Audio-Based Understanding of Audiobook Narration Appeal
Authors: Shahar Elisha, Mariano Beguerisse-Díaz, Emmanouil Benetos
Organizations: Spotify · Queen Mary University of London
Abstract
Narration is central to the audiobook listening experience, shaping how listeners engage with and understand the content. This work explores how narration qualities shape an audiobook's appeal, noting that their effects can vary by genre, title, and audience. We extract vocal and acoustic features (e.g., tone, pace, loudness) from LibriVox using pre-trained audio models and analyse their relationship with consumption data (specifically, view-rate) and their interplay with genre and title. Despite limited consumption data, we find that acoustic information alone has a robust association with appeal, even after accounting for title effects. We further validate these findings using more nuanced proprietary engagement metrics. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic computational study linking narration qualities, genre, title, and audiobook consumption, highlighting the potential of data-driven insights to improve audiobook personalisation and narrator casting.
Large Audio-Language Models show consistent performance gains across speech and audio benchmarks, yet high scores may not reflect true auditory perception. If a model can answer questions without processing the acoustic signal, the benchmark fails as a measure of auditory understanding. We present a diagnostic framework using two axes: text prior, which measures answerability from text and general knowledge alone, and audio reliance, which assesses actual dependency on the acoustic signal. Evaluating eight LALMs across three benchmarks, we find that models retain 60-72% of their full audio scores even without any audio input. Moreover, among items that require audio, only 3.0-4.2% need the complete audio clip; the majority can be resolved using localized fragments. These findings challenge the assumption that benchmark performance equals robust audio understanding, and we conclude with practical guidelines for improving evaluation reliability and benchmark design.
Leonardo Haw-Yang Foo, Chih-Kai Yang, Chen-An Li +2
General audio comprehension now covers speech, sound, and music over durations from seconds to hours, driven by large audio-language models (LALMs) that are increasingly omni-modal. Yet the benchmarks that test them still rely on clips of seconds, where scores saturate and models converge; recent long-form efforts extend duration but evaluate long audio much as short clips are. We introduce LongAudioSpan, a benchmark that spans both duration and depth: it pairs audio from 10 minutes to over 2 hours with 3,240 questions across three cognitive levels, namely perception, understanding, and reasoning. Two paths supply the questions, differing in how question content is sourced and how ground truth is obtained. Native QA extracts questions from the audio's content, posing each as a multiple-choice item and an open-ended one graded by detailed rubrics. Anchor QA instead injects ground truth, planting acoustic anchors into the audio and building a perception-to-reasoning chain scored only to the first error. A fully automated pipeline constructs every item through structured captioning, QA generation, and adversarial critic feedback. Evaluating 12 LALMs on LongAudioSpan, we find the hard part comes before reasoning: distilling a few relevant facts from a long, redundant signal. This difficulty grows with audio length and falls hardest on perception, especially temporal grounding. LongAudioSpan is available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/holvan/LongAudioSpan.
Popular ASR test sets adopt inconsistent conventions for numbers, disfluencies, entities, and casing, while standard normalizers erase the format distinctions users care about. Current benchmarks therefore cannot measure whether a model follows user preferences for output style. We introduce PreferenceASR, a test set evaluating ASR systems on their ability to follow natural-language preference instructions across four categories: normalization, entities, disfluencies, and case. Built from seven open-source corpora via a two-stage LLM-assisted pipeline with human verification, it is evaluated with a preference-aware normalizer that selectively skips steps matching the active instruction. Benchmarking four models shows rankings shift across preference types, exposing quality differences traditional evaluation obscures. We publicly release the dataset.
Nithin Rao Koluguri, Sasha Meister, Nikolay Karpov +4