1 / 16

Learning the cues associated with non-individualised HRTFs

Binaural and Spatial Hearing Group. Learning the cues associated with non-individualised HRTFs. John Worley and Jonas Braasch. Binaural and Spatial Hearing Group. Head-Related Transfer Functions. Binaural and Spatial Hearing Group. Individual Differences in HRTFs. Highly idiosyncratic.

gayora
Download Presentation

Learning the cues associated with non-individualised HRTFs

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Binaural and Spatial Hearing Group Learning the cues associated with non-individualised HRTFs John Worley and Jonas Braasch

  2. Binaural and Spatial Hearing Group Head-Related Transfer Functions

  3. Binaural and Spatial Hearing Group Individual Differences in HRTFs • Highly idiosyncratic. • Differences in HRTF magnitude due to differences in the size and shape of pinnae. • Inter-subject differences in level as much as 28 dB (Wightman & Kistler, ‘89a).

  4. Binaural and Spatial Hearing Group Using Non-Individualised HRTFs • Binaural cues cue multiple locations. • Cones of confusion lead to reversal errors. • Non-individualised HRTFs result in a 3-fold increase in reversals over individualised HRTFs.

  5. Binaural and Spatial Hearing Group Learning non-individualised HRTFs • Listeners adapt to long-term pinna modifications (Hofman et al, ’98). • Scaling non-individualised HRTFs improves localisation (Middlebrooks, ‘99). • Localisation is unaffected by smoothing HRTFs (Kulkarni & Colburn, ’98). • Visual system calibrates auditory input • Early-blind listeners (Zwiers & Van Opstal, ’01). • Compressed visual space compresses auditory space (Zwiers,’03).

  6. Binaural and Spatial Hearing Group Methodology • Headphone-based azimuth localisation of scrambled noise. • HRTFs from prototype Neumann KU80 (pinna molded from average pinna). • 12 possible locations, surrounding the listener. • Instructed to respond to auditory event. • Responses recorded via GELP method (Gilkey et al 1995). • Test auditory localisation over time: • Day 1 = Auditory alone • Day 1 to 9 = Auditory location cued by visual stimuli • Day 10 = Auditory alone

  7. 330° Binaural and Spatial Hearing Group Methodology - Testing X

  8. 210° Binaural and Spatial Hearing Group Methodology - Training

  9. Results Rear Rear

  10. Results Rear Rear Perfect localisation

  11. Results Results Rear Rear Rear Rear Front-to-back mislocalisation

  12. Results Day 1- Testing • Responses clustered in the rear hemisphere.

  13. Results Training Type – I (2 listeners) Type - II (3 listeners) • Response bias

  14. Results All Days- Testing • Majority of front-to-back reversals. • No reduction in reversals as a function of time.

  15. Results All Days- Testing Type - II Type - I Type – I = No reversal predisposition. Type- II = Majority of front-to-back reversals. Response bias significantly determines reversal type

  16. Conclusions • Listeners display a response bias. • Response bias determines reversal type. • Overall, • Non-sig. reduction in reversals over training period. • Why?, • Difference between passive -v- dynamic listening. • Individualised head -v- dummy head.

More Related