Re: [AUDITORY] Localizing smoke detectors - why is it so hard? ("Ewan A. Macpherson" )

Subject: Re: [AUDITORY] Localizing smoke detectors - why is it so hard?
From:    "Ewan A. Macpherson"  <ewan.macpherson@xxxxxxxx>
Date:    Wed, 26 Jun 2013 16:52:49 -0400

Richard F. Lyon wrote, On 6/25/2013 1:43 PM: > Jennifer, > > I believe the answer is primarily in the transducer: to make the beeper > cheep, they use a resonant transducer, which has a slow buildup at the > onset and makes the resulting signal not very broadband at all, > depriving you of all ITD cues. And they make the beeps so brief that > you don't have much chance to turn your head and vary the ILD cue; It also turns out that front/back location is much more readily disambiguated by head turning in stimuli that carry low-frequency ITD than in those carrying only high-frequency ILD (such as the ~3-kHz, more-or-less pure tones from smoke detectors). The dynamic ILD cue does not seem to be able to beat the phantom spectral cue due to the narrow high-frequency peak in the spectrum. This is true under anechoic conditions, and presumably would be even worse in reverberation. EAM

This message came from the mail archive
maintained by:
DAn Ellis <>
Electrical Engineering Dept., Columbia University