4.5 Article

Masking release for low- and high-pass-filtered speech in the presence of noise and single-talker interference

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
Volume 125, Issue 1, Pages 457-468

Publisher

ACOUSTICAL SOC AMER AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1121/1.3021299

Keywords

hearing; high-pass filters; low-pass filters; speech intelligibility; speech processing

Funding

  1. NIDCD NIH HHS [R01 DC005216] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DEAFNESS AND OTHER COMMUNICATION DISORDERS [R01DC005216] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Speech intelligibility was measured for sentences presented in spectrally matched steady noise, single-talker interference, or speech-modulated noise. The stimuli were unfiltered or were low-pass (LP) (1200 Hz cutoff) or high-pass (HP) (1500 Hz cutoff) filtered. The cutoff frequencies were selected to produce equal performance in both LP and HP conditions in steady noise and to limit access to the temporal fine structure of resolved harmonics in the HP conditions. Masking release, or the improvement in performance between the steady noise and single-talker interference, was substantial with no filtering. Under LP and HP filtering, masking release was roughly equal but was much less than in unfiltered conditions. When the average F0 of the interferer was shifted lower than that of the target, similar increases in masking release were observed under LP and HP filtering. Similar LP and HP results were also obtained for the speech-modulated-noise masker. The findings are not consistent with the idea that pitch conveyed by the temporal fine structure of low-order harmonics plays a crucial role in masking release. Instead, any reduction in speech redundancy, or manipulation that increases the target-to-masker ratio necessary for intelligibility to beyond around 0 dB, may result in reduced masking release.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available