4Blauert J, Jekosch U. Sound-quality evaluation - A multilayered problem. Acta Acustica United With Acustica,1997; 83(5): 747-753.
5Otto N et al. Guidelines for jury evaluations of automotive sounds. Proceeding of the 1999 Noise and Vibration Conference, Traverse City, Michigan, USA, 1999. SAE Paper No. 1999-01-1822.
6Guski R. Psychological methods for evaluating sound quality and assessing acoustic information. Acta Acustica United With Acustica, 1997; 83(5): 765-774.
7Bodden M, Heinrichs R, Linow A. Evaluation of interior vehichle noise using an efficient psychoacoustic method. Proceeding of Euronoise 98, Munich, Germany, 1998.
8Chouard N. Perception of overall loudness and unpleasantness. Proceeding of Inter-noise 98, Christchurch, New Zealand, 1998.
9Susini P, McAdams S, and Winsberg S. A multidimensional technique for sound quality assessment. Acta Acustica United With Acustica, 1999; 85(5): 650-656.
10Bradley R A, Terry M E. The rank analysis of incomplete block designs. 1. The method of paired comparisons.Biometrika, 1952; 39(4): 324-345.
9Beranek L. Concert Halls and Opera Houses: Music, Acoustics, and Architecture [ M ]. New York: Springer, 2004.30,512.
10Barron M, Marshall A H. Spatial Impression due to Early Lateral Reflections in Concert Hails : The Derivation of a Physi- cal Measure[J]. Sound Vibration, 1981, 77(2) :211 -232.
