Literature DB >> 19640044

Effects of envelope bandwidth on the intelligibility of sine- and noise-vocoded speech.

Pamela Souza1, Stuart Rosen.   

Abstract

The choice of processing parameters for vocoded signals may have an important effect on the availability of various auditory features. Experiment 1 varied envelope cutoff frequency (30 and 300 Hz), carrier type (sine and noise), and number of bands (2-5) for vocoded speech presented to normal-hearing listeners. Performance was better with a high cutoff for sine-vocoding, with no effect of cutoff for noise-vocoding. With a low cutoff, performance was better for noise-vocoding than for sine-vocoding. With a high cutoff, performance was better for sine-vocoding. Experiment 2 measured perceptibility of cues to voice pitch variations. A noise carrier combined with a high cutoff allowed intonation to be perceived to some degree but performance was best in high-cutoff sine conditions. A low cutoff led to poorest performance, regardless of carrier. Experiment 3 tested the relative contributions of co-modulation across bands and spectral density to improved performance with a sine carrier and high cutoff. Co-modulation across bands had no effect so it appears that sidebands providing a denser spectrum improved performance. These results indicate that carrier type in combination with envelope cutoff can alter the available cues in vocoded speech, factors which must be considered in interpreting results with vocoded signals.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19640044      PMCID: PMC2730710          DOI: 10.1121/1.3158835

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  43 in total

1.  Intrinsic envelope fluctuations and modulation-detection thresholds for narrow-band noise carriers.

Authors:  T Dau; J Verhey; A Kohlrausch
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Effect of stimulation rate on phoneme recognition by nucleus-22 cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Q J Fu; R V Shannon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Adaptation by normal listeners to upward spectral shifts of speech: implications for cochlear implants.

Authors:  S Rosen; A Faulkner; L Wilkinson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Influence of fundamental frequency on stop-consonant voicing perception: a case of learned covariation or auditory enhancement?

Authors:  L L Holt; A J Lotto; K R Kluender
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for signal processors using sine-wave and noise-band outputs.

Authors:  M F Dorman; P C Loizou; D Rainey
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Modulation rate detection and discrimination by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  K W Grant; V Summers; M R Leek
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Multichannel compression, temporal cues, and audibility.

Authors:  P E Souza; C W Turner
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 2.297

8.  Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues.

Authors:  R V Shannon; F G Zeng; V Kamath; J Wygonski; M Ekelid
Journal:  Science       Date:  1995-10-13       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  Use of temporal envelope cues in speech recognition by normal and hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  C W Turner; P E Souza; L N Forget
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Effects of the salience of pitch and periodicity information on the intelligibility of four-channel vocoded speech: implications for cochlear implants.

Authors:  A Faulkner; S Rosen; C Smith
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  40 in total

1.  The intelligibility of noise-vocoded speech: spectral information available from across-channel comparison of amplitude envelopes.

Authors:  Brian Roberts; Robert J Summers; Peter J Bailey
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2010-11-10       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  When noise vocoding can improve the intelligibility of sub-critical band speech.

Authors:  James A Bashford; Richard M Warren; Peter W Lenz
Journal:  Proc Meet Acoust       Date:  2010-06-15

3.  When Spectral Smearing Can Increase Speech Intelligibility.

Authors:  J A Bashford; R M Warren; P W Lenz
Journal:  Proc Meet Acoust       Date:  2013-06

4.  The intelligibility of pointillistic speech.

Authors:  Gerald Kidd; Timothy M Streeter; Antje Ihlefeld; Ross K Maddox; Christine R Mason
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Speech Rate Normalization and Phonemic Boundary Perception in Cochlear-Implant Users.

Authors:  Brittany N Jaekel; Rochelle S Newman; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2017-05-24       Impact factor: 2.297

6.  Vocoded speech perception with simulated shallow insertion depths in adults and children.

Authors:  Arifi Waked; Sara Dougherty; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Memory Span for Spoken Digits in Adults With Cochlear Implants or Typical Hearing: Effects of Age and Identification Ability.

Authors:  Miranda Cleary; Tracy Wilkinson; Lauren Wilson; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2018-08-08       Impact factor: 2.297

8.  Speech perception in noise with a harmonic complex excited vocoder.

Authors:  Tyler H Churchill; Alan Kan; Matthew J Goupell; Antje Ihlefeld; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2014-01-22

9.  Predicting the intelligibility of vocoded speech.

Authors:  Fei Chen; Philipos C Loizou
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Vowel discrimination by hearing infants as a function of number of spectral channels.

Authors:  Andrea D Warner-Czyz; Derek M Houston; Linda S Hynan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.