Pitch strength of noise-vocoded harmonic tone complexes in normal-hearing listeners

Shofner, William P.; Campbell, Jeannine

doi:10.1121/1.4757697

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been suggested that these apparent species differences in perception could relate to the pitch cues that are available following cochlear filtering ( Cedolin and Delgutte, 2010 ; Shofner and Chaney, 2013 ). In particular, the growing evidence that cochlear bandwidths are broader in many non-human species ( Joris et al, 2011 ; Shera et al, 2002 ), including ferrets ( Alves-Pinto et al, 2016 ; Sumner et al, 2018 ), supports the possibility that they might process pitch cues in different ways from humans, as has been noted previously ( Shofner and Campbell, 2012 ; Shofner and Chaney, 2013 ).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 60%

“…Although psychophysical experiments have demonstrated that humans can extract F0 using either resolved harmonics or unresolved harmonics alone ( Bernstein and Oxenham, 2003 ; Houtsma and Smurzynski, 1990 ; Shackleton and Carlyon, 1994 ), human pitch perception is generally dominated by resolved harmonics ( Ritsma, 1967 ; Shackleton and Carlyon, 1994 ; Shofner and Campbell, 2012 ). Marmosets can also use resolved harmonics to detect F0 changes ( Bendor et al, 2012 ; Song et al, 2016 ), whereas rodents (i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, most animal studies have not directly compared performance across human and non-human species ( Bendor et al, 2012 ; Osmanski et al, 2013 ; Song et al, 2016 ), or have compared them across considerably different behavioural tasks (e.g. Shofner and Campbell, 2012 versus Shofner and Chaney, 2013 ), so differences in task demands might account for any apparent species differences. For example, the pitch difference thresholds of ferrets can differ by orders of magnitude between a go/no-go and 2AFC task ( Walker et al, 2011 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Across-species differences in pitch perception are consistent with differences in cochlear filtering

Walker

Gonzalez

Kang

et al. 2019

eLife

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pitch perception is critical for recognizing speech, music and animal vocalizations, but its neurobiological basis remains unsettled, in part because of divergent results across species. We investigated whether species-specific differences exist in the cues used to perceive pitch and whether these can be accounted for by differences in the auditory periphery. Ferrets accurately generalized pitch discriminations to untrained stimuli whenever temporal envelope cues were robust in the probe sounds, but not when resolved harmonics were the main available cue. By contrast, human listeners exhibited the opposite pattern of results on an analogous task, consistent with previous studies. Simulated cochlear responses in the two species suggest that differences in the relative salience of the two pitch cues can be attributed to differences in cochlear filter bandwidths. The results support the view that cross-species variation in pitch perception reflects the constraints of estimating a sound’s fundamental frequency given species-specific cochlear tuning.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 60%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Across-species differences in pitch perception are consistent with differences in cochlear filtering

Walker

Gonzalez

Kang

et al. 2019

eLife

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, while we argue that marmosets are sensitive to spectral cues in these experiments, it is important to note that we cannot separate a spectral processing scheme in our experiments from a complimentary scheme utilizing temporal fine structure information (see, for example, Oxenham et al, 2004; Shofner and Campbell, 2012). For instance, similar predictions have been obtained whether one uses a harmonic template-based mechanism or one based on the waveform autocorrelation function (Cariani and Delgutte, 1996a,b; Meddis and O'Mard, 1997).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

The Role of Harmonic Resolvability in Pitch Perception in a Vocal Nonhuman Primate, the Common Marmoset (Callithrix jacchus)

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pitch is one of the most fundamental percepts in the auditory system and can be extracted using either spectral or temporal information in an acoustic signal. While pitch perception has been extensively studied in human subjects, it is far less clear how non-human primates perceive pitch. We have addressed this question in a series of behavioral studies in which marmosets, a vocal non-human primate species, were trained to discriminate complex harmonic tones differing in either spectral (fundamental frequency [f0]) or temporal envelope (repetition rate) cues. We found that marmosets used temporal envelope information to discriminate pitch for acoustic stimuli with higher order harmonics and lower f0's and spectral information for acoustic stimuli with lower order harmonics and higher f0's. We further measured frequency resolution in marmosets using a psychophysical task in which pure tone thresholds were measured as a function of notched noise masker bandwidth. Results show that only the first four harmonics are resolved at low f0's and up to sixteen harmonics are resolved at higher f0's. Resolvability in marmosets is different from that in humans, where the first five to nine harmonics are consistently resolved across most f0's, and is likely the result of a smaller marmoset cochlea. In sum, these results show that marmosets employ two mechanisms to extract pitch (harmonic templates [spectral] for resolved harmonics, and envelope extraction [temporal] for unresolved harmonics) and that species differences in stimulus resolvability need to be taken into account when investigating and comparing mechanisms of pitch perception across animals.

show abstract

“…The large number of ERB bands used in the manipulation preserved much of the temporal structure of the original version, including some basic perception of pitch and phrasing (Shofner & Campbell, 2012). However, the replacement of all harmonic structure within bands by noise largely degraded the possibility of identifying instrumental timbres: in practice, all morphology-only variants sounded like a unique noisy instrument playing phrases of the same temporal morphology as the original (Figure 2(c)).…”

Section: Appendix A: Signal Manipulationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Play together, think alike: Shared mental models in expert music improvisers

Canonne

Aucouturier

2015

Psychology of Music

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International audienceWhen musicians improvise together, they tend to agree beforehand on a common structure (e.g. a jazz standard) which helps them coordinate. However, in the particular case of collective free improvisation (CFI), musicians deliberately avoid having such a referent. How, then, can they coordinate? We propose that CFI musicians who have experience playing together come to share higher-level knowledge, which is not piece-specific but rather task-specific: an implicit mental model of what it is to improvise freely. We tested this hypothesis on a group of 19 expert improvisers from the Parisian CFI community, who had various degrees of experience playing with one another. Drawing from the methodology of team cognition, we used a card-sorting procedure on a set of 25 short improvised sound sequences to elicit and represent each participant’s mental model of the CFI task. We then evaluated the similarity between the participants’ models, and used the measure in a nearest neighbour classification algorithm to retrieve clusters of participants who were known to play together. As hypothesized, we found that the degree of similarity in participants’ mental models predicted their degree of musical familiarity with better-than-random accuracy: musicians who played together tended to ‘think’ about improvised music in the same way

show abstract

Pitch strength of noise-vocoded harmonic tone complexes in normal-hearing listeners

Cited by 6 publications

References 19 publications

Across-species differences in pitch perception are consistent with differences in cochlear filtering

Across-species differences in pitch perception are consistent with differences in cochlear filtering

The Role of Harmonic Resolvability in Pitch Perception in a Vocal Nonhuman Primate, the Common Marmoset (Callithrix jacchus)

Play together, think alike: Shared mental models in expert music improvisers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About