Literature DB >> 7790652

Identification of concurrent harmonic and inharmonic vowels: a test of the theory of harmonic cancellation and enhancement.

A de Cheveigné1, S McAdams, J Laroche, M Rosenberg.   

Abstract

The improvement of identification accuracy of concurrent vowels with differences in fundamental frequency (delta F0) is usually attributed to mechanisms that exploit harmonic structure. To decide whether identification is aided primarily by selecting the target vowel on the basis of its harmonic structure ("harmonic enhancement") or removing the interfering vowel on the basis of its harmonic structure ("harmonic cancellation"), pairs of synthetic vowels, each of which was either harmonic or inharmonic, were presented to listeners for identification. Responses for each vowel were scored according to the vowel's harmonicity and that of the vowel that accompanied it. For a given target, identification was better by about 3% for a harmonic ground unless the target was also harmonic with the same F0. This supports the cancellation hypothesis. Identification was worse for harmonic than for inharmonic targets by 3%-8%. This does not support the enhancement hypothesis. When both vowels were harmonic, identification was better by about 6% when the F0's differed by 1/2 semitone, consistent with previous experiments. Results are interpreted in terms of harmonic enhancement and harmonic cancellation, and alternative explanations such as waveform interaction are considered.

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7790652     DOI: 10.1121/1.412389

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


  23 in total

1.  Spatial cues alone produce inaccurate sound segregation: the effect of interaural time differences.

Authors:  Andrew Schwartz; Josh H McDermott; Barbara Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Listening to every other word: examining the strength of linkage variables in forming streams of speech.

Authors:  Gerald Kidd; Virginia Best; Christine R Mason
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Effect of spatial uncertainty of masker on masked detection for nonspeech stimuli.

Authors:  Wei Li Fan; Timothy M Streeter; Nathaniel I Durlach
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  A new approach to sound source segregation.

Authors:  Robert A Lutfi; Ching-Ju Liu; Christophe N J Stoelinga
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 2.622

5.  Target enhancement and noise cancellation in the identification of a rudimentary sound source in noise.

Authors:  Robert A Lutfi; Ching-Ju Liu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Phase effects in masking by harmonic complexes: detection of bands of speech-shaped noise.

Authors:  Mickael L D Deroche; John F Culling; Monita Chatterjee
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  The role of pitch and harmonic cancellation when listening to speech in harmonic background sounds.

Authors:  Daniel R Guest; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  The effect of fundamental frequency contour similarity on multi-talker listening in older and younger adults.

Authors:  Peter A Wasiuk; Mathieu Lavandier; Emily Buss; Jacob Oleson; Lauren Calandruccio
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Speech recognition against harmonic and inharmonic complexes: spectral dips and periodicity.

Authors:  Mickael L D Deroche; John F Culling; Monita Chatterjee; Charles J Limb
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Harmonic template neurons in primate auditory cortex underlying complex sound processing.

Authors:  Lei Feng; Xiaoqin Wang
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-01-17       Impact factor: 11.205

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.