Supplementary material

All audio files link to Fig. 5. Access here

Access here

(Fig. 5a): Representative of a ground truth of the signal we should expect at the receiver. The receiver sampling frequency was 16 kHz.

Access here

(Fig. 5b): The aliased signal when the receiver sampling frequency was set to 4 kHz.

Access here

(Fig. 5c): A case where excessive images are present in the signal and have not been appropriately filtered out, resulting in the imaging artifacts. A discrete-time source where linear interpolation was used and the receiver sampling frequency was 44.1 kHz.

Access here

(Fig. 5d): A case where both aliasing of the original signal as well the images has occurred. A discrete-time source where linear interpolation was used and the receiver sampling frequency was 4 kHz.

Access here

(Fig. 5e): Representative of the of the signal we should expect at the receiver when the receiver sampling frequency is 4 kHz. Although there is some bandwidth loss in comparison to A_ground_truth_fsr16k.wav, there are no aliasing/imaging artifacts. This is the intended behaviour of any auralization scheme at such low receiver sampling frequencies.

Access here

(Fig. 5f): NOTAP result using Zero Order Hold interpolation, an oversampling ratio, N = 50, and the receiver sampling frequency of 4 kHz.

Access here

(Fig. 5g): NOTAP result using Zero Order Hold interpolation, an oversampling ratio, N = 500, and the receiver sampling frequency of 4 kHz.

Access here

(Fig. 5h): NOTAP result using linear interpolation, an oversampling ratio, N = 50, and the receiver sampling frequency of 4 kHz.

© The Author(s), published by EDP Sciences, 2025