Notionally steady background noise acts primarily as a modulation masker of speech

Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

Volumn 132, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 317-326

  Stone, Michael A ^a   Füllgrabe, Christian ^b   Moore, Brian C J ^a  

^a UK   (United Kingdom)

^b MRC INSTITUTE OF HEARING RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BACKGROUND NOISE; CHANNEL SIGNALS; ENVELOPE FLUCTUATIONS; GAUSSIANS; LOW NOISE; NOISE BANDS; PERCENTAGE POINTS; PERIPHERAL INTERACTIONS; SINUSOIDALLY AMPLITUDE MODULATED; STEADY NOISE;

BANDWIDTH; BENCHMARKING; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY;

MODULATION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; NOISE; PERCEPTION; PHYSIOLOGY; SPEECH; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; NOISE; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; SPEECH; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84863691201     PISSN: 00014966     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1121/1.4725766     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Agus, T. R., Akeroyd, M. A., Gatehouse, S., and Warden, D. (2009). Informational masking in young and elderly listeners for speech masked by simultaneous speech and noise., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 126, 1926-1940. 10.1121/1.3205403
2. ANSI. (1969). ANSI S3.5. Methods for the Calculation of the Articulation Index (American National Standards Institute, New York).
3. ANSI. (1997). ANSI S3.5-1997. Methods for the Calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index (American National Standards Institute, New York).
4. Arbogast, T. L., Mason, C. R., and Kidd, G., Jr. (2005). The effect of spatial separation on informational masking of speech in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117, 2169-2180. 10.1121/1.1861598
5. Bacon, S. P., and Grantham, D. W. (1989). Modulation masking: Effects of modulation frequency, depth, and phase., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85, 2575-2580. 10.1121/1.397751
6. Baker, R. J., and Rosen, S. (2006). Auditory filter nonlinearity across frequency using simultaneous notched-noise masking., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119, 454-462. 10.1121/1.2139100
7. Bernstein, J. G., and Brungart, D. S. (2011). Effects of spectral smearing and temporal fine-structure distortion on the fluctuating-masker benefit for speech at a fixed signal-to-noise ratio., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 130, 473-488. 10.1121/1.3589440
8. Bernstein, J. G. W., and Grant, K. W. (2009). Auditory and auditory-visual intelligibility of speech in fluctuating maskers for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125, 3358-3372. 10.1121/1.3110132
9. Brungart, D. S., Simpson, B. D., Ericson, M. A., and Scott, K. R. (2001). Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of multiple simultaneous talkers., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110, 2527-2538. 10.1121/1.1408946
10. Chi, T., Gao, Y., Guyton, M. C., Ru, P., and Shamma, S. (1999). Spectro-temporal modulation transfer functions and speech intelligibility., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 106, 2719-2731. 10.1121/1.428100
11. Dau, T., Kollmeier, B., and Kohlrausch, A. (1997a). Modeling auditory processing of amplitude modulation. I. Detection and masking with narrowband carriers., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 102, 2892-2905. 10.1121/1.420344
12. Dau, T., Kollmeier, B., and Kohlrausch, A. (1997b). Modeling auditory processing of amplitude modulation. II. Spectral and temporal integration., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 102, 2906-2919. 10.1121/1.420345
13. Delgutte, B. (1990). Physiological mechanisms of psychophysical masking: Observations from auditory-nerve fibers., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 87, 791-809. 10.1121/1.398891
14. Drullman, R. (1995). Temporal envelope and fine structure cues for speech intelligibility., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97, 585-592. 10.1121/1.413112
15. Drullman, R., Festen, J. M., and Plomp, R. (1994a). Effect of reducing slow temporal modulations on speech reception., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 2670-2680. 10.1121/1.409836
16. Drullman, R., Festen, J. M., and Plomp, R. (1994b). Effect of temporal envelope smearing on speech reception., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 1053-1064. 10.1121/1.408467
17. Dubbelboer, F., and Houtgast, T. (2008). The concept of signal-to-noise ratio in the modulation domain and speech intelligibility., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 124, 3937-3946. 10.1121/1.3001713
18. Dudley, H. (1939). Remaking speech., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 11, 169-177. 10.1121/1.1916020
19. Duquesnoy, A. J. (1983). Effect of a single interfering noise or speech source on the binaural sentence intelligibility of aged persons., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 74, 739-743. 10.1121/1.389859
20. Durlach, N. (2006). Auditory masking: Need for improved conceptual structure., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 120, 1787-1790. 10.1121/1.2335426
21. Durlach, N. I., Mason, C. R., Kidd, G., Jr., Arbogast, T. L., Colburn, H. S., and Shinn-Cunningham, B. G. (2003a). Note on informational masking., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 113, 2984-2987. 10.1121/1.1570435
22. Durlach, N. I., Mason, C. R., Shinn-Cunningham, B. G., Arbogast, T. L., Colburn, H. S., and Kidd, G., Jr. (2003b). Informational masking: counteracting the effects of stimulus uncertainty by decreasing target-masker similarity., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 114, 368-379. 10.1121/1.1577562
23. Festen, J. M., and Plomp, R. (1990). Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech-reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88, 1725-1736. 10.1121/1.400247
24. Fletcher, H. (1953). Speech and Hearing in Communication (Van Nostrand, New York), pp. 1-461.
25. Füllgrabe, C., Berthommier, F., and Lorenzi, C. (2006). Masking release for consonant features in temporally fluctuating background noise., Hear. Res. 211, 74-84. 10.1016/j.heares.2005.09.001
26. Glasberg, B. R., and Moore, B. C. J. (1990). Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data., Hear. Res. 47, 103-138. 10.1016/0378-5955(90)90170-T
27. Houtgast, T. (1989). Frequency selectivity in amplitude-modulation detection., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85, 1676-1680. 10.1121/1.397956
28. Jorgensen, S., and Dau, T. (2011). Predicting speech intelligibility based on the signal-to-noise envelope power ratio after modulation-frequency selective processing., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 130, 1475-1487. 10.1121/1.3621502
29. Jürgens, T., and Brand, T. (2009). Microscopic prediction of speech recognition for listeners with normal hearing in noise using an auditory model., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 126, 2635-2648. 10.1121/1.3224721
30. Kwon, B. J., and Turner, C. W. (2001). Consonant identification under maskers with sinusoidal modulation: Masking release or modulation interference? J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110, 1130-1140. 10.1121/1.1384909
31. Lawson, J. L., and Uhlenbeck, G. E. (1950). Threshold Signals (Radiation Laboratory Series, Vol. 24) (McGraw-Hill, New York), pp. 1-388.
32. Loizou, P. C., Mani, A., and Dorman, M. F. (2003). Dichotic speech recognition in noise using reduced spectral cues., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 114, 475-483. 10.1121/1.1582861
33. Lunner, T., Arlinger, S., and Hellgren, J. (1993). 8-channel digital filter bank for hearing aid use: Preliminary results in monaural, diotic and dichotic modes., Scand. Audiol. Suppl. 38, 75-81.
34. Moore, B. C. J. (1975). Mechanisms of masking., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 57, 391-399. 10.1121/1.380454
35. Moore, B. C. J. (2012). An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing, 6th ed. (Emerald, Bingley, UK), pp. 1-441.
36. Moore, B. C. J., and Glasberg, B. R. (1987). Formulae describing frequency selectivity as a function of frequency and level and their use in calculating excitation patterns., Hear. Res. 28, 209-225. 10.1016/0378-5955(87) 90050-5
37. Moore, B. C. J., Glasberg, B. R., and Oxenham, A. J. (2012). Effects of pulsing of a target tone on the ability to hear it out in different types of complex sounds., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 2927-2937. 10.1121/1.3692243
38. Moore, B. C. J., and Vickers, D. A. (1997). The role of spread of excitation and suppression in simultaneous masking., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 102, 2284-2290. 10.1121/1.419638
39. Patterson, R. D., Allerhand, M. H., and Giguère, C. (1995). Time-domain modeling of peripheral auditory processing: A modular architecture and a software platform., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 98, 1890-1894. 10.1121/1.414456
40. Peters, R. W., Moore, B. C. J., and Baer, T. (1998). Speech reception thresholds in noise with and without spectral and temporal dips for hearing-impaired and normally hearing people., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103, 577-587. 10.1121/1.421128
41. Pumplin, J. (1985). Low-noise noise., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 78, 100-104. 10.1121/1.392571
42. Rice, S. O. (1954). Mathematical analysis of random noise., in Selected Papers on Noise and Stochastic Processes, edited by, N. Wax, (Dover, New York), pp. 133-294.
43. Richards, V. M. (1992). The detectability of a tone added to narrow bands of equal-energy noise., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 91, 3424-3435. 10.1121/1.402831
44. Shannon, R. V., Zeng, F.-G., Kamath, V., Wygonski, J., and Ekelid, M. (1995). Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues., Science 270, 303-304. 10.1126/science.270.5234.303
45. Smith, M. W., and Faulkner, A. (2006). Perceptual adaptation by normally hearing listeners to a simulated hole' in hearing., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 120, 4019-4030. 10.1121/1.2359235
46. Steeneken, H. J. M., and Houtgast, T. (1980). A physical method for measuring speech-transmission quality., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 67, 318-326. 10.1121/1.384464
47. Stone, M. A., Füllgrabe, C., Mackinnon, R. C., and Moore, B. C. J. (2011). The importance for speech intelligibility of random fluctuations in steady' background noise., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 130, 2874-2881. 10.1121/1.3641371
48. Stone, M. A., Füllgrabe, C., and Moore, B. C. J. (2008a). Benefit of high-rate envelope cues in vocoder processing: Effect of number of channels and spectral region., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 124, 2272-2282. 10.1121/1.2968678
49. Stone, M. A., Füllgrabe, C., and Moore, B. C. J. (2009). High-rate envelope information in many channels provides resistance to reduction of speech intelligibility produced by multi-channel fast-acting compression., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 126, 2155-2158. 10.1121/1.3238159
50. Stone, M. A., Füllgrabe, C., and Moore, B. C. J. (2010). Relative contribution to speech intelligibility of different envelope modulation rates within the speech dynamic range., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128, 2127-2137. 10.1121/1.3479546
51. Stone, M. A., and Moore, B. C. J. (2003). Effect of the speed of a single-channel dynamic range compressor on intelligibility in a competing speech task., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 114, 1023-1034. 10.1121/1.1592160
52. Stone, M. A., Moore, B. C. J., and Greenish, H. (2008b). Discrimination of envelope statistics reveals evidence of sub-clinical hearing damage in a noise-exposed population with normal' hearing thresholds., Int. J. Audiol. 47, 737-750. 10.1080/14992020802290543
53. Studebaker, G. A. (1985). A rationalized' arcsine transform., J. Speech Hear. Res. 28, 455-462.
54. Tanner, W. P. (1958). What is masking? J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 30, 919-921. 10.1121/1.1909406
55. Van Tasell, D. J., Soli, S. D., Kirby, V. M., and Widin, G. P. (1987). Speech waveform envelope cues for consonant recognition., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 82, 1152-1161. 10.1121/1.395251
56. Whitmal, N. A., Poissant, S. F., Freyman, R. L., and Helfer, K. S. (2007). Speech intelligibility in cochlear implant simulations: Effects of carrier type, interfering noise, and subject experience., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122, 2376-2388. 10.1121/1.2773993