Binaural auditory models cannot yet explain human perception of complex spatial audio

Evidence

Auditory-modelling-based objective quality measurement systems could potentially solve the problem of the impossible comparison of the reproduced spatial sound to the original conditions. Binaural models, which were introduced in Section 13.5, have been suggested for use in measuring the quality of spatial sound reproduction. Indeed, in limited cases, auditory models are applicable for evaluating spatial audio quality (Blauert, 2013b). Although a large number of binaural models have been proposed, the explanation of human perception of spatially complex scenarios still seems challenging. The research in this field is thus incomplete. The need for models for the analysis of spatial audio in industry exists, since an effort to extend the PEAQ standard to the measurement of quality over stereophonic and multi-channel audio formats has been initiated. Unfortunately, the current results in the process are not promising (Liebetrau et al., 2010), and the process is on hold as of now (2014). β€” Ville Pulkki, Matti Karjalainen, Communication Acoustics- An…, 2378

Categorization

  • QUESTION: Why did the PEAQ extension to multichannel audio fail? What specific limitations of binaural models surfaced in the 2010 Liebetrau work?
  • XREF: Connects to PEAQ objective quality measurement standard and psychoacoustic modelling from earlier audio engineering reading. β€” connects to: Room correction cannot substitute for two-eared timbral and spatial perception β€” , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 1507; Binaural models differ on whether the brain uses narrow or wide directional receptive fields; Spatial audio systems create illusions of direction and space rather than reproducing them exactly (+3 more)
  • corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim β€” Ville Pulkki, Matti Karjalainen, Communication Acoustics- An…, 2378

Broader Connections