Literature DB >> 19354395

Can temporal fine structure represent the fundamental frequency of unresolved harmonics?

Andrew J Oxenham1, Christophe Micheyl, Michael V Keebler.   

Abstract

At least two modes of pitch perception exist: in one, the fundamental frequency (F0) of harmonic complex tones is estimated using the temporal fine structure (TFS) of individual low-order resolved harmonics; in the other, F0 is derived from the temporal envelope of high-order unresolved harmonics that interact in the auditory periphery. Pitch is typically more accurate in the former than in the latter mode. Another possibility is that pitch can sometimes be coded via the TFS from unresolved harmonics. A recent study supporting this third possibility [Moore et al. (2006a). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119, 480-490] based its conclusion on a condition where phase interaction effects (implying unresolved harmonics) accompanied accurate F0 discrimination (implying TFS processing). The present study tests whether these results were influenced by audible distortion products. Experiment 1 replicated the original results, obtained using a low-level background noise. However, experiments 2-4 found no evidence for the use of TFS cues with unresolved harmonics when the background noise level was raised, or the stimulus level was lowered, to render distortion inaudible. Experiment 5 measured the presence and phase dependence of audible distortion products. The results provide no evidence that TFS cues are used to code the F0 of unresolved harmonics.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19354395      PMCID: PMC2736736          DOI: 10.1121/1.3089220

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  27 in total

1.  The lower limit of pitch as determined by rate discrimination.

Authors:  K Krumbholz; R D Patterson; D Pressnitzer
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  A test for the diagnosis of dead regions in the cochlea.

Authors:  B C Moore; M Huss; D A Vickers; B R Glasberg; J I Alcántara
Journal:  Br J Audiol       Date:  2000-08

3.  Perception of the low pitch of frequency-shifted complexes.

Authors:  Geoffrey A Moore; Brian C J Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Correct tonotopic representation is necessary for complex pitch perception.

Authors:  Andrew J Oxenham; Joshua G W Bernstein; Hector Penagos
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-01-12       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Pitch discrimination of diotic and dichotic tone complexes: harmonic resolvability or harmonic number?

Authors:  Joshua G Bernstein; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Auditory nonlinearity.

Authors:  J L Goldstein
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1967-03       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Phase effects in a three-component signal.

Authors:  T J Buunen; J M Festen; F A Bilsen; G van den Brink
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1974-02       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  The pattern-transformation model of pitch.

Authors:  F L Wightman
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1973-08       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  An optimum processor theory for the central formation of the pitch of complex tones.

Authors:  J L Goldstein
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1973-12       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics.

Authors:  H Levitt
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1971-02       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  35 in total

1.  Revisiting place and temporal theories of pitch.

Authors:  Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Acoust Sci Technol       Date:  2013

2.  Does fundamental-frequency discrimination measure virtual pitch discrimination?

Authors:  Christophe Micheyl; Kristin Divis; David M Wrobleski; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Implications of within-fiber temporal coding for perceptual studies of F0 discrimination and discrimination of harmonic and inharmonic tone complexes.

Authors:  Sushrut Kale; Christophe Micheyl; Michael G Heinz
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2014-06

4.  Further evidence that fundamental-frequency difference limens measure pitch discrimination.

Authors:  Christophe Micheyl; Claire M Ryan; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Limiting unwanted cues via random rove applied to the yes-no and multiple-alternative forced choice paradigms.

Authors:  Huanping Dai; Gerald Kidd
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Assessing the Role of Place and Timing Cues in Coding Frequency and Amplitude Modulation as a Function of Age.

Authors:  Kelly L Whiteford; Heather A Kreft; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2017-04-20

7.  Pitch strength of noise-vocoded harmonic tone complexes in normal-hearing listeners.

Authors:  William P Shofner; Jeannine Campbell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Perceptual sensitivity to, and electrophysiological encoding of, a complex periodic signal: effects of age.

Authors:  Sara K Mamo; John H Grose; Emily Buss
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2019-05-06       Impact factor: 2.117

9.  Separating the contributions of primary and unwanted cues in psychophysical studies.

Authors:  Huanping Dai; Christophe Micheyl
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2012-07-30       Impact factor: 8.934

10.  Dual-pitch processing mechanisms in primate auditory cortex.

Authors:  Daniel Bendor; Michael S Osmanski; Xiaoqin Wang
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-11-14       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.