The role of perceived spatial separation in the unmasking of speech
Spatial separation of speech and noise in an anechoic space creates a release from masking that often improves speech intelligibility. However, the masking release is severely reduced in reverberant spaces. This study investigated whether the distinct and separate localization of speech and interfer...
Saved in:
Published in | The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America Vol. 106; no. 6; p. 3578 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
United States
01.12.1999
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get more information |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Spatial separation of speech and noise in an anechoic space creates a release from masking that often improves speech intelligibility. However, the masking release is severely reduced in reverberant spaces. This study investigated whether the distinct and separate localization of speech and interference provides any perceptual advantage that, due to the precedence effect, is not degraded by reflections. Listeners' identification of nonsense sentences spoken by a female talker was measured in the presence of either speech-spectrum noise or other sentences spoken by a second female talker. Target and interference stimuli were presented in an anechoic chamber from loudspeakers directly in front and 60 degrees to the right in single-source and precedence-effect (lead-lag) conditions. For speech-spectrum noise, the spatial separation advantage for speech recognition (8 dB) was predictable from articulation index computations based on measured release from masking for narrow-band stimuli. The spatial separation advantage was only 1 dB in the lead-lag condition, despite the fact that a large perceptual separation was produced by the precedence effect. For the female talker interference, a much larger advantage occurred, apparently because informational masking was reduced by differences in perceived locations of target and interference. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0001-4966 |
DOI: | 10.1121/1.428211 |