Optimizing the spatial configuration of a seven-talker speech display

ABSTRACT

Although there is substantial evidence that performance in multitalker listening tasks can be improved by spatially separating the apparent locations of the competing talkers, very little effort has been made to determine the best locations and presentation levels for the talkers in a multichannel speech display. In this experiment, a call sign based color and number identification task was used to evaluate the effectiveness of three different spatial configurations and two different level normalization schemes in a seven-channel binaural speech display. When only two spatially adjacent channels of the seven-channel system were active, overall performance was substantially better with a geometrically spaced spatial configuration (with far-field talkers at −90°, −30°, −10°, 0°, +10°, +30°, and +90° azimuth) or a hybrid near-far configuration (with far-field talkers at −90°, −30°, 0°, +30°, and +90° azimuth and near-field talkers at ±90°) than with a more conventional linearly spaced configuration (with far-field talkers at −90°, −60°, −30°, 0°, +30°, +60°, and +90° azimuth). When all seven channels were active, performance was generally better with a “better-ear” normalization scheme that equalized the levels of the talkers in the more intense ear than with a default normalization scheme that equalized the levels of the talkers at the center of the head. The best overall performance in the seven-talker task occurred when the hybrid near-far spatial configuration was combined with the better-ear normalization scheme. This combination resulted in a 20% increase in the number of correct identifications relative to the baseline condition with linearly spaced talker locations and no level normalization. Although this is a relatively modest improvement, it should be noted that it could be achieved at little or no cost simply by reconfiguring the HRTFs used in a multitalker speech display.

REFERENCES

• 1: Bolia, R., Nelson, W., Ericson, M., and Simpson, B. 2000. A speech corpus for multitalker communications research. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 107, 1065--1066.
• 2: Brungart, D. and Rabinowitz, W. 1999. Auditory localization of nearby sources. i: Head-related transfer functions. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 106, 1465--1479.
• 3: Brungart, D. and Simpson, B. 2002. The effects of spatial separation in distance on the informational and energetic masking of a nearby speech signal. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 112, 664--676.
• 4: Crispien, K. and Ehrenberg, T. 1995. Evaluation of the “cocktail party effect” for multiple speech stimuli within a spatial audio display. Journal of the Audio Engineering Society 43, 932--940.
• 5: Hawley, M., Litovsky, R., and Colburn, H. 1999. Speech intelligibility and localization in a multi-source environment. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 105, 3436--3448.
• 6: Mills, A. 1958. On the minimum audible angle. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 30, 237--246.
• 7: Nelson, W. T., Bolia, R. S., Ericson, M. A., and McKinley, R. L. 1999. Spatial audio displays for speech communication. A comparison of free-field and virtual sources. In Proceedings of the 43rd Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. 1202--1205.
• 8: Yost, W., Dye, R., and Sheft, S. 1996. A simulated “cocktail party” with up to three sources. Perception and Psychophysics 58, 1026--1036.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)

Keywords:
Cocktail party effect, informational masking