Literature DB >> 9479768

Pitches of concurrent vowels.

P F Assmann1, D D Paschall.   

Abstract

When two vowels are presented simultaneously, listeners can report their phonemic identities more accurately if their fundamental frequencies (F0's) are different rather than the same. If the F0 difference (delta F0) is large, listeners hear two vowels on different pitches; if the delta F0 is small the vowels are identified less accurately and they do not evoke different pitches. The present study used a matching task to obtain judgments of the pitches evoked by "double vowels" created from pairwise combinations of steady-state synthetic vowels /i/, /a/, /u/, /ae/, and /[symbol: see text]/. One F0 was always 100 Hz; the other F0 was either 0, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, or 4 semitones higher. Experienced listeners adjusted the F0 of a tone complex to assign pitch matches to 50-ms or 200-ms double vowels. For delta F0's up to two semitones, listeners' matches formed a single cluster in the frequency region spanned by the two F0's. When the delta F0 was 4 semitones, the matches generally formed two clusters close to the F0 of each vowel, suggesting that listeners perceive two distinct pitches when the delta F0 is 4 semitones but only one clear pitch (possibly accompanied by one or more weaker pitches) with smaller delta F0's. When the duration was reduced from 200 ms to 50 ms, only a subset of the vowel pairs with a delta F0 of 4 semitones produced a bimodal distribution of matches. In general, 50-ms stimuli were matched less consistently than their 200-ms counterparts, indicating that the pitches of concurrent vowels emerge less clearly when the stimuli are brief. Comparisons of pitch and vowel identification data revealed a moderate correlation between match intervals (defined as the absolute frequency difference between first and second pitch matches) and identification accuracy for the 200-ms stimuli with the largest delta F0 of 4 semitones. The link between match intervals and vowel identification was weak or absent in conditions where the stimuli evoked only one pitch.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9479768     DOI: 10.1121/1.421249

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


  12 in total

1.  The use of confusion patterns to evaluate the neural basis for concurrent vowel identification.

Authors:  Ananthakrishna Chintanpalli; Michael G Heinz
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  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

3.  Effects of age and hearing loss on concurrent vowel identification.

Authors:  Ananthakrishna Chintanpalli; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Effects of age on concurrent vowel perception in acoustic and simulated electroacoustic hearing.

Authors:  Kathryn H Arehart; Pamela E Souza; Ramesh Kumar Muralimanohar; Christi Wise Miller
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2010-08-05       Impact factor: 2.297

5.  Binaural pitch fusion: Pitch averaging and dominance in hearing-impaired listeners with broad fusion.

Authors:  Yonghee Oh; Lina A J Reiss
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Effects of fundamental frequency and vocal-tract length cues on sentence segregation by listeners with hearing loss.

Authors:  Carol L Mackersie; James Dewey; Lesli A Guthrie
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 7.  Pitch, harmonicity and concurrent sound segregation: psychoacoustical and neurophysiological findings.

Authors:  Christophe Micheyl; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2009-09-27       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Pitch representations in the auditory nerve: two concurrent complex tones.

Authors:  Erik Larsen; Leonardo Cedolin; Bertrand Delgutte
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-07-16       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Neural representation of concurrent harmonic sounds in monkey primary auditory cortex: implications for models of auditory scene analysis.

Authors:  Yonatan I Fishman; Mitchell Steinschneider; Christophe Micheyl
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2014-09-10       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Pitch enumeration: failure to subitize in audition.

Authors:  Neil M McLachlan; David J T Marco; Sarah J Wilson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-04-02       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.