Literature DB >> 541278

Scaling of pitch strength.

H Fastl, G Stoll.   

Abstract

Pitch strength of the following equally loud sounds was scaled by magnitude estimation procedures: pure and complex tones, band-pass filtered complex tones, AM-tones, low-pass, high-pass and band-pass noise, comb-filtered noise. AM-noise and Zwicker-tone. At the test frequencies 125, 250 and 500 Hz pure tones were assigned a pitch strength of 100%. Relative to this value spectral pitches reach 100--75%, virtual pitches 50% and noise pitches 25--0% pitch strength. At 125 Hz no consistent data were found for the Zwicker-tone, while at 500 Hz it elicits on the average the same pitch strength as a pure tone (100%). Implications concerning pitch mechanisms would seem to suggest a prevalence of the 'place principle' in comparison to the 'time principle'.

Mesh:

Year:  1979        PMID: 541278     DOI: 10.1016/0378-5955(79)90002-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hear Res        ISSN: 0378-5955            Impact factor:   3.208


  10 in total

1.  Neural representation of pitch salience in the human brainstem revealed by psychophysical and electrophysiological indices.

Authors:  Ananthanarayan Krishnan; Gavin M Bidelman; Jackson T Gandour
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2010-05-10       Impact factor: 3.208

2.  Pitch strength of normal and dysphonic voices.

Authors:  Rahul Shrivastav; David A Eddins; Supraja Anand
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  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

4.  Does a pitch rating method converge on the frequencies within tonal stimuli?

Authors:  Jennifer J Lentz
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-07       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Simulating the effects of spread of electric excitation on musical tuning and melody identification with a cochlear implant.

Authors:  Anthony J Spahr; Leonid M Litvak; Michael F Dorman; Ashley R Bohanan; Lakshmi N Mishra
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2008-07-29       Impact factor: 2.297

6.  Pitch strength decreases as F0 and harmonic resolution increase in complex tones composed exclusively of high harmonics.

Authors:  D Timothy Ives; Roy D Patterson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Processing pitch in a nonhuman mammal (Chinchilla laniger).

Authors:  William P Shofner; Megan Chaney
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2012-09-17       Impact factor: 2.231

Review 8.  Syllabic (∼2-5 Hz) and fluctuation (∼1-10 Hz) ranges in speech and auditory processing.

Authors:  Erik Edwards; Edward F Chang
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2013-09-12       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  On Zwicker tones and musical pitch in the likely absence of phase locking corresponding to the pitch.

Authors:  Hedwig E Gockel; Robert P Carlyon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 1.840

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

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.