Objective: Four head-related transfer function (HRTF) data sets were compared to determine the effect of HRTF measurement methodology on the localization of spatialized auditory stimuli. Background: Spatial audio interfaces typically require HRTF data sets to generate the spatialized auditory stimuli. HRTF measurement is accomplished using a variety of techniques that can require several nearly arbitrary decisions about methodology. The effects of these choices upon the resulting spatial audio interface are unclear. Method: Sixteen participants completed a sound localization task that included real-world, broadband stimuli spatialized at eight locations on the horizontal plane. Four different HRTF data sets were utilized to spatialize the stimuli: two publicly available HRTF data sets and two data sets obtained using different in-house measurement systems. All HRTFs were obtained from the Knowles Electronics Mannequin for Acoustics Research. Results: Unsigned localization error and proportion of front/back reversals did not differ significantly across HRTF data sets. Poorest accuracy was observed in locations near the medial (front/back) axis of the listener, mainly because of the relatively large proportions of reversals at these locations. Conclusion: This study suggests that the particular generalized HRTF data set chosen for spatialization is of minimal importance to the localizability of the resulting stimuli. Application: This result will inform the design of many spatial audio interfaces that are based upon generalized HRTFs, including wayfaring devices, communication systems, and virtual reality systems.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aberson, C. (2002). Interpreting null results: Improving presentation and conclusions with confidence intervals. Journal of Articles in Support of the Null Hypothesis, 1, 36-42.
2.
Abouchacra, K.S., Breitenbach, J., Mermagen, T., & Letowski, T. (2001). Binaural helmet: Improving speech recognition in noise with spatialized sound. Human Factors, 43, 584-594.
3.
Algazi, V.R., Duda, R.O., Thompson, D.M., & Avendano, C. (2001). The CIPIC HRTF database. In Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Workshop on Applications of Signal Processing to Audio and Electro-acoustics (pp. 99-102). Piscataway, NJ: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
4.
American PsychologicalAssociation. (2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
5.
Begault, D.R., & Wenzel, E.M. (1993). Headphone localization of speech. Human Factors, 35, 361-376.
6.
Bernstein, L.R. (2004). Sensitivity to interaural intensitive disparities: Listeners' use of potential cues. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115, 3156-3160.
7.
Blauert, J. (1997). Spatial hearing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8.
Bolia, R.S., Nelson, W.T., & Morley, R.M. (2001). Asymmetric performance in the cocktail party effect: Implications for the design of spatial audio displays. Human Factors, 43, 208-216.
9.
Brungart, D.S., & Simpson, B.D. (2001). Auditory localization of nearby sources in a virtual audio display. In Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Workshop on the Applications of Signal Processing to Audio and Acoustics (pp. 107-110). Piscataway, NJ: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
10.
Chen, F. (2003). Localization of 3-D sound presented through headphone - Duration of sound presentation and localization accuracy. Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, 51, 1163-1171.
11.
Cherry, E.C. (1953). Some experiments on the recognition of speech, with one and two ears. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 25, 975-979.
12.
Doll, T.J., & Hanna, T.E. (1995). Spatial and spectral release from masking in three-dimensional auditory displays. Human Factors, 37, 341-355.
13.
Endsley, M.R., & Rosiles, S.A. (1995). Auditory localization for spatial orientation . Journal of Vestibular Research, 5, 473-485.
14.
Fisher, L.D., & Belle, B.D. (1998). Biostatistics: A methodology for the health sciences . Chichester, UK: Wiley.
15.
Gardner, W.G., & Martin, K.D. (1995). HRTF measurements of a KEMAR. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 3907-3908.
16.
Golay, M.J.E. (1961). Complementary series. IRE Transactions on Information Theory, 7, 82-87.
17.
Grant, D. (1962). Testing the null hypothesis and the strategy and tactics of investigating theoretical models. Psychological Review, 60, 54-61.
18.
Gunn, D.V., Warm, J.S., Nelson, W.T., Bolia, R.S., Schumsky, D.A., & Corcoran, K.J. (2005). Target acquisition with UAVs: Vigilance displays and advanced cuing interfaces. Human Factors, 47, 488-497.
19.
Loftus, G.R. (1996). Psychology will be a much better science when we change the way we analyze data. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5, 161-171.
20.
MacDonald, J.A., Balakrishnan, J.D., Orosz, M.D., & Karplus, W.P. (2002). The intelligibility of speech in a virtual 3D environment. Human Factors, 44, 272-286.
21.
Makous, J.C., & Middlebrooks, J.C. (1990). Two-dimensional sound localization by human listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 87, 2188-2200.
22.
Musicant, A.D., & Butler, R.A. (1984). The psychophysical bases of monaural localization . Hearing Research, 14, 185-190.
23.
Perrott, D.R., Cisneros, J., McKinley, R.L., & D'Angelo, W.R. (1996). Aurally aided visual search under virtual and free-field listening conditions. Human Factors , 38, 702-715.
24.
Perrott, D.R., & Saberi, K. (1990). Minimum audible angle thresholds for sources varying in both elevation and azimuth. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 87, 1728-1731.
25.
Perrott, D.R., Saberi, K., Brown, K., & Strybel, T.Z. (1990). Auditory psychomotor coordination and visual search performance. Perception and Psychophysics, 48, 214-226.
26.
Ricard, G.L., & Meirs, S.L. (1994). Intelligibility and localization of speech from virtual directions. Human Factors, 36, 120-128.
27.
Rife, D.D., & Vanderkooy, J. (1989). Transfer-function measurement with maximum-length sequences. Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, 37, 419-444.
28.
Rudmann, D.S., & Strybel, T.Z. (1999). Auditory spatial facilitation of visual search performance: Effect of cue precision and distractor density. Human Factors, 41, 146-160.
29.
Searle, C., Braida, L., Davis, M., & Colburn, H.S. (1976). Model for auditory localization. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 60, 1164-1175.
30.
Walker, B.N., & Lindsay, J. (2006). Navigation performance with a virtual auditory display: Effects of beacon sound, capture radius, and practice. Human Factors, 48, 265-278.
31.
Wenzel, E.M., Arruda, M., Kistler, D.J., & Wightman, F.L. (1993). Localization using non-individualized head-related transfer functions. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 94, 111-123.
32.
Wightman, F.L., & Kistler, D.J. (1989). Headphone simulation of freefield listening: II. Psychophysical validation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 85, 868-878.
33.
Zhou, B., Green, D.M., & Middlebrooks, J.C. (1992). Characterization of external ear impulse responses using Golay codes. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 92, 1169-1171.
34.
Zotkin, D.N., Duraiswami, R., Grassi, E., & Gumerov, N.A. (2004). Fast head related transfer function measurement via reciprocity (Computer Science and UMIACS Tech. Rep. CS-4620). College Park: University of Maryland.
