PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 6699293

Frequency and intensity difference limens for harmonics within complex tones.

Abstract

A two-interval, two-alternative forced choice task was used to estimate frequency difference limens (DLs) for individual harmonics within complex tones, and DLs for the periodicity (i.e., number of periods per s) of the whole complexes. For complex tones with equal-amplitude harmonics, the DLs for the lowest harmonics were small (less than one percent). The DLs increased rather abruptly around the fifth to seventh harmonic. The highest harmonic in each complex was also well discriminated, and the discriminability of a single high harmonic was markedly improved by increasing its level relative to the other components. The DL for a complex tone was generally smaller than the frequency DL of its most discriminable component. The DL for a complex was found to be predictable from the DLs of the harmonics comprising the complex, using a formula derived by Goldstein [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 54, 1496-1516 (1973)] from his optimum processor theory for the formation of the pitch of complex tones. The DL for a complex is sometimes primarily determined by high harmonics, such as the highest harmonic, or a harmonic whose level exceeds that of adjacent harmonics. We also measured intensity DLs for individual harmonics within complex tones. The intensity DLs were smallest for low harmonic numbers, and for the highest harmonic in a complex. An excitation-pattern model was used to determine whether the frequency DLs of harmonics within complex tones could be explained in terms of place mechanisms, i.e., in terms of changes in the amount of excitation at appropriate frequency places. We conclude that place mechanisms are not adequate, and that information about the frequencies of individual harmonics is probably carried in the time patterning of neural impulses.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

B C Moore, B R Glasberg, M J Shailer. 1984. Frequency and intensity difference limens for harmonics within complex tones.. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.390527

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Processing of speech signals for physical and sensory disabilities.

Assistive technology involving voice communication is used primarily by people who are deaf, hard of hearing, or who have speech and/or language disabilities. It is also used to a lesser extent by people with visual or motor disabilities. A very wide range of devices has been developed for people with hearing loss. These devices can be categorized not only by the modality of stimulation [i.e., auditory, visual, tactile, or direct electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve (auditory-neural)] but also in terms of the degree of speech processing that is used. At least four such categories can be distinguished: assistive devices (a) that are not designed specifically for speech, (b) that take the average characteristics of speech into account, (c) that process articulatory or phonetic characteristics of speech, and (d) that embody some degree of automatic speech recognition. Assistive devices for people with speech and/or language disabilities typically involve some form of speech synthesis or symbol generation for severe forms of language disability. Speech synthesis is also used in text-to-speech systems for sightless persons. Other applications of assistive technology involving voice communication include voice control of wheelchairs and other devices for people with mobility disabilities.

Auditory Perception

On the nature of auditory neglect: a reply to Hugdahl and Wester.

We respond to the points raised by Hugdahl and Wester (1994) and argue that a definition of auditory neglect must be based not on consideration of lesion location and extension but on a theoretical understanding of the mechanisms held to underlie neglect in the auditory modality. A first requirement is to describe the phenomenon that has to be explained. An ear extinction effect in dichotic listening, even considered along with the site of brain damage, does not provide sufficient justification for the effect to be attributed to "neglect."

Auditory Perception