al.  On the accuracy of the ray-tracing algorithms based on various sound receiver models , 2003 .

[8]  Steffen Lepa,et al.  A spatial audio quality inventory for virtual acoustic environments (SAQI) , 2014 .

[9]  U. Stephenson Comparison of the mirror image source method and the sound particle simulation method , 1990 .

[10]  Cheol-Ho Jeong,et al.  Combination of acoustical radiosity and the image source method. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  T. Lewers,et al.  A combined beam tracing and radiatn exchange computer model of room acoustics , 1993 .

[12]  Michael Vorländer,et al.  Integrating Real-Time Room Acoustics Simulation into a CAD Modeling Software to Enhance the Architectural Design Process , 2014 .

[13]  Donald P. Greenberg,et al.  A radiosity method for non-diffuse environments , 1986, SIGGRAPH.

[14]  Brian F. G. Katz International Round Robin on Room Acoustical Impulse Response Analysis Software 2004 , 2004 .

[15]  Uwe M. Stephenson,et al.  COMBINING HIGHER ORDER REFLECTIONS WITH DIFFRACTIONS WITHOUT EXPLOSION OF COMPUTATION TIME: THE SOUND PARTICLE RADIOSITY METHOD , 2014 .

[16]  A. Krokstad,et al.  Calculating the acoustical room response by the use of a ray tracing technique , 1968 .

[17]  I. Bork,et al.  A comparison of room simulation software - The 2nd round robin on room acoustical computer simulation , 2000 .

[18]  S. Strøm,et al.  Fifteen years' experience with computerized ray tracing , 1983 .

[19]  I. Bork Report on the 3rd round robin on room acoustical computer simulation - : Part II: Calculations , 2005 .

[20]  Roberto A. Tenenbaum,et al.  Hybrid method for numerical simulation of room acoustics with auralization: part 1 - theoretical and numerical aspects , 2007 .

[21]  Michael Vorländer,et al.  RAVEN: A real-time framework for the auralization of interactive virtual environments , 2011 .

[22]  J. Rindel Modelling the angle-dependent pressure reflection factor , 1993 .