  While sound emergence is used in several countries to regulate wind energy
development, there is no published evidence that it is a relevant noise
descriptor for this purpose. In the present work, we carried out two listening
tests to evaluate the merits of sound emergence. Three definitions of sound
emergence were considered: the one in ISO 1996-1, sound emergence under
audibility condition $e_{UAC}$, and spectral emergence $e_{SP}$. We also
considered the specific to residual ratio and loudness metrics. In each
listening test, the sound stimuli consisted of 48 sound stimuli at 3 A-weighted
sound pressure levels $\{30, 40, 50\}$~dB and 4 specific-to-residual ratios
$\{-10, -5, 0, +5 \}$~dB. The results lead to the conclusion that short term
annoyance is better predicted by the total sound pressure level than by sound
emergence, whatever the definition considered for the latter, or than by the
specific to residual ratio. Short-term annoyance is slightly better predicted
by $e_{UAC}$ than by $e$, while $e$ is a better predictor than $e_{SP}$. The
total sound pressure level and the loudness metrics performed similarly.
Furthermore, the results provide evidence that sound emergence is a poor
predictor of the audibility of wind turbine sounds.
