Study into an Individuals Ability to

Localise Sound in an Ambisonic

Environment







Christopher Osborne 27
th
April 2012
B00149787@studentmail.uws.ac.uk
University of the West of Scotland
Paisley Campus
Paisley
PA1 2BE



I certify that all material in this essay/assignment which is not
my own is duly acknowledged. I have read and understand
the section in the school handbook dealing with plagiarism.





Word Count: 6208

2
Contents




1. Abstract Page 3

2. Introduction Page 4

3. Procedure Page 6

3.1 Questionnaire Page 6
3.2 General Hearing Test Page 7
3.3 Localisation Test using a 5.0 System Page 10
3.4 Localisation Test using an Ambisonic System Page 13

4. Findings Page 17

4.1 Questionnaire Page 17
4.2 General Hearing Test Page 27
4.3 Localisation Tests Page 29

5. Discussion Page 35

5.1 Variables Affecting General Hearing Levels Page 35
5.2 Variables Affecting Localisation Ability Page 37
5.3 Localisation Ability (5.0 vs Ambisonic Surround Sound) Page 40

6. Conclusions Page 46

6.1 General Hearing Health Page 46
6.2 General Localisation Ability Page 47
6.3 Implementation Page 48
6.4 Final Thoughts Page 48

7. Bibliography Page 49

8. References Page 50







S

1. Abstract

Audio encoded then decoded with an Ambisonic Encoder/Decoder and played
through an Ambisonic Surround Sound System can be localised more accurately
by humans than audio played through a standard 5.0 Surround Sound System.








































4

2. Introduction

3D Technology has been implemented in various areas of entertainment and
consumer electronics in recent years. Everything from cinema to video gaming
has had 3D technology implemented into aspects of their functionality. These
implementations are major technological advances and force other
manufacturers to further research and develop better performing applications of
the technology, which is of course very positive, however a large section of the
consumer market is being forgotten about in these rapid developments.

Around 10% of individuals do not have binocular vision (6 million people in the
UK alone), meaning they cannot fully utilize their two eyes equally, commonly
known as Stereo Blindness. Stereo Blindness is one of the main reasons that
many individuals cannot fully see 3D images.

3D is appearing everywhere, and theres loads of people complaining they
cant see itFor these six million people, its like taking the 3D glasses off,
making everything all blurry. It can create really bad headaches and aches
behind the eyes.
1


In 2012 there are already 33 3D films lined to be given a worldwide release,
compared to the solitary 5 3D film releases of just 3 years ago.
2
With this major
increase in 3D material being released many more individuals are getting to
experience an extremely engrossing film experience, however many are also
missing out. It is the view of the researcher that audio technology could also be
implemented to not only enhance the 3D experience but also help engross
audiences who have to view non 3D versions of films due to medical conditions.

Ambisonic recordings and/or audio encoded through an Ambisonic Encoder
possess unique attributes compared to standard audio recordings. The
recordings themselves contain accurate directional properties that can be
reproduced when the audio is decoded and played on specific speaker setups.











1
Bhaimesh Patel, Chaiiman of The Eyecaie Tiust, The Telegiaph, 1S
th
}uly 2u1u
2
NovieInsiuei.com
S










Figure 1 B-Format Sound Field Diagram
3


Figure 1 displays the axial information that can be found in an Ambisonic track.
Unlike standard surround sound setups, height information (Z Axis) can be stored
within the track and reproduced along with X and Y Axis information, creating a
full 3D environment.

Theoretically the sound field created by an Ambisonic setup should be more
immersive than a standard surround sound System as all 3 dimensions are
catered for. Directionality, distance and height are can all be precisely recorded
and reproduced. It is the researchers opinion that these attributes would lead to a
more engrossing film experience for both 3D and non-3D viewers.

Before an argument for the film industry to adopt this technology can begin, it is
essential to first provide evidence that individuals are actually able to perceive a
difference in the system compared to surround sound systems that are already
common place in most cinemas and many homes. The key to this would be
identifying whether sounds can be more accurately localized through the
Ambisonic setup compared to a surround sound setup. If localization accuracy by
individuals was greater through an Ambisonic setup an argument could be made
that the technology would perform better in a film environment than current
technology and should be adopted by the industry.

The experimental research carried out and detailed in this paper aims to help
support this argument through scientific approach, analysis and findings.










S
http:meuia.sounuonsounu.comsosjunu4imageslivesounufieluuiag.l.jpg
6

3. Procedure

The experimental procedure of the research was split into 4 distinct sections;

1. Questionnaire
2. General Hearing Test
3. Localization Test carried out on a 5.0 Surround Sound Setup
4. Localization Test carried out on an Ambisonic Surround Sound Setup

3.1 Questionnaire

The Questionnaire task taken by the participants helped determine a general
profile of their hearing health by asking them their age and questions relating to
sound environments they are currently in contact with (i.e. loud machinery in a
factory environment), whether they use ear protection when they are exposed to
loud noise and if they have any pre-diagnosed hearing conditions. The
questionnaire did not give scientific accurate results however it gave the
researcher a brief outline of their auditory profile, meaning any anomalies in the
other three tests could be more easily explained.

Participants were asked to mark, on a scale of 1-5 how often they listened to
audio through headphones, how often they were exposed to loud noise and what
level they regularly listened to audio at. They also gave details of pre-diagnosed
medical conditions, whether they used ear protection when needed and what
genre of music they listened to most.

The Questionnaires marking scheme was developed after researching what
effect certain variables have on auditory health. For the questions that asked the
participant to rank their answer between 1 and 5, the number marked was taken
as the score. If they said Yes to using ear protection when necessary they were
given a score of -2, if not they were given 2. If they said, Yes to having a pre-
diagnosed hearing condition they were given a score of 2, if not -2. Finally they
were given a score of ! of whatever age they had given. All the scores were
then added together to make an overall score. The genre of music the participant
marked down was just used as reference when it came to analysing their
individual results throughout the entire testing process. Although this was not a
totally scientific approach it certainly helped identify individuals who had one or
two variables that could dramatically influence the other tasks in the research
experimentation.






7
3.2 General Hearing Test

The General Hearing Test gave the researcher an idea of the limitations of each
participants hearing ability, allowing him to understand why certain frequency
ranges used as part of the Localisation Tests may be impossible for certain
participants to perceive. The test was carried out using a pair of Sennheisser
HD650 headphones (see Figure 2) and Apples digital audio workstation, Logic
Pro.














Figure 2 Sennheisser HD650 Headphones
4


Although these headphones are of a very high standard as with all audio
reproduction devices the frequency response of the device is not perfectly flat. In
order to overcome this I made sure the master track, which audio would go
through last before being sent to participants, had an EQ plug-in applied to it that
counteracted the flaws in the headphones frequency response.














Figure 3 - Frequency Response of Sennheisser HD650 Headphones

4
http:cun.heau-fi.oigSS4S4bc7e2u_BB6SuSeite.jpg
8









Figure 4 EQ Applied to Master Fader in General Hearing Test

A session was setup in Apples Logic Pro, containing 20 individual tracks, 10
panned fully left and 10 panned fully right in order to fully test both ears of each
participant. These tracks were mixed randomly so that no patterns between the
testing of each ear occurred. Tests tracks panned to the left were coloured blue
while tests tracks panned to the right were coloured red.



An Oscillator Pug-in was placed on each track and set to generate a tone of
desired frequency.














Figure 5 Oscillator Generating a 1kHz Tone





9
10 varying frequencies between 50Hz and 15kHz were played to each ear in no
specific order. Each track was played to the participant; they were instructed to
say Yes if they could perceive the sound, No if they could not. Each track was
played to participants first at -96dB; the level was then gradually increased until
the absolute level was found (lowest level that the participant could perceive the
tone at).

















Figure 6 Increase In Test Tone Level

There were also times when no tone would be played and the participant would
be asked if they could hear anything, this helped ensure that the participants
were carrying out the task correctly and not just saying, Yes to everything.
Carrying out this type of procedure ensures that the MUSHRA method (Multiple
Stimuli with Hidden Reference and Anchor Methodology) was being adopted,
helping to remove flawed test data from the results.

The researcher marked down participants absolute level for each tone on a
Participant Testing Pack.



Figure 7 Participant Having
General Hearing Test









1u
3.3 Localisation Test using a 5.0 System

In order to output the audio for the Localisation Tests a Motu 2408mk3 Interface
was used along with 9 Genelec 8050a Monitors. The Motu Interface was used in
order to allow a large number of audio channels to be output from the computer.
In total 9 audio outputs and Genelec monitors were used, 6 for the Ambisonic
testing and an additional 3 were needed for 5.0 Surround testing.














Figure 8 Genelec 8050a Monitors















Figure 9 Motu 2408mk3 Interface

Localisation Tests using a 5.0 Surround Sound System were carried out as one
of the participant tasks during the experimental research. The system was laid
out in the standard format, with participants positioned 1.5 metres away from the
centre speaker, angled directly in front of them at 0.









11




















Figure 10 5.0 Surround Sound Layout Diagram

All speakers were positioned at a height of 1 metre. No Low Frequency Emitter
(Subwoofer) was used throughout testing, hence 5.0, due to the wavelength of
the low frequencies reproduced by the speaker to be too long for humans to
accurately localize. Therefore it would have added no useful data to the
research.

14 sound bursts were created in order to test the participants Localisation Ability
from various angles using various frequency bands. These were then set into a
random order so that no pattern or themes were obvious. The 3-second sound
bursts were created by recording three bursts of an oscillator emitting white
noise. An EQ plug-in was then used to filter the signal until only one specific
frequency band could be perceived. By only letting the participants hear short
bursts instead of longer sound samples it ensured they had no time to over
analyse the sample. Participants were also instructed not to move their head
throughout testing. If the examiner noticed any movement the testing procedure
was restarted and the order of the specific sound bursts/angles tested was
altered.









12











Figure 11 White Noise Generator with EQ Plug-in Exposing Specific Frequency Bands


14 tracks were setup within Logic Pro and set to Surround Mode. Each channel
was positioned at the angle detailed in the Sound Localisation Test Answer
Sheet. Each participants testing pack contained an empty polar graph for him or
her to mark the number of the tone at the angle they perceived it at.

The examiner would clearly state the sound burst that was be played (e.g. Sound
Burst 1), play the sample and then give the participant a few moments to mark
down their answers. Sound Bursts were NOT repeated except in exceptional
circumstances, e.g. fire alarm going off.





















Figure 12 - Surround Panner set and placed on each Channel


1S
With an SPL meter set at -48dB, Range 60, Weighting A and with at the slow
response setting the level of the sound blasts used for both the 5.0 Surround
Sound and Ambisonic Localisation tests was 3dB. Natural room noise detected
using the same SPL meter and settings was -13dB.

3.4 Localisation Test using an Ambisonic System

The testing equipment and procedure used for the Ambisonic Localisation tests
was very similar to that of the tests carried out using the 5.0 Surround Sound
System. The main differences were the speaker setup and the software used to
produce the audio.

































Figure 13 - Ambisonic Surround Sound Layout Diagram

The participant was positioned in the same position as in the previous tests with
the speakers still positioned at a height of 1 metre. As no speakers were placed
at higher or lower heights, the test carried out will only deal with Ambisonic
Planar Reproduction.

14
Reaper, a digital audio workstation program, was used instead of Logic Pro for
the Ambisonic setup due to Reaper allowing the user to import VST Plug-ins,
which the B-Format encoder and decoder were.

The audio sound bursts used previously were recorded into a stereo audio track
then imported into Reaper. This ensured that the sound bursts used in both
localisation tests were identical.








Figure 14 Sound Blast Audio Track Imported Into Reaper

In order to make the stereo audio track into an Ambisonic signal an Ambisonic
Encoder was needed, a decoder would also be needed to enable the signal to be
reproduced by the speaker setup created.

The same frequency range and angle pairings, used in the 5.0 Surround Sound
tests, were implemented again to keep consistency between the two tests. The
B-Format encoder turned the stereo signal into a signal that could be reproduced
on the Ambisonic setup, this then allowed the user to pan the signal to a desired
angle. To save time during testing 14 presets were created into to quickly change
between the various panning settings/angles.















Figure 15 B-Format Encoder With Preset Loader




1S
















Figure 16 B-Format Decoder


The decoder was set to the standard Hexagonal Reproduction setting with Near-
Field Compensation switched off.

The procedure from the previous testing was adopted for the Ambisonic
Localisation Tests. Participants were given an identical marking sheet to mark
down the numbers of the sound bursts played, guided by the examiner.




















Figure 17 Complete Speaker Setup

16


























Figure 18 Participant Carry Out Localisation Tests























17
4. Findings

All results were analysed and used in the most scientific and methodical way
possible. Many measures were taken to ensure results given are as accurate as
possible.

4.1 Questionnaire

Age

The age of the 18 participants who took part in the research ranged from 19-62,
with 29 being the average age tested. The most common age of participants was
21.























Figure 19 Age Against Overall Hearing Score











18














Figure 20 Age Against Localisation Score Using 5.0 Setup



















Figure 21 Age Against Localisation Score Using Ambisonic Setup












19
On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being never and 5 being daily) how often do you
listen to music through headphones/earphones?

The average answer given to this question was 4 with the most popular answer
being 5. All participants gave an answer of 2 or more, meaning they all use
headphones/earphones at least occasionally.


















Figure 22 - Headphone Usage Against Overall Hearing Score



















Figure 23 Headphone Usage Against Localisation Score Using 5.0 Setup


2u















Figure 24 Headphone Usage Against Localisation Score Using Ambisonic Setup


On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being never and 5 being more than once a week) how
often are you exposed to excessive loud noise? (E.g. nightclub, factory
noise, loud gig)

The average and most popular answer given to this question was 3. 78% of
participants said they experience excessive noise levels of some degree,
however the number who actually take precautions when experiencing excessive
loud noise is much lower.

Do you take precautions in these situations (e.g. ear protectors/ear plugs)?
(Yes or No)

Only 28% of participants marked Yes, they do take precautions in these
situations. 72% said No they did not.






Figure 25 - Loud Noise
Exposition Against
Percentage of Hearing
Protection Users






21















Figure 26 Use of Hearing Protection Against Overall Hearing Score























Figure 27 Use of Hearing Protection Against Localisation Score Using 5.0 Setup










22
















Figure 28 Use of Hearing Protection Against Localisation Score Using Ambisonic Setup


On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being low and 5 being loudest possible) what volume
do you set your iPod/car radio/hi-if etc to the majority of the time?

The most popular answer and also the average answer for this question was 3.



















Figure 29 - Usual Audio Volume Against Overall Hearing Score




2S
















Figure 30 - Usual Audio Volume Against Localisation Score Using 5.0 Setup



















Figure 31 - Usual Audio Volume Against Localisation Score Using Ambisonic Setup


What genre of music would you say you listen to most?

A wide range of answers was given, however Rock (in various forms) was the
most common choice.




24

Do you have any pre-diagnosed hearing conditions (Yes or No)?

Of the 18 participants asked only 2 (11%) had a pre-diagnosed hearing condition.

What is this condition?

The conditions stated were as follows;

Tinnitus
Hereditary hole in my hearing spectrum and difficulty with fast changing sound
(people that really speak fast)



















Figure 32 - Pre-Diagnosed Conditions Against Overall Hearing Score

















2S



















Figure 33 - Pre-Diagnosed Conditions Against Localisation Score Using 5.0 Setup
























Figure 34 - Pre-Diagnosed Conditions Against Localisation Score Using Ambisonic Setup


When analysis of all data was completed, the overall questionnaire scores
participants received were correlated with the overall scores the participants
obtained in the other tasks.




26




















Figure 35 - Overall Questionnaire Score Against Overall Hearing Score

























Figure 36 - Overall Questionnaire Score Against Localisation Score Using 5.0 Setup








27




















Figure 37 - Overall Questionnaire Score Against Overall Hearing Score


All participants were sent an individual Hearing Profile from the researcher,
detailing their individual results in each task and also highlighting areas they
could improve on (i.e. use hearing protection when exposed to excessive loud
noise). The profiles also advised them to seek medical advice if there were any
anomalies/potential problems encountered during testing.

4.2 General Hearing Tests

General Hearing Test results were analysed by creating three separate scores
for each participant. A Left Ear, Right Ear and Overall (Combined) Score were
calculated by adding up all the absolute values found for each participant in each
category. The Overall (Combined) Score was calculated by adding the Left and
Right Scores together. A higher hearing score suggests a participant has a
greater level of hearing ability. For example a score of 40 refers to -40dB, this is
quieter than -10dB, therefore a participant with a score of 40 can perceive sound
that is -30dB quieter than a participant with a score of 10.

!"#$ &'( )*+,$ &'( -."('// 01234*5"67
8'9*3:3 ;<2(" "#$ "#% &%'(
8*5*3:3 ;<2(" ()& ('' #("
=."('+" ;<2(" '"' '## &$"(

Figure 38 General Hearing Test Results By Ear





28



Figure 39 General Hearing Test Results By Frequency















Figure 40 Difference Between Left and Right Ear Hearing Scores

On average the right ear perceived sound 23dB quieter than the left ear however
on when both ears were tested with a 2kHz tone on average the left ear
perceived the sound 2dB quieter than the right ear.



















>?@A B??@A C??@A >??@A D??@A B???@A E???@A >???@A B?F???@A B>F???@A
8'9*3:3 ;<2(" %# "$ ") )' )( )# #( )$ )* )*
8*5*3:3 ;<2(" +# (% '' "+ "$ "$ '* +% " *
=."('+" ;<2(" (' '$ "+ ") "# )& "# "( '% (#
Difference Between Left and Right Ear
Hearing Scores
Maximum -2
Minimum 15
Average -23
29


























Figure 41 Average Participant Hearing Curve



4.3 Localisation Tests

In order to analyse both of the Localisation Tests various techniques were
implemented, the first being to analyse the standard deviation of the angles
plotted by each participant for each sound burst of both of the tests. Standard
Deviation is defined as a statistical measure of spread or variability
5
, which is
essential to this research, as it is vital that the differences in participant
perception between the two tests are investigated. In order to accurately analyse
results angles have to be transposed slightly, meaning they had to be written as
values between -180 - 180. For example 330 would become -30.








S
http:easycalculation.comstatisticsleain-stanuaiu-ueviation.php
Su


















































Figure 42 Standard
Deviation Data of Both Tests




S1



























Figure 43 Standard Deviation of 5.0 Setup Against Ambisonic Setup

The approximate angular differences between the actual angles and the angles
plotted by the participants were also analysed to try to determine if the systems
were more efficient at reproducing audio from specific angles.


















Figure 44 Average Angular Inaccuracy Between 5.0 and Ambisonic Systems (in )

S2





























Figure 45 Average Angular Inaccuracy of 5.0 Setup Against Ambisonic System (in )


Each participant received graphs in their individual Hearing Profiles which
detailed the directionality of the sound bursts and what angles they plotted at for
the corresponding sound bursts on both tests. Figure 46 and 47 details the
average angles plotted against each sound burst for each test.



















SS


Figure 46 Average Plots For Both
Systems Against Actual Angles Used












































S4




















Figure 47 Average Plots For Both Systems Against Actual Angles Used (Polar Diagram

























SS
5. Discussion

Numerical Data from various calculations is only part of what this research aims
to identify. It is essential to analyse these figures and make sense of them in a
practical sense.

5.1 Variables Affecting General Hearing Levels

Figure 38 details how general hearing level was affected by age. The trend line
shows a decrease in overall hearing score as the age of participant increases. A
result similar to this would be expected as natural hearing loss occurs
predominately due to age. If we look at the average hearing scores of
participants above and below 30 years of age this theory is supported even
further.





Figure 48 Difference in Overall Hearing Score Between Participants Under & Over the
Age of 30

The difference shown equates to an average difference of 143, this would mean
that on average participants under 30 years of age perceived each test tone at a
level -7dB quieter than that of participants over the age of 30.




















Figure 49 Average Hearing Curves For Both Participants Under & Over the Age of 30

S6
From Figure 49 it is apparent that both sets of participants perform well when
test tones are under 2kHz. When test tones increase over 2kHz the average
scores start to decrease rather severely.

The frequency of which participants wear headphones looks to have a dramatic
effect on overall hearing score. The trend line of Figure 22 seems to suggest that
overall hearing level is increased as the frequency of headphone usage also
increases. It is the researchers opinion however that this trend is only apparent
due to a few anomalies. Only 3 participants marked down a headphone wearing
frequency of under 3, out of these 2 of the participants were the lowest scoring in
the General Hearing Test, causing the trend line to increase with frequency. It is
the researchers view that no correlation between headphone wearing frequency
and general hearing level has been found from this particular research.
From Figure 26 there does not seem to be any correlation between overall
hearing score and the use of hearing protection. Although no correlation has
been found on this occasion I think it is still essential that the use of hearing
protection be promoted much more. Figure 25 highlights that just over a quarter
(28%) of participants actually use ear protection when needed. If individuals want
to be able to enjoy any type of high quality audio system later in life it is essential
that the proper precautions be taken while their hearing spectrum is still
complete. The same could be said about the effects of playing music at severe
volumes. Although Figure 29 does not seem to show any negative
consequences of always playing music at excessive levels, it has been proven by
previous studies;
Regularly listening to personal music players at high-volume settings
when young, often has no immediate effect on hearing but is likely to
result in hearing loss later in life.
6

Figure 32 shows that participants who did not suffer from any pre-diagnosed
auditory conditions performed better than those who did throughout the general
hearing tests.




Figure 50 - Difference in Overall Hearing Score Between Participants With & Without Pre-
Diagnosed Auditory Conditions

The difference between the two average hearing scores is 250; this means that
on average a participant with good auditory health perceived each test tone at a
level -12.5dB quieter than that of a participant who suffered from a pre-
diagnosed hearing condition.


6
,-./01.2.- 3455.11// 40 65/78.08 90: ;/<=> ?:/01.2./: @/9=1A B.CDCE +**)
S7


















Figure 51 - Average Hearing Curves For Both Participants With & Without a Pre-Diagnosed
Condition

The difference in hearing curve between participants with and without pre-
diagnosed conditions is immediately noticeable from Figure 51. Both sets of
participants perform steadily until around 1kHz, when participants who suffer with
conditions scores then start to dramatically decrease. The devastating effects
certain conditions can have on the ears ability to perceive the entire frequency
spectrum humanly possible is very evident.

When the relationship between overall questionnaire score and overall hearing
score is studied (Figure 35) it shows that as questionnaire score rises hearing
score decreases, this helps demonstrate that the questionnaire results are
effective in giving participants and the researcher a rough estimation of their
hearing profile. If they listen to loud levels of sound frequently without taking
precautions they will receive a high overall score that is likely to be linked to a
poor hearing score.

5.2 Variables Affecting Localisation Ability

Age seems to be a factor in an individuals Localisation Ability. Figures 20 and
31 both identify a trend between the two variables. As age increases so does
inaccuracy.





Figure 52 Comparison of Localisation Inaccuracy Between 5.0 & Ambisonic Setups (in)
S8
The table above highlights that on average the over 30 inaccuracy score was
greater than the corresponding score of the under 30s. There is an average
accuracy difference of 5 between participants under and over the age of 30
when the 5.0 systems is used. This difference reduces to 3 when the Ambisonic
system is used.
















Figure 53 Inaccuracy Curve of Participants Both Under & Over Age of 30 Using 5.0 Setup
(in )




















Figure 54 Inaccuracy Curve of Participants Both Under & Over Age of 30 Using
Ambisonic Setup (in )




S9
The two graphs previous highlight the greatest inaccuracy difference between the
two age ranges at the second and eighth sound burst tests through both
systems. These sound bursts were played from angles of 210 and 0
respectively. The second test tone had a frequency range of 1.5-3kHz and the
eighth had a frequency range of 12-16kHz. The greater inaccuracy score for the
eighth sound burst could be explained by its high frequency range, which will be
harder for older participants to perceive. The poor accuracy of the second test
tone however would seem to be due to its angular positioning as the frequency
range should be perceived well by the older participants (Figure 49).

The frequency that participants use headphones and the volume which they
regularly listen to music at does not seem to have any visible effect on
localisation ability, however this is mainly due to the out of proportion results
given by participants for the questions in the questionnaire that dealt with these
issues. The reason for this will be discussed further in the next section
(Critique).

No relationship is visible between Localisation Ability and the use of hearing
protection from Figure 27 & 28. This is due the fact that Localisation Accuracy
was calculated by averaging all the angles the participants marked down - it does
not take into account the sound bursts that participants could not perceive and
hence failed to mark down a possible answer. If the number of failed attempts is
analysed the following is found:

All participants who use ear protection when necessary recorded only 6 failed
attempts in total. However, when the total number of failed attempts by
participants who do not use ear protection when necessary is counted the
number rises to 14, over double that of the other group. Therefore the benefits of
using ear protection are again highlighted.

Figure 33 & 34 highlight how suffering from auditory conditions can affect an
individuals localisation ability. The overall accuracy of participants markings
decreases if the participants have a pre-diagnosed hearing condition, however
the difference is less when Ambisonic Test is compared to that of the 5.0 Test.

Analysing overall questionnaire scores against localisation accuracy (Figure 36
& 37) participants with a higher questionnaire score (poorer auditory care
taken/health) actually had greater accuracy in both tests when plotting angles
they thought sounds were being reproduced from. However other factors can be
taken into account that may put this upset into perspective. The majority of
participants who use hearing protection are older and as described previously,
older participants did not perform as well in the localisation tests as younger
participants.



4u
5.3 Localisation Ability (5.0 vs. Ambisonic Surround Sound)

By studying the difference between experimental data obtained from both
Localisation Tests it becomes clear that the Ambisonic System produces more
accurate results. When the difference in accuracy scores between the two age
ranges is analysed (Figure 52) we see the difference in accuracy reduces from
5 to 3.

















Figure 55 - Comparison of Participants Over 30 Years Old Performance With Both Systems





















Figure 56 - Participants Over 30 Inaccuracy Comparison Curve (in )
41
By analysing Figure 55 & 56 one can see that 71% of sound bursts were, on
average, marked more accurately by participants when they were played through
the Ambisonic setup. The 29% of sound blasts that were plotted more accurately
through the 5.0 System were of a high frequency range. It is the researchers
opinion that the inaccuracy is likely to be due to the poor perception participants
above the age of 30 seem have at high frequencies (Figure 49), rather than the
Ambisonic setup having shortcomings at certain angles.

Suffering from a pre-diagnosed hearing condition, as discussed above, seems to
affect how accurately an individual can localise sound. The gap in accuracy
between individuals with and without a pre-diagnosed hearing condition however
seems to be less when an Ambisonic setup is used instead of a 5.0 setup.

















Figure 57 Comparison of Participants With Hearing Conditions Performance With Both
Systems
















42
















Figure 58 Participants With Pre-Diagnosed Hearing Conditions Inaccuracy Comparison
Curve (in )
Figure 57 & 58 shows how the two systems compared over the entire process of
testing. As with the over 30s group, 71% of sound bursts were plotted more
accurately when the participants heard them being reproduced through the
Ambisonic setup. Again the researcher feels that the poor perception of high
frequencies common with participants who suffer from pre-diagnosed hearing
conditions (Figure 51) contributed greatly to the 29% of sound blasts which were
marked more accurately when played through a 5.0 system.























Figure 59 Overall Comparison of Participant Performance Through Both Systems (5.0 &
Ambisonic) (in )
4S





















Figure 60 Overall Comparison Curve of Both Systems (5.0 & Ambisonic) (in )





























Figure 61 Difference in Accuracy Between Both Systems (5.0 & Ambisonic) (In )


44
Comparing the overall accuracy of both systems, it is evident that 79% of the
sound burst tests were marked down more accurately when played through the
Ambisonic System (11 out of the 14). 21% were marked more accurately when
played through the 5.1 System (3 out of the 14). As discussed previously, the
sound bursts that were marked down more accurately by the participants when
played through the 5.0 systems were of a higher frequency band (7.9kHz-12kHz
& 16kHz-20kHz). It would seem that on average higher frequency sound bursts
are harder to accurately localise than lower frequency sound bursts - this could
be due to variables discussed earlier (age, suffering from a pre-diagnosed
condition etc).

Figure 61 highlights the difference in accuracy between the two systems. Plots
above 0 are sound bursts that were marked, on average, more accurately
through the Ambisonic System. Plots below 0 were marked more accurately
through the 5.0 setup. The most inaccurate results above 0 (Sound Bursts 4 &
7) were reproduced from angles between 135 and 225. This seems to be the
angular proportion of the testing environment that the majority of participants had
difficulty localising correctly through both systems, more so through the 5.0
system.

A common occurrence throughout the testing procedure was participant
confusion when localising sounds positioned at 0 and 180 (Sound Bursts 7 &
8).




















Figure 62 Sound Blast 7 & 8 Data (5.0 Setup) Figure 63 Sound Blast 7 & 8 Data
(Ambisonic Setup)


4S
When audio is played from rear angles (135 - 225) the Intraoral Phase
Difference between the left and right ears is harder for the brain to calculate,
causing localisation from these angles to be very uncertain, hence causing an
increase in the chance of inaccuracy.
At 180 degrees, localization is almost completely uncertain. Regardless of
the type of sound source, the overall tendencies of localization versus
phase difference are similar, except for a sound source of impulsive
nature.
7






















7
FA9C/ G.22/7/0-/ 90: ,4H0: ?598/ I4-9=.J91.40E K9D/CA. LM N91CH:9.79E K9D/CA. OHD95.E &#"$
46
6. Conclusions

Once experimental results are analysed and discussed it is important to put them
into context. There are areas of the findings of this research that could be used to
help better understand auditory health and listening habits in our current society
and also the various advantages different surround sound systems may bring to
various situations. Some sections of the research may need to be investigated
further before they can fully be understood. The implementation of this research
should also be clearly stated.

6.1 General Hearing Health

The average hearing curve obtained from the testing carried out (Figure 41)
seems to show what would be expected when compared to other results of
similar tests, however there are certain concerns to be raised. The poorer
perception possessed by older participants, over 30 in the case of this research,
can be easily seen from data like Figure 49. The researcher noticed from the
answers given in the questionnaire that older participants tend not to have
used/currently use headphones as often as younger participants. They also tend
to mark a lower score (1-5) when asked what volume they regularly listen to
audio at. If older participants are showing significant signs of hearing
deterioration at an age as young as 30, then younger participants, who from the
data provided tend to use headphones more regularly and listen to audio at
higher levels, will surely suffer hearing deterioration, maybe to a more severe
scale and at a younger age.

A great deal more attention has to be drawn towards auditory health and
targeted at individuals of a young age. If individuals are encouraged to look after
their hearing at a young age they may manage to adopt a regime (i.e. using ear
protection when necessary) that will help slow down the rate hearing
deterioration. Schemes should be structured and marketed similar to that of
dental hygiene and sexual health initiatives. Although the effects of hearing
deterioration might not seem as dramatic as the effects of poor dental hygiene or
sexual health, the scale of hearing deterioration that will affect the young people
of today is unknown. The consumption of audio through headphones and
attendances at excessively loud festivals are at an all time high, this could lead to
an unprecedented level of hearing problems in the future.

The researcher noticed whilst carrying out General Hearing Tests that the
majority of participants had stronger hearing in their right ear, what is the reason
for this? In the future the researcher would like to find out what hand the
participants use most (i.e. left handed) and see if there is any correlation
between preferred hand and most sensitive ear.



47
6.2 General Localisation Ability

When analysing the effects age has on Localisation Accuracy the researcher
noticed that the difference in accuracy between younger participants and older
participants was smaller when an Ambisonic System was used. The same trend
was seen when sufferers and non-sufferers of pre-diagnosed hearing conditions
were compared. The catalyst for this research was that many people were not
able to experience 3D video technology due to various conditions. The
researcher felt that 3D Surround Sound (Ambisonics) could be used to improve
the 3D experience of film enthusiasts, especially those who may not be able to
experience 3D films. Although no definite conclusions can be made it would
seem from the results obtained that not only do Ambisonic Systems provide
overall more accurate localisation but they can also provide an experience for
individuals with poorer hearing which is not as far removed from what individuals
with a good hearing level would be experiencing.

Although the findings of this research are extremely encouraging there is still a
great deal of experimentation and research that would have to be carried out in
order to come up with the solid conclusion that Ambisonic Systems immerse
individuals more than 5.0 Systems. The experimental procedure used in this
research should be carried out using a full 3D Ambisonic System (extra speakers
used to help aid in height reproduction). Testing could be carried out with a
significantly larger number of speakers as there is no limit to the number of
speakers that can be used in an Ambisonic setup. By carrying out numerous
tests increasing the number of speakers used an optimum number of speakers
could be found which helps aid localisation while still being practical (i.e. using
200 speakers is not practical in most environments).

Thorough testing should be carried out on participants with a wide range of pre-
diagnosed conditions. It is the researchers opinion that any audio system that is
implemented into mainstream technology should be accessible and beneficial to
as many people as possible. One of the reasons that some people get put off
viewing 3D films is that someone they are with may not be able to watch it; hence
the entire group abandons the technology. Testing should also be carried out
using an actual film soundtrack instead of sound bursts. Although it would be
harder to calculate Localisation Accuracy in a test like this, it would be much
easier to get personal feedback from participants









48
6.3 Implementation

It is the researchers opinion that Ambisonic Systems should one day replace
Dolby Surround Systems in most cinemas, however it would be extremely difficult
for the technology to overtake Dolby, as it has had a major stronghold on the
movie industry since the release of Batman Returns in 1992. The IMAX
experience, although popular, is not dominant over the whole cinema industry,
Ambisonic Systems could be implemented in a similar way to this. One or two
cinema halls out of a multiplex could be fitted with the technology.

Due to the versatility of Ambisonic technology, companies, such as Sky, could
help launch the system in the home. Movie and television programmes
soundtracks could be broadcast in UHJ Format meaning individuals who did not
have the correct setup could still receive the signal through a standard stereo
setup. If users of the service have a speaker setup the set-top box could
implement a UHJ to B-Format convertor so that they could experience a full
Ambisonic soundtrack. Unlike a standard 5.1 setup, users would not have to
have the setup laid out in a specific manner, due to the nature of Ambisonic
Systems as long as there are at least four speakers (Basic Planar Reproduction)
in a rough symmetrical spatial reproduction can take place.

The most likely way that the technology could become more common would be if
more Blu-Ray releases adopted the technology as one of the additional
soundtracks. Many major Blu-Ray releases come with numerous soundtracks
(Stereo, 5.1, Directors Commentary, Various Languages etc). If Ambisonic
versions of soundtracks were added to some major Blu-Ray releases it would
dramatically increase the awareness of the technology.

6.4 Final Thoughts

Equal-Opportunity schemes should not just be implemented in working and
academic environments. The Entertainment Industry has a duty to deliver
services to as many people as possible, regardless of their impairments. It is the
researchers view that technology, that can bring enjoyment to a greater number
of individuals than any other similar technology readily available, should be
developed accordingly and made available to as many individuals as possible.










49
7. Bibliography

Auvinen, A. et al. (2008) Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified
Health Risks.
Cheng, B. et al. (2008) A Spatial Approach To Ambisonic Audio Compression.
Everest, F. (2006) Critical Listening Skills For Audio Professionals. Boston:
Thomson Course Technology

Katz, B. (2002) Mastering Audio: The Art and The Science. Oxford: Focal Press.
Ludman, H. (2007) ABC of Ear, Nose, and Throat. 5th ed. Oxford: Blackwell.
Matsudaira, T. and Fukami, T. (1973) Phase Difference and Sound Image
Localization.
Rosenberg, M. (1982) Sound and Hearing. London: Edward Arnold.
Smith, S. (2003) Digital Signal Processing: A Practical Guide For Engineers and
Scientists. London: Burlington Mass.
Tomlinson, H. (2008) Surround Sound: Up and Running. 2nd ed. Oxford: Focal
Press.
Wyatt, H. (2005) Audio Post Production For Television and Film: An Introduction
to Technology. 3rd ed. Oxford: Focal Press.










Su
8. References
Beaumont, C. (2010) Six million Britons cant see 3D TV - Telegraph. [online]
Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/7887422/Six-million-
Britons-cant-see-3D-TV.html [Accessed: 7th April 2012].
CDN.Head-Fi.org (2012) Sennheisser HD650 Headphones. [image online]
Available at: http://cdn.head-fi.org/0/07/265x265px-LS-
07429eaa_B00018MSNI.01._SX250_SCLZZZZZZZ_V199155185_.jpeg
[Accessed: 7th April 2012].
Easycalculation.com (2012) Learn Standard Deviation. [online] Available at:
http://easycalculation.com/statistics/learn-standard-deviation.php [Accessed: 9th
April 2012].
Movieinsider.com (2012) Movie Insider - Taking You Beyond The Studio Gates.
[online] Available at: http://movieinsider.com [Accessed: 7th April 2012].
Sound On Sound (n.d.) B-Format Field Diagram. [image online] Available at:
http://www.surround-library.com/images/white-papers/wp-b-format.jpeg
[Accessed: 2nd February 2012].