Re: AUDITORY Digest - 9 May 2004 to 10 May 2004 (#2004-112)

["Watson, Charles S" <watson@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Regrading Patrick Wong's query about training people to hear speech in
noise. Strange you should ask. 

Miller, J.D., Dalby, J. M, Watson, C. S. and Burleson, D. F. (2004)
Training experienced hearing-aid users to identify syllable initial
consonants in quiet and in noise.  J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 115, Pt. 2, May
2004, p. 2387. 

This is the abstract of a poster/paper to be given at ASA.  Basically it
found that training with multiple talkers and multiple productions, for
about 14 hours, did yield a modest improvement in the S/N at which they
could achieve 80% correct on difficult phonemic discriminations.  Noise
was a multi-talker babble.  A little more detail can be found in the
abstract, or contact Jim Miller. 

csw

  
-----Original Message-----
From: AUDITORY Research in Auditory Perception
[mailto:AUDITORY@LISTS.MCGILL.CA] On Behalf Of Automatic digest
processor
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 11:00 PM
To: Recipients of AUDITORY digests
Subject: AUDITORY Digest - 9 May 2004 to 10 May 2004 (#2004-112)

There are 11 messages totalling 376 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. A couple of questions on OAE measurements (2)
  2. <No subject given>
  3. will phase distortion affect hearing result? (2)
  4. research on bad quality singing
  5. pitch in speech
  6. Statistical foundation of jnd and critical bandwidth (2)
  7. speech in noise training
  8. hearing integration time

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:    Mon, 10 May 2004 13:46:35 +0200
From:    "Enrique A. Lopez-Poveda" <ealopezpoveda@USAL.ES>
Subject: A couple of questions on OAE measurements

Dear friends,

I am trying to interpret the results produced by Interacoustics'
OtoRead=20 apparatus for OAE screening.  The printouts for the DPOAEs
test specify the= =20 value for F2 only. The value of F1 seems to be a
mistery.  Does anyone know= =20 this value?

Thank you in advance.

-- Enrique

Dr. Enrique A. Lopez-Poveda
Instituto de Neurociencias de Castilla y Le=F3n Universidad de
Salamanca, Avda. Alfonso X "El Sabio" s/n
37007 Salamanca, Spain.

Tel. +34-923 294 500 ext. 1957
Fax. +34-923 294 730
E-mail: ealopezpoveda@usal.es
http://web.usal.es/~ealopezpoveda

------------------------------

Date:    Mon, 10 May 2004 12:20:33 +0000
From:    yoav frankel <yoavfr@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject: <No subject given>

Hello,

I am doing some research on bad quality singing. I would like to know if
someone is aware of any reference to an updated model of voice
production from the cognitive aspect (or other).

Thanks

Yoav Frankel

Research Assistant
Musicology laboratory
Hebrew University,
Jerusalem, Israel.

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

------------------------------

Date:    Mon, 10 May 2004 14:38:39 +0100
From:    "Jose I. Alcantara" <jia10@CUS.CAM.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: A couple of questions on OAE measurements

Hola Enrique,

We usually use an f1/f2 frequency ratio of 1.2, if this is of any help?

Cheers,
Jose

On Mon, 10 May 2004, Enrique A. Lopez-Poveda wrote:

> Dear friends,
>=20
> I am trying to interpret the results produced by Interacoustics' 
>OtoRead=
=20
> apparatus for OAE screening.  The printouts for the DPOAEs test 
> specify t=
he=20
> value for F2 only. The value of F1 seems to be a mistery.  Does anyone

> kn=
ow=20
> this value?
>=20
> Thank you in advance.
>=20
> -- Enrique
>=20
> Dr. Enrique A. Lopez-Poveda
> Instituto de Neurociencias de Castilla y Le=F3n  Universidad de 
>Salamanca,  Avda. Alfonso X "El Sabio" s/n
> 37007 Salamanca, Spain.
>=20
> Tel. +34-923 294 500 ext. 1957
> Fax. +34-923 294 730
> E-mail: ealopezpoveda@usal.es
> http://web.usal.es/~ealopezpoveda
>=20

________________________________________________________________________
___=
___

Jos=E9 Ignacio Alc=E1ntara

Affiliated Lecturer=09=09Fellow of Fitzwilliam College and=09 The
Psychological Laboratory=09Director of Studies in Natural Sciences (Bio=
logical)
University of Cambridge
Downing Street
Cambridge CB2 3EB


Email: jia10@cus.cam.ac.uk
Tel: (0)1223-333569/562
Fax: (0)1223-333564

------------------------------

Date:    Mon, 10 May 2004 22:18:17 +0800
From:    xiao xianbo <xxb00@MAILS.TSINGHUA.EDU.CN>
Subject: will phase distortion affect hearing result?

Dear List,
        I am working on algorithms on digital hearing aid. As I know,
auditory is sensitive to amplitude on every frequency. Then how about
phase infomation? Will all the filters necessarily be linear phase in a
multi-band hearing aid?
        Any discussion or paper recommendation will be appreciated.

------------------------------

Date:    Mon, 10 May 2004 11:11:52 -0400
From:    Ramin Pichevar <Ramin.Pichevar@USHERBROOKE.CA>
Subject: Re: will phase distortion affect hearing result?

Xiao,
As you already mentioned, audition is more sensitive to amplitude than =
to phase. That is why, for example some performance criteria (i.e. the =
Log Spectral distortion) used in speech coding are based on amplitude. =
On the other hand, it seems that you sum up the outputs of filters in a
= filterbank for your hearing algorithm. Note that a phase distortion in
= each of the filters can cause an amplitude distortion in the output
(you = are adding  complex numbers: an amplitude and a phase for each
filter). = Therefore a phase distortion may result in an amplitude
distortion.
Best regards,
Ramin



-----Message d'origine-----
De : AUDITORY Research in Auditory Perception =
[mailto:AUDITORY@LISTS.MCGILL.CA]De la part de xiao xianbo
Envoy=C3=A9 : 10 mai 2004 10:18
=C3=80 : AUDITORY@LISTS.MCGILL.CA
Objet : will phase distortion affect hearing result?


Dear List,
        I am working on algorithms on digital hearing aid. As I know,
auditory is sensitive to amplitude on every frequency. Then how about =
phase infomation? Will all the filters necessarily be linear phase in a
= multi-band hearing aid?
        Any discussion or paper recommendation will be appreciated.

------------------------------

Date:    Mon, 10 May 2004 11:23:07 -0400
From:    "Marvit, Peter" <PMarvit@SOM.UMARYLAND.EDU>
Subject: Re: research on bad quality singing

Perhaps a good resource would be http://www.williamhung.net/.






[[ Sorry, I couldn't resist. ]]

: Peter Marvit, PhD                          <pmarvit@som.umaryland.edu>
:
: Dept. Anatomy and Neurobiology    University of Maryland Medical
School:
: 685 W. Baltimore Street, HSF 222                   Baltimore, MD 21201
:
: phone 410-706-1272                                    fax 410-706-2512
:

------------------------------

Date:    Mon, 10 May 2004 14:30:19 -0400
From:    RRandhawa <rsran@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject: pitch in speech

Dear List,
I am studying the quasiperiodic nature of speech and am looking for some
kind comments on whether anyone could shed some light as to the strange
counter intutive results that were indicated. Basically, I am measuring
the wavelength manually by visually identifying the periodicity of the
waveform for some short words e.g. no, go, me etc, using to their
horror, family members for the samples. The variations from the begining
of the word to the end in the worst case was about 25hz based on the
wavelength but was much smaller for words that ended in the vowel 'o',
where I would have expected it to be much larger. To the extent that the
variation was this small, tended to reinforce my belief that the length
of the vocal tract does not change much and therefore it is the shape of
the waveform that provides the preceived variation in pitch for spoken
words. But this also led to a problem in that, the shape of the waveform
varies widely between speakers, though the transition from consonant to
vowel seems to be identifiable.
Hence even if the modalities of vision and hearing are assumed to be the
same, then I would have thought that the shape of the input waveforms
should also be the same, unless one reason the shape changes could be
due to the differing basic wavelengths between the speakers. I am using
*.wav files with the inherent PCM coding and am wondering whether this
could also contribute to the variation in the waveforms that I am
seeing.
Thanking everybody,
Yours Truly
Randy Randhawa

------------------------------

Date:    Mon, 10 May 2004 19:42:55 +0100
From:    Andrew Milne <andymilne@DIAL.PIPEX.COM>
Subject: Statistical foundation of jnd and critical bandwidth

Dear List,

When terms like critical bandwidth or just-noticeable-difference are
used, what is their statistical foundation?

For instance, if I say that the JND for pitch is 5 cents (at a given
frequency, for a sample), for what percentage of responses would I
expect would I expect to get a "yes the pitch has changed" answer?

Andy Milne

------------------------------

Date:    Mon, 10 May 2004 15:05:45 -0400
From:    William Hartmann <hartmann@PA.MSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Statistical foundation of jnd and critical bandwidth

AM,

        For a yes/no task such as you describe, you need to find the hit
rate and the false alarm rate. Then the JND is normally defined for a
d-prime of approximately 1.0.

Best,
Bill

Andrew Milne wrote:
>
> Dear List,
>
> When terms like critical bandwidth or just-noticeable-difference are 
> used, what is their statistical foundation?
>
> For instance, if I say that the JND for pitch is 5 cents (at a given 
> frequency, for a sample), for what percentage of responses would I 
> expect would I expect to get a "yes the pitch has changed" answer?
>
> Andy Milne

------------------------------

Date:    Mon, 10 May 2004 14:45:02 -0500
From:    Patrick Wong <pwong@NORTHWESTERN.EDU>
Subject: speech in noise training

Hi all,

I'm looking for research studies involving training people to listen to
speech in noise.  It can be something like you have the subjects
identify phonemes and words and gradually increase the level of noise
within a 2-week period, and when you test them after 2 weeks, they are
better at speech ID even when the noise level is reasonably high.

Thanks,
Patrick


---------------
Patrick Wong
Assistant Professor
Communication Sciences and Disorders
Northwestern University  (847) 491-2416 (phone)
2240 Campus Drive        (847) 491-4975 (fax)
Evanston, IL 60208         FSB 3-365 (office)

Email: pwong@northwestern.edu
Webpage:
http://www.communication.northwestern.edu/csd/faculty/Patrick_C_Wong/

------------------------------

Date:    Tue, 11 May 2004 11:51:06 +1000
From:    David Gilfillan <davidgil@IHUG.COM.AU>
Subject: hearing integration time

Can anyone tell me where I can find out what the integration time of the
hearing system is in each octave band?

David Gilfillan
ph 0414504513
=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: AUDITORY Research in Auditory Perception  
>[mailto:AUDITORY@LISTS.MCGILL.CA] On Behalf Of Ramin Pichevar
> Sent: Tuesday, 11 May 2004 1:12 AM
> To: AUDITORY@LISTS.MCGILL.CA
> Subject: Re: will phase distortion affect hearing result?
>=20
> Xiao,
> As you already mentioned, audition is more sensitive to amplitude than
to
> phase. That is why, for example some performance criteria (i.e. the
Log
> Spectral distortion) used in speech coding are based on amplitude. On
the
> other hand, it seems that you sum up the outputs of filters in a 
> filterbank for your hearing algorithm. Note that a phase distortion in

> each of the filters can cause an amplitude distortion in the output
(you
> are adding  complex numbers: an amplitude and a phase for each
filter).
> Therefore a phase distortion may result in an amplitude distortion.
> Best regards,
> Ramin
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : AUDITORY Research in Auditory Perception  
>[mailto:AUDITORY@LISTS.MCGILL.CA]De la part de xiao xianbo
> Envoy=E9 : 10 mai 2004 10:18
> =C0 : AUDITORY@LISTS.MCGILL.CA
> Objet : will phase distortion affect hearing result?
>=20
>=20
> Dear List,
>         I am working on algorithms on digital hearing aid. As I know,

>auditory is sensitive to amplitude on every frequency. Then how about  
>phase  infomation? Will all the filters necessarily be linear phase in 
>a
multi-
> band
> hearing aid?
>         Any discussion or paper recommendation will be appreciated.

------------------------------

End of AUDITORY Digest - 9 May 2004 to 10 May 2004 (#2004-112)
**************************************************************