Lydolf, Morten

Møller, Henrik

    Aalborg UniversitetMeasurements of equal-loudness contours between 20 Hz and 1 kHzLydolf, Morten; Møller, HenrikPublished in:Proceedings of Internoise 2000Publication date:2000Link to publication from Aalborg UniversityCitation for published version (APA):Lydolf, M., & Møller, H. (2000). Measurements of equal-loudness contours between 20 Hz and 1 kHz. InProceedings of Internoise 2000 (pp. 3747-3652)General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.            ? Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.            ? You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain            ? You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ?Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us at vbn@aub.aau.dk providing details, and we will remove access tothe work immediately and investigate your claim.Downloaded from vbn.aau.dk on: April 25, 2017MEASUREMENTSOFEQUA~LOUDNESSCONTOURS BETWEEN 20 HZ AND 1 KHZ M. LYDOLF, H. M0LLER Dept. of Acoustics, Aalborg University, Fredrik Bajesrvej 7-B4, DK-9220, Aalborg 0, Denmark Tel.: +45 9635 8710 I Fax: +45 9815 2144 / Email: ml@acoustics.auc.dk Keywords EQUAL LOUDNESS - HEARJNG THRESHOLD - STANDARDIZATION ABSTRACT The equal-loudness relation for pure tones in free-field is investigated for the frequency range below 1 kHz with a resolution of 1/3-octave. Levels ranging from the absolute threshold of hearing to 100 phon are examined. The psychoacoustical measurements are based on an adaptive sequential maximum likelihood method implemented with the 2-AFC response paradigm. The number of trials used by the method is relatively low. However, .the experiments show that even a smaller number of trials produces reliable and nearly similar data. The results are, as expected, deviating from the standardized equal-loudness contours in ISO 226. A much better agreement is seen between the results of the present investigation and the more recent investigations on equal-loudness contours at low frequencies. 1 - INTRODUCTION As a contribution to the revision of ISO 226: 1987 [ 1 J researchers at Aalborg University has made an investigation of the threshold of hearing and equal-loudness contours in the frequency range 20 Hz to 1 kHz. In the past, several investigations have been made at our laboratory of the hearing abilities in the infrasonic and low frequency range: Kirk [2), M0ller and Andresen [3], Watanabe and M0ller [ 4, 5). The aim of the present investigation is, however, to determine the equal-loudness level contours and the threshold of hearing strictly according to the preferred test conditions (ISOffC 43/WG 1 [ 6]) which have been published in the meantime. Preliminary results of the present work was published by Lydolf & M0ller [7] and was :finally published in a dissertation by Lydolf [8]. The low frequency range may be considered to be the most interesting part of the loudness contours because the ISO 226 standard has the most severe deviation from other equal-loudness data in this particular range. Moreover data from equal-loudness experiments is often lacking at low frequencies and high levels because of the natural limitations of the physical sound reproduction· system used. 3647 2-METHOD Experimental setup. It is notoriously difficult to produce a free propagating wave at low frequencies and high levels. In the present experiment this problem was solved by using two different test environments. An anechoic room was used for measurements with frequencies above 50 Hz and a small pressure :field chamber with an inner volume of 1.1 m3 was used for frequencies below 100 Hz. Sound pressure levels up to 13 8 dB could be produced in the pressure field chamber and this provided sufficiently intense stimuli for determination of the 100 phon curve. The maximum sound pressure level obtained in the anechoic room was less than in the pressure field but was at least 109 dB. A reference tone of 1 kHz could not be presented in the pressure :field chamber in a well defined way so the equal-loudness investigations in the chamber was based on the use of an individually adjusted anchor point at 100 Hz which was determined in the experiment in the anechoic room. The pressure field chamber was equipped with 8 loudspeakers of 13" diameter and the same type and number of speakers were used in the anechoic room for stimuli presentation in the 50-400 Hz range. The stimuli between 500 Hz and 1 kHz were presented by a midrange horn loudspeaker placed in the frontal direction of the test subject. The low-frequency speakers in the free-field setup were placed symmetrically on each side of the horn. Stimuli and test subjects. The experiments included 27 test subjects in the free-field part and 17 in the pressure field part, all with otologically normal hearing according to the specifications in the preferred test conditions [ 6]. All 1/3-octave center frequencies from 20 Hz to 1 kHz were used for a threshold measurement and determinations of the equal-loudness levels at: 20, 40, 60, 80, 90 and 100 phon. The 90 phon level was included because the 100 phon level was expected to be close to the upper limitation of the experimental setup and thus might not be possible to determine for all subjects. Stimuli were pure tones with a duration of 1 s and the pause between the test tone and the 11eference tone for loudness comparison was 0.5 s. The order of the test tone and the reference tone was randomized in order to minimize the order effect. Psychophysical methods. The psychophysical method for threshold measurements was chosen as the ascending method implemented nearly as described in ISO 8253-1 [9). It starts with a descent from 30 dB HL with a step size oflO dB and makes 3-5 ascents with a step size of 5 dB. The modification consists of an interlacing of the presentation levels of two successive ascents in order to achieve a resolution of 2.5 dB which is equal to a half step size. The threshold estimate is carefully calculated as the 50 % detection level by a maximum likelihood estimation technique and does not rely on averaging the lowest detectable level as described in ISO 8253-1. The psychophysical method for the equal-loudness level measurements 75 ,....., 70 ~ 165 ~ Q) :3 60 "' "' Q) ... ~55 i:: ::, 0 Vl 50 45 40 2 4 6 3648 + ++ 0 j - 0 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Presentation number was the sequential maximum likelihood method. This method was introduced by Hall [10] and a previous investigation at our laboratory [3] has provided good experiences with a modified version of this method. An illustration of the level presentation strategy of the sequential maximum likelihood method is seen in figure 1. The fundamental idea is to present test tone levels close to the point of subjective equality. However, in order not to stress the subjects more than necessary with only difficult trials other levels were included too. The initial test tone level was identical to the reference loudness level accordmg to ISO 226. Before the method itself was started an ascent and a descent with a step size of 10 dB were made, and the order of the ascent and descent was deterrruned by the initial response. These few presentations were used to produce a rough estimate of the point of subjective equality and ensured that the test tone had been evaluated both as louder and softer than the reference tone before the sequential maximum likelihood method took over. A model of the psychometric function for the test subject was updated during the course of the measurement for the sequential maximum likelihood method. The psychometric function was modeled as a cumulative normal distributed function described by the mean, µ, and standard deviation, cr. The presentation levels chosen by the method were randomly chosen between five different levels on the current psychometric function: µ, µ±cr and µ±20. The estimated values of the mean and two times the standard deviation are plotted as the vertical error bars in :figure 1. The method tenrunated when all the five different levels on the psychometric function was presented. Schedule of the measurements. The threshold and equal-loudness level measurements in the two experimental setups were made over 3 days for each test subject. Two days were spend using the anechoic room and one day was used in the pressure field chamber. Each of the test subjects was paid on hourly basis and their participation comprised of approximately 6 hours work. On every day a training session was made prior to the real experiments. Each session had a duration of 10-13 minutes and it was followed by a brake of approximately the same duration. A session included about 7-10 measuring points at the same phon level and they were 120 ~100 co ~ ~ 80 ..!!:! ~ ~ 60 U) Q) 0. -o 40 c :J 0 oo 20 0 ·~ "' '\ '\ \ '"'-~ ) ~ L ~ I\ "' L ~ '-~ -...... '- ', '~ ' \ ' " I'\ ['. r\ \ "' I'\ ~ ·~ '"'-l "' 100 Hz • a 100 phon I I 90 phon I I .._ • 80 phon I I r--... i.-,._ 60 phon r-,._ I I """ ... 40 phon I ~ ._,. I I "'~ 20 phon I I ) '5-. ......... Threshold ~ I I I I -~ 1 kHz 10 kHz neighboring :frequencies. After each determination of a point of subjective equality a pause of 30 s was given in order to reduce the bias of the context effect (see Gabriel [11]). None of the test subjects participated in a threshold experiment less than two days after a loudness experiment. In order to avoid the effect of a temporary threshold shift, TTS, the loudness levels were tested in ascending order. 3649 3-RESULTS The threshold and equal-loudness contours determined in this experiment are shown in figure 2 in terms of mean values averaged across subjects. The equal-loudness curves in the figure are based on the sequential maximum likelihood method. The average number of trials in the measurements was 13.3 which lasted 58 son average. A good agreement is seen between the experiments in the two different acoustical environments for both the threshold and higher levels. A few of the equal-loudness points at the highest levels are missing because the experimental setup was not able to produce sufficiently high levels for all subjects. Only complete measurements are shown. 120 -100 CD ::£. ~ 80 ~ Q) .... i7l 60 U) ~ Cl. -o 40 c: ::, 0 <I) 20 0 ~~ i'<l, ~ N ~ f).._ ~ i\ \ \ ...,.,_~ I', ~ ~ ~ ~ !',;>,. ~~ ~ ;,.~ ~ !', " I: v),_ i\ i\,_ ;i. ~ ""' Nr\. 'C\ 100 Hz ¢ ~ 100 phon ~ p-- I I r~p 90 phon ...... I I p 80 phon I I re-I', 60 phon r h>- I I p...;,s 40 phon I' v ~!'>-- I I 20 phon I I "'¢-I>-"' Threshold D L> I I I ~ 1 kHz 10 kHz A surprising result from the experiments appeared when the quality of the rough estimate of the point of subjective equality made by the initial presentations was investigated. The rough estimate is typically determined after only 4-5 trials made by an ascent and a descent with 10 dB steps. With respect to the threshold data, the rough estimates are based on the tone familiarization in the beginning of the measurement also made by a descent and an ascent with a step size of 10 dB. The rough estimates are represented by the diamonds in figure 3. The continuos lines in the figure represents the measurements based on the full method. It is seen that the agreement between the two data sets is very good and the sparse data material does not give rise to considerably more fluctuations of the curves. However, the final estimates are systematically 1-2 dB above the initial estimates in the frequency range. 80-800 Hz. This is most likely bias from the context effect. Since the starting point for the test tone level was typically placed 120 below the point of subjective equality, PSE, Eo 1 oo ::£. there were initially more presentations ~ 80 below the PSE, which gives a downwards ~ bias in the beginning of the measurement. However, when the sequential maximum likelihood method has taken over there becomes an equal amount of stimuli above and below PSE. According to Gabriel [11], levels above the PSE gives more bias upwards than levels below the PSE gives bias dov.:.nwards, thus resulting in a net upward bias in the end of the measurement. Q) ~ 60 <J) (I) a. -o 40 c: ::, 0 (/) 20 0 r--:- io_ ~ ~ "r--- ~ r-,"' ~ t~ ~ t--.. ~ .:: .... ·~ ~ ..._., .~ \..., ".~ \ ' "• ·~ ~ II,. \, ~ ~ ..._ \ " ~ ~ ~ "'-• t-....... ~ 100 Hz 4 - DISCUSSION l • • ...... I/ ll "- ......... "-...... _,,. J ~ ......... '\ ,........_ ll ,_..., ~ I>-~ 11 \ ......... II \ ,....__ r------!"--...., II \ I ......... j " "-- !"---~ r--- --- v :--,..... 11 I ......... ll lJ ~ r---"' ~~ II ... ~ "'=!,; 1 kHz 10 kHz A comparison of the new data and the standardized data for the free-field threshold according to ISO 389-7 [12] and the equal-loudness contours in ISO 226 [l] is seen in figure 4. On one hand a substantial difference is seen for the equal-loudness levels where the new data suggests a 10-3650 15 dB elevation of the equal-loudness contours between 50 and 200 Hz for low and medium levels. On the other hand a good agreement is seen between the two set of threshold data in the full frequency range. If the new data is going to be compared to results of other equal-loudness investigations, attention must be paid to the experimental conditions in each of the investigations. Most of the early researchers produced stimuli by the use of headphones and the reported levels may not be expressed in terms of a free-field sound pressure level. Kingsbury [ 13] used monaurally earphone exposure and the cahbration was made in a unspecified coupler, thus for the following comparison his data is re-calibrated so the threshold fits to ISO 389-7 [12] and the loudness growth function is retained. Zwicker and Feldtkeller [14] used an earphone too and made an equalization to free-field levels in terms of an electronic filter. The response of the filter was based on a very sparse investigation of the relation between earphone and free-field listening so the loudness data is treated like Kingsbury's. Unfortunately the re-calibrations has the effect that the data seem artificially good since the curvature is strongly influenced by the reference threshold. Fletcher & Munson calibrated their headphone measurements to free-field but the data is interpolated to the nearest loudness level in 10 phon steps. Any other data at the two equal-loudness level 40 and 70 phon shown in figure 5 and 6 respectively is represented as the original data. A comparison between the results of the present investigation and all the available data show a much better agreement than if they are compared to ISO 226 alone. 20 10 1 --iii' VO ~ ;E. 90 .; ~ !\ r--,._ > .!l? 80 ~;: e :, 70 "' 1', "' e 60 c. "O c: 50 :, 0 CJ) 40 30 20 100 Hz REFERENCES 1 kHz 10 kHz 130 120 110 iii :E.100 .;; 1 90 e " 80 i 70 'O § 60 Jl 50 40 30 150226 1987 t:"6 ~l~P~l Munson m~ -- Zwicker & Feldtkeller 1955 t>-<> FesU & Zwicker. 1987>-----l\ v->v Betl<e eta!. 1997 *-*" FasU et a!. 1990 ')\_ ~,~:~i~~l. 1993 ~ 1997 ......., Lydolf & M•ller 1999 "'" ~ ~ ~i>-. ........_ It.; · ~ r-s. ""' '.)' I"" I I I 100 Hz 1 kHz 10 kHz [1] ISO 226: 1987, Acoustics - Normal Equal-loudness level contours [2] Kirk, B., H@restyrke og genevirkning afinfralyd (in Danish), Institute ofElectronic Systems, Aalborg University, Denmark, pp. 1-111, 1983 [3] Moller, H. and Andresen, J., Loudness of pure tones at low and infrasonic frequencies, J. Low Freq. Noise Vib., Vol. 3 (2), pp. 78-87, 1984 [4] Watanabe, T. and Moller, H., Hearing thesholds and equal loudness contours in free field at frequencies below 1 kHz, J. Low Freq. Noise Vib., Vol. 9 (4), pp. 135-148, 1990 [ 5] Watanabe~ T. and Moller, H ., Low frequency hearing thesholds in pressure :field and in free field, J. Low Freq. Noise Vib., Vol. 9 (3), pp. 106-115, 1990 [6] ISO/TC 43/WG 1, Preferred test conditions for determining hearing thresholds for standardization, Scand. Audio!., Vol. 25, pp. 46-52, 1996 [7] Lydolf, M. and Maller, H., New measurements of .the threshold of hearing and equal-loudnesss contours at low frequencies, In 9th Int. Meeting on Low Freq. Noise and Vib., Gothenburg, 3rd June-5th June, pp. 76-84, 1997 [8] Lydolf, M., The threshold of hearing & contours of equal loudness - a study of measuring 3651 methods and normal hearing, Dissertation from Aalborg Univerity, Denmark, pp. 1-87, 1999 [9] ISO 8253-1: 1989, Acoustics - Audiometric test methods - Part 1: Basic pure tone air and bone conduction threshold audiometry, 1989 [10] Hall, J. L., Maximum-likelihood sequential procedure for estimation of psychometric. functions (Abstract N9), In Meeting af the Acoust. Soc. Am. , pp. 370, 1968 [11] Gabriel, B., Equal-loudness level contours: procedures factors and models, Dissertation from Fachbereich Physik der Universitat Oldenburg, Gennany, pp. 1-128, 1996 [12] ISO 389-7: 1996, Acoustics - Reference zero for the calibration of audiometric equipment - Part 7: Reference threshold of hearing under free-field and diffuse field listening conditions, 1996 [13] .Kingsbury, B.A., A direct comparison of the loudness of pure tones, Phys. Rev. , Vol. 29, pp. 588-600, 1927 [14] Zwicker, E. and Feldtkeller, R., Uber die Lautstarke von Gleichformigen Gerauschen, Acoustica, Vol. 5, pp. 303-316, 1955 (15] Churcher, B.G. and King, A.J., The performance of noise meters in terms of the primary standard, J Inst. Electr. Eng., Vol. 81, pp. 57-90, 1937 [16] Robinson, D.W. and Dadson, R.S., A re-determination of the equal-loudness relations for pure tones, Br. J. Appl. Phys. , Vol. 7, pp. 166-181, 1956 [17] Betke, K., New hearing threshold measurements for pure tones under free-field listening conditions, J Acoust. Soc. AM. , Vol. 89 (5), pp. 2400-2403, 1991 [18] Poulsen, T. og Th0gersen, L., Hearing threshold and equal loudness level contours in a free sound field for pure tones from 1 kHz to 16 kHz, In Proceedings of Nordic Acoustical Meeting, June 8, Arhus, Denmark, pp. 195-198, 1994 [19] Suzuki, Y. and Sone, T., Frequency characteristics ofloudness perception: principles and applications, In Proceedings of Oldenburg Symposium on Psychologi,cal Acoustics, pp. 1-21 , .1993 [20] Takeshima, H and Suzuki, Y. and al., Randomized maximum likelihood sequential procedure as a robust procedure against the range effects and for the measurement of equal-loud.1:).ess levels, submitted to J Acoust. Soc. Am. , 1997 [21] Fastl, H. and Zwicker, E., Lautstarkespegel bei 400 Hz. Psychoakusstische Messung und Berechnung nach ISO 532 B, In Proceedings of DA GA 1987, pp. 189-192, 1987 [22] Fastl, H. and Jaros:zewski, A., end al., Equal loudness contours between 100 and 1000 Hz for 30, 50 and 70 phon, Acoustica, Vol. 70, pp. 197-201, 1990 3652 

Measurements of equal-loudness contours between 20 Hz and 1 kHz

http://vbn.aau.dk/files/227975748/2000_Lydolf_and_M_ller_Internoise_Nice.pdf

Measurements of equal-loudness contours between 20 Hz and 1 kHz

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

VBN