Literature DB >> 2380441

Auditory filter shapes at low center frequencies.

B C Moore1, R W Peters, B R Glasberg.   

Abstract

Auditory-filter shapes were estimated in normally hearing subjects for signal frequencies (fs) of 100, 200, 400, and 800 Hz using the notched-noise method [R. D. Patterson and I. Nimmo-Smith, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 67, 229-245 (1980)]. Two noise bands, each 0.4fs wide, were used; they were placed both symmetrically and asymmetrically about the signal frequency to allow the measurement of filter shape and asymmetry. Two overall noise levels were used: 77 and 87 dB SPL. In deriving the shapes of the auditory filters, account was taken of the nonflat frequency response of the Sennheiser HD424 earphone, and also of the frequency-dependent attenuation produced by the middle ear. The auditory filters were asymmetric; the upper skirt was steeper than the lower skirt. The asymmetry tended to be greater at the higher noise level. The equivalent rectangular bandwidths (ERBs) of the filters at the lower noise level had average values of 36, 47, 87, and 147 Hz for values of fs of 100, 200, 400, and 800 Hz, respectively. The standard deviations of the ERBs across subjects were typically about 10% of the ERB values. The signal-to-masker ratio at the output of the auditory filter required to achieve threshold increased markedly with decreasing fs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2380441     DOI: 10.1121/1.399960

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


  11 in total

1.  Integration of auditory and vibrotactile stimuli: effects of frequency.

Authors:  E Courtenay Wilson; Charlotte M Reed; Louis D Braida
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 2.  Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: More than a restrictive bariatric surgery procedure?

Authors:  David Benaiges; Antonio Más-Lorenzo; Albert Goday; José M Ramon; Juan J Chillarón; Juan Pedro-Botet; Juana A Flores-Le Roux
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-11-07       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Unexceptional sharpness of frequency tuning in the human cochlea.

Authors:  Mario A Ruggero; Andrei N Temchin
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2005-12-12       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Frequency selectivity in macaque monkeys measured using a notched-noise method.

Authors:  Jane A Burton; Margit E Dylla; Ramnarayan Ramachandran
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2017-11-28       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  Auditory filter shapes derived from forward and simultaneous masking at low frequencies: Implications for human cochlear tuning.

Authors:  John Leschke; Gerardo Rodriguez Orellana; Christopher A Shera; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 3.672

6.  Temporal frequency channels are linked across audition and touch.

Authors:  Jeffrey M Yau; Jonathon B Olenczak; John F Dammann; Sliman J Bensmaia
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2009-03-05       Impact factor: 10.834

7.  Comparison of the roex and gammachirp filters as representations of the auditory filter.

Authors:  Masashi Unoki; Toshio Irino; Brian Glasberg; Brian C J Moore; Roy D Patterson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Separate mechanisms for audio-tactile pitch and loudness interactions.

Authors:  Jeffrey M Yau; Alison I Weber; Sliman J Bensmaia
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2010-10-13

Review 9.  Development and current status of the "Cambridge" loudness models.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2014-10-13       Impact factor: 3.293

10.  On the Pitch Strength of Bandpass Noise in Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners.

Authors:  Maria Horbach; Jesko L Verhey; Jan Hots
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2018 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.