The effect of spatial separation in distance on the intelligibility of speech in rooms.

The influence of spatial separation in source distance on speech reception thresholds (SRTs) is investigated. In one scenario, the target was presented at 0.5 m distance, and the masker varied from 0.5 m distance up to 10 m. In a second scenario, the masker was presented at 0.5 m distance and the target distance varied. The stimuli were synthesized using convolution with binaural room impulse responses (BRIRs) measured on a dummy head in a reverberant auditorium, and were equalized to compensate for distance-dependent spectral and intensity changes. All sources were simulated directly in front of the listener. SRTs decreased monotonically when the target was at 0.5 m and the speech-masker was moved further away, resulting in a SRT improvement of up to 10 dB. When the speech masker was at 0.5 m and the target was moved away, a large variation across subjects was observed. Neither short-term signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) improvements nor cross-ear glimpsing could account for the observed improvement in intelligibility. However, the effect might be explained by an improvement in the SNR in the modulation domain and a decrease in informational masking. This study demonstrates that distance-related cues can play a significant role when listening in complex environments.

[1]  Harvey Dillon,et al.  Development of the Listening in Spatialized Noise-Sentences Test (LISN-S) , 2007, Ear and hearing.

[2]  P. Peterson,et al.  Intelligibility-weighted measures of speech-to-interference ratio and speech system performance. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  E. C. Cmm,et al.  on the Recognition of Speech, with , 2008 .

[4]  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.

[5]  Pavel Zahorik,et al.  Direct-to-reverberant energy ratio sensitivity. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  M. Ericson,et al.  Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of multiple simultaneous talkers. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  Douglas S Brungart,et al.  The effects of spatial separation in distance on the informational and energetic masking of a nearby speech signal. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  W. M. Rabinowitz,et al.  Auditory localization of nearby sources. Head-related transfer functions. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Virginia Best,et al.  The influence of non-spatial factors on measures of spatial release from masking. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[11]  A. Bronkhorst,et al.  Auditory distance perception in humans : A summary of past and present research , 2005 .

[12]  A. Nabelek,et al.  Monaural and binaural speech perception in reverberation for listeners of various ages. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  W. T. Nelson,et al.  A speech corpus for multitalker communications research. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  C. Mason,et al.  Release from masking due to spatial separation of sources in the identification of nonspeech auditory patterns. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  R Plomp,et al.  A clinical test for the assessment of binaural speech perception in noise. , 1990, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[16]  Virginia Best,et al.  The effect of better-ear glimpsing on spatial release from masking. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  Swen Müller,et al.  Transfer-Function Measurement with Sweeps , 2001 .

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

[19]  John H. L. Hansen,et al.  An effective quality evaluation protocol for speech enhancement algorithms , 1998, ICSLP.

[20]  Torsten Dau,et al.  Predicting speech intelligibility based on the signal-to-noise envelope power ratio after modulation-frequency selective processing. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  Nandini Iyer,et al.  Better-ear glimpsing efficiency with symmetrically-placed interfering talkers. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  Eric R. Thompson,et al.  An Energetic Limit on Spatial Release from Masking , 2013, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[23]  W. E. Kock Binaural Localization and Masking , 1950 .

[24]  B G Shinn-Cunningham,et al.  Spatial unmasking of nearby speech sources in a simulated anechoic environment. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.