Comparison of psychoacoustic-based reverberance parameters

Lee, D; Van Dorp Schuitman, J; Cabrera, D; Qiu, X; Burnett, I

Comparison of psychoacoustic-based reverberance parameters

Lee, D Van Dorp Schuitman, J Cabrera, D Qiu, X

Burnett, I

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2017, 142 (4), pp. 1832 - 1840
Issue Date:: 2017-10-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Publisher PermissionAdobe PDF (495.68 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Lee, D	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Van Dorp Schuitman, J	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Cabrera, D	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Qiu, X https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5181-1220	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Burnett, I https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3795-7722	en_US
dc.date.issued	2017-10-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2017, 142 (4), pp. 1832 - 1840	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	0001-4966	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/123888
dc.description.abstract	© 2017 Acoustical Society of America. This study compared psychoacoustic reverberance parameters to each other, as well as to reverberation time (RT) and early decay time (EDT) under various acoustic conditions. The psychoacoustic parameters were loudness-based RT (TN), loudness-based EDT [EDTN; Lee, Cabrera, and Martens, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 1194-1205 (2012a)], and parameter for reverberance [PREV; van Dorp Schuitman, de Vries, and Lindau., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 133, 1572-1585 (2013)]. For the comparisons, a wide range of sound pressure levels (SPLs) from 20 dB to 100 dB and RTs from 0.5 s to 5.0 s were evaluated, and two sets of subjective data from the previous studies were used for the cross-validation and comparison. Results of the comparisons show that the psychoacoustic reverberance parameters provided better matches to reverberance than RT and EDT; however, the performance of these psychoacoustic reverberance parameters varied with the SPL range, the type of audio sample, and the reverberation conditions. This study reveals that PREV is the most relevant for estimating a relative change in reverberance between samples when the SPL range is small, while EDTN is useful in estimating the absolute reverberance. This study also suggests the use of PREV and EDTN for speech and music samples, respectively.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Journal of the Acoustical Society of America	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1121/1.5005508	en_US
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject.classification	Acoustics	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Humans	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Acoustic Stimulation	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Speech	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Auditory Perception	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Loudness Perception	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Speech Perception	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Psychoacoustics	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Sound	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Vibration	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Motion	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Pressure	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Time Factors	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Music	en_US
dc.title	Comparison of psychoacoustic-based reverberance parameters	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	4	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	142	en_US
utslib.for	0203 Classical Physics	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology/School of Mechanical and Mechatronic Engineering
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
pubs.issue	4	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	142	en_US

Abstract:

© 2017 Acoustical Society of America. This study compared psychoacoustic reverberance parameters to each other, as well as to reverberation time (RT) and early decay time (EDT) under various acoustic conditions. The psychoacoustic parameters were loudness-based RT (TN), loudness-based EDT [EDTN; Lee, Cabrera, and Martens, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 1194-1205 (2012a)], and parameter for reverberance [PREV; van Dorp Schuitman, de Vries, and Lindau., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 133, 1572-1585 (2013)]. For the comparisons, a wide range of sound pressure levels (SPLs) from 20 dB to 100 dB and RTs from 0.5 s to 5.0 s were evaluated, and two sets of subjective data from the previous studies were used for the cross-validation and comparison. Results of the comparisons show that the psychoacoustic reverberance parameters provided better matches to reverberance than RT and EDT; however, the performance of these psychoacoustic reverberance parameters varied with the SPL range, the type of audio sample, and the reverberation conditions. This study reveals that PREV is the most relevant for estimating a relative change in reverberance between samples when the SPL range is small, while EDTN is useful in estimating the absolute reverberance. This study also suggests the use of PREV and EDTN for speech and music samples, respectively.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/123888