Phase effects on the masking of speech by harmonic complexes: Variations with level

被引:11
作者
Green, Tim [1 ]
Rosen, Stuart [1 ]
机构
[1] UCL Speech Hearing & Phonet Sci, London WC1N 1PF, England
关键词
RECEPTION THRESHOLD; NORMALLY HEARING; NOISE; SIGNALS;
D O I
10.1121/1.4820899
中图分类号
O42 [声学];
学科分类号
070206 ; 082403 ;
摘要
Speech reception thresholds were obtained in normally hearing listeners for sentence targets masked by harmonic complexes constructed with different phase relationships. Maskers had either a constant fundamental frequency (F0), or had F0 changing over time, following a pitch contour extracted from natural speech. The median F0 of the target speech was very similar to that of the maskers. In experiment 1 differences in the masking produced by Schroeder positive and Schroeder negative phase complexes were small (around 1.5 dB) for moderate levels [60 dB sound pressure level (SPL)], but increased to around 6 dB for maskers at 80 dB SPL. Phase effects were typically around 1.5 dB larger for maskers that had naturally varying F0 contours than for maskers with constant F0. Experiment 2 showed that shaping the long-term spectrum of the maskers to match the target speech had no effect. Experiment 3 included additional phase relationships at moderate levels and found no effect of phase. Therefore, the phase relationship within harmonic complexes appears to have only minor effects on masking effectiveness, at least at moderate levels, and when targets and maskers are in the same F0 range. (C) 2013 Acoustical Society of America.
引用
收藏
页码:2876 / 2883
页数:8
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], P INT C SPOK LANG PR
[2]   INTONATION AND THE PERCEPTUAL SEPARATION OF SIMULTANEOUS VOICES [J].
BROKX, JPL ;
NOOTEBOOM, SG .
JOURNAL OF PHONETICS, 1982, 10 (01) :23-36
[3]   Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of multiple simultaneous talkers [J].
Brungart, DS ;
Simpson, BD ;
Ericson, MA ;
Scott, KR .
JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 2001, 110 (05) :2527-2538
[4]   Concurrent vowel identification .2. Effects of phase, harmonicity, and task [J].
deCheveigne, A ;
McAdams, S ;
Marin, CMH .
JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 1997, 101 (05) :2848-2856
[5]   Voice segregation by difference in fundamental frequency: Evidence for harmonic cancellation [J].
Deroche, Mickael L. D. ;
Culling, John F. .
JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 2011, 130 (05) :2855-2865
[6]   EFFECTS OF FLUCTUATING NOISE AND INTERFERING SPEECH ON THE SPEECH-RECEPTION THRESHOLD FOR IMPAIRED AND NORMAL HEARING [J].
FESTEN, JM ;
PLOMP, R .
JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 1990, 88 (04) :1725-1736
[7]   PHASE EFFECTS IN MASKING RELATED TO DISPERSION IN THE INNER-EAR .2. MASKING PERIOD PATTERNS OF SHORT TARGETS [J].
KOHLRAUSCH, A ;
SANDER, A .
JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 1995, 97 (03) :1817-1829
[8]   Speech reception thresholds in noise with and without spectral and temporal dips for hearing-impaired and normally hearing people [J].
Peters, RW ;
Moore, BCJ ;
Baer, T .
JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 1998, 103 (01) :577-587
[9]   SPEECH-RECEPTION THRESHOLD FOR SENTENCES AS A FUNCTION OF AGE AND NOISE-LEVEL [J].
PLOMP, R ;
MIMPEN, AM .
JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 1979, 66 (05) :1333-1342
[10]  
Rosen S.M., 1986, Frequency Selectivity in Hearing, P373