Literature DB >> 2348021

Frequency discrimination of complex tones with overlapping and non-overlapping harmonics.

B C Moore1, B R Glasberg.   

Abstract

These experiments address the following issues. (1) When two complex tones contain different harmonics, do the differences in timbre between them impair the ability to discriminate the pitches of the tones? (2) When two complex tones have only a single component in common, and that component is the most discriminable component in each tone, is the frequency discrimination of the component affected by differences in residue pitch between the two tones? (3) How good is the pitch discrimination of complex tones with no common components when each tone contains multiple harmonics, so as to avoid ambiguity of pitch? (4) Is the pitch discrimination of complex tones with common harmonics impaired by shifting the component frequencies to nonharmonic values? In all experiments, frequency difference limens (DLCs) were measured for multiple-component complex tones, using an adaptive two-interval, two-alternative, forced-choice task. Three highly trained subjects were used. The main conclusions are as follows. (1) When two tones have the first six harmonics in common, DLCs are larger when the upper harmonics are different than when the upper harmonics are in common or are absent. It appears that differences in timbre impair DLCs. (2) Discrimination of the frequency of a single common partial in two complex tones is worse when the two tones have different residue pitches than when they have the same residue pitch. (3) DLCs for complex tones with no common harmonics are generally larger than those for complex tones with common harmonics. For the former, large individual differences occur, probably because subjects are affected differently by differences in timbre. (4) DLCs for harmonic complex tones are smaller than DLCs for complex tones in which the components are mistuned from harmonic values. This can probably be attributed to the less distinct residue pitch of the inharmonic complexes, rather than to reduced discriminability of partials. Overall, the results support the idea that DLCs for complex tones with common harmonics depend on residue pitch comparisons, rather than on comparisons of the pitches of partials.

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2348021     DOI: 10.1121/1.399184

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


  23 in total

1.  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

2.  Perceptual grouping affects pitch judgments across time and frequency.

Authors:  Elizabeth M O Borchert; Christophe Micheyl; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 3.332

3.  Comparing F0 discrimination in sequential and simultaneous conditions.

Authors:  Christophe Micheyl; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Infant pitch perception: Missing fundamental melody discrimination.

Authors:  Bonnie K Lau; Kaylah Lalonde; Monika-Maria Oster; Lynne A Werner
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 5.  Basic auditory processes involved in the analysis of speech sounds.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2008-03-12       Impact factor: 6.237

6.  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

7.  Encoding of natural timbre dimensions in human auditory cortex.

Authors:  Emily J Allen; Michelle Moerel; Agustín Lage-Castellanos; Federico De Martino; Elia Formisano; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2017-11-04       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  Cortical Correlates of Attention to Auditory Features.

Authors:  Emily J Allen; Philip C Burton; Juraj Mesik; Cheryl A Olman; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-02-25       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Time-dependent discrimination advantages for harmonic sounds suggest efficient coding for memory.

Authors:  Malinda J McPherson; Josh H McDermott
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Perception of the pitch of unresolved harmonics by 3- and 7-month-old human infants.

Authors:  Bonnie K Lau; Lynne A Werner
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.