Literature DB >> 8207140

Effect of reducing slow temporal modulations on speech reception.

R Drullman1, J M Festen, R Plomp.   

Abstract

The effect of reducing low-frequency modulations in the temporal envelope on the speech-reception threshold (SRT) for sentences in noise and on phoneme identification was investigated. For this purpose, speech was split up into a series of frequency bands (1/4, 1/2, or 1 oct wide) and the amplitude envelope for each band was high-pass filtered at cutoff frequencies of 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, or 128 Hz, or infinity (completely flattened). Results for 42 normal-hearing listeners show: (1) A clear reduction in sentence intelligibility with narrow-band processing for cutoff frequencies above 64 Hz; and (2) no reduction of sentence intelligibility when only amplitude variations below 4 Hz are reduced. Based on the modulation transfer function of some conditions, it is concluded that fast multichannel dynamic compression leads to an insignificant change in masked SRT. Combining these results with previous data on low-pass envelope filtering (temporal smearing) [Drullman et al., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 1053-1064 (1994)] shows that at 8-10 Hz the temporal modulation spectrum is divided into two equally important parts. Vowel and consonant identification with nonsense syllables were studied for cutoff frequencies of 2, 8, 32, 128 Hz, and infinity, processed in 1/4-oct bands. Results for 12 subjects indicate that, just as for low-pass envelope filtering, consonants are more affected than vowels. Errors in vowel identification mainly consist of reduced recognition of diphthongs and of durational confusions. For the consonants there are no clear confusion patterns, but stops appear to suffer least. In most cases, the responses tend to fall into the correct category (stop, fricative, or vowel-like).

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8207140     DOI: 10.1121/1.409836

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


  130 in total

1.  Learning and generalization of auditory temporal-interval discrimination in humans.

Authors:  B A Wright; D V Buonomano; H W Mahncke; M M Merzenich
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1997-05-15       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Channel selection in the modulation domain for improved speech intelligibility in noise.

Authors:  Kamil K Wójcicki; Philipos C Loizou
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Sentence recognition in noise promoting or suppressing masking release by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners.

Authors:  Bomjun J Kwon; Trevor T Perry; Cassie L Wilhelm; Eric W Healy
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Identifying fragments of natural speech from the listener's MEG signals.

Authors:  Miika Koskinen; Jaakko Viinikanoja; Mikko Kurimo; Arto Klami; Samuel Kaski; Riitta Hari
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2012-02-17       Impact factor: 5.038

5.  The consonant-weighted envelope difference index (cEDI): a proposed technique for quantifying envelope distortion.

Authors:  Eric C Hoover; Pamela E Souza; Frederick J Gallun
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2012-03-12       Impact factor: 2.297

6.  Intelligibility and acoustic characteristics of clear and conversational speech in telugu (a South Indian dravidian language).

Authors:  Naresh Durisala; S G R Prakash; Arivudai Nambi; Ridhima Batra
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2011-04-11

Review 7.  Some behavioral and neurobiological constraints on theories of audiovisual speech integration: a review and suggestions for new directions.

Authors:  Nicholas Altieri; David B Pisoni; James T Townsend
Journal:  Seeing Perceiving       Date:  2011-09-29

8.  Fundamental frequency is critical to speech perception in noise in combined acoustic and electric hearing.

Authors:  Jeff Carroll; Stephanie Tiaden; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Discrimination of speech stimuli based on neuronal response phase patterns depends on acoustics but not comprehension.

Authors:  Mary F Howard; David Poeppel
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-05-19       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  Reciprocal Interactions Between Audition and Touch in Flutter Frequency Perception.

Authors:  Silvia Convento; Kira A Wegner-Clemens; Jeffrey M Yau
Journal:  Multisens Res       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 2.286

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.