MENU
  • Scitation Home
SUBMIT YOUR ARTICLE

Thank you

For your interest in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

Check for updates on crossmark
Prev Next
No Access Submitted: 26 December 2001 Accepted: 01 August 2002 Published Online: 25 October 2002

  • Primitive stream segregation of tone sequences without differences in fundamental frequency or passband

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 112, 2074 (2002); https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1508784
Brian Roberts
  • School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, England
    • Brian R. Glasberg and Brian C. J. Moore
  • Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EB, England
    • more...View Contributors
    • Brian Roberts
    • Brian R. Glasberg
    • Brian C. J. Moore
    ABSTRACT
    Peripheral-channeling theorists argue that differences in excitation pattern between successive sounds are necessary for stream segregation to occur. The component phases of complex tones comprising unresolved harmonics (F0=100 Hz) were manipulated to change pitch and timbre without changing the power spectrum. In experiment 1, listeners compared two alternating sequences of tones, A and B. One sequence was isochronous (tone duration=60 ms, intertone interval=40 ms). The other began isochronously, but the progressive delay of tone B made the rhythm irregular. Subjects had to identify the sequence with irregular rhythm. Stream segregation makes this task more difficult. A and B could differ in passband (1250–2500 Hz, 1768–3536 Hz, 2500–5000 Hz), component phase (cosine, alternating, random), or both. Stimuli were presented at 70 dB SPL in pink noise. Dissimilarity in either passband or phase increased discrimination thresholds. Moreover, phase differences raised threshold even when there was no passband difference. In experiment 2, listeners judged moment-by-moment the grouping of long ABA-ABA-… sequences. The measure was the proportion of time a sequence was heard as segregated. The factors that increased segregation were very similar to those that increased threshold in experiment 1. Overall, the findings indicate that substantial stream segregation can occur without differences in power spectrum. It is concluded that differences in peripheral channeling are not a requirement for stream segregation.

    REFERENCES
    Section:
    Previous sectionNext section

    1. 1. Anstis, S., and Saida, S.(1985). “Adaptation to auditory streaming of frequency-modulated tones,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 11, 257–271. Google ScholarCrossref
    2. 2. Attneave, F.(1971). “Multistability in perception,” Sci. Am. 225, 62–71. Google ScholarCrossref
    3. 3. Beauvois, M. W., and Meddis, R.(1996). “Computer simulation of auditory stream segregation in alternating-tone sequences,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 99, 2270–2280. Google ScholarScitation
    4. 4. Bilsen, F. A.(1973). “On the influence of the number and phase of harmonics on the perceptibility of the pitch of complex signals,” Acustica 28, 60–65. Google Scholar
    5. 5. Bregman, A. S.(1978). “Auditory streaming is cumulative,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 4, 380–387. Google ScholarCrossref
    6. 6. Bregman, A. S. (1990). Auditory Scene Analysis: The Perceptual Organization of Sound (MIT, Cambridge, MA). Google Scholar
    7. 7. Bregman, A. S., and Campbell, J.(1971). “Primary auditory stream segregation and perception of order in rapid sequences of tones,” J. Exp. Psychol. 89, 244–249. Google ScholarCrossref
    8. 8. Bregman, A. S., Liao, C., and Levitan, R.(1990). “Auditory grouping based on fundamental frequency and formant peak frequency,” Can. J. Psychol. 44, 400–413. Google ScholarCrossref
    9. 9. Broadbent, D. E., and Ladefoged, P.(1959). “Auditory perception of temporal order,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 31, 1539. Google ScholarScitation
    10. 10. Burns, E. M., and Viemeister, N. F.(1976). “Nonspectral pitch,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 60, 863–869. Google ScholarScitation
    11. 11. Carlyon, R. P., and Datta, A. J.(1997). “Excitation produced by Schroeder-phase complexes: Evidence for fast-acting compression in the auditory system,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 101, 3636–3647. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    12. 12. Carlyon, R. P., Cusack, R., Foxton, J. M., and Robertson, I. H.(2001). “Effects of attention and unilateral neglect on auditory stream segregation,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 27, 115–127. Google ScholarCrossref
    13. 13. Cusack, R., and Roberts, B.(1999). “Effects of similarity in bandwidth on the auditory sequential streaming of two-tone complexes,” Perception 28, 1281–1289. Google ScholarCrossref
    14. 14. Cusack, R., and Roberts, B.(2000). “Effects of differences in timbre on sequential grouping,” Percept. Psychophys. 62, 1112–1120. Google ScholarCrossref
    15. 15. Dowling, W. J.(1973). “The perception of interleaved melodies,” Cogn. Psychol. 5, 322–337. Google ScholarCrossref
    16. 16. Fisher, G. H.(1967). “Measuring ambiguity,” Am. J. Psychol. 80, 541–557. Google ScholarCrossref
    17. 17. Glasberg, B. R., and Moore, B. C. J.(1990). “Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data,” Hear. Res. 47, 103–138. Google ScholarCrossref, ISI
    18. 18. Gockel, H., Moore, B. C. J., and Patterson, R. D.(2002). “Influence of component phase on the loudness of complex tones,” Acta Acust. Acust. 88, 369–377. Google Scholar
    19. 19. Grey, J. M.(1977). “Multidimensional perceptual scaling of musical timbres,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 61, 1270–1277. Google ScholarScitation
    20. 20. Grimault, N., Bacon, S. P., and Micheyl, C.(2002). “Auditory stream segregation on the basis of amplitude-modulation rate,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 111, 1340–1348. Google ScholarScitation
    21. 21. Grimault, N., Micheyl, C., Carlyon, R. P., Arthaud, P., and Collet, L.(2000). “Influence of peripheral resolvability on the perceptual segregation of harmonic complex tones differing in fundamental frequency,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 108, 263–271. Google ScholarScitation
    22. 22. Grose, J. H., Hall, J. W., Buss, E., and Hatch, D.(2001). “Gap detection for similar and dissimilar gap markers,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 109, 1587–1595. Google ScholarScitation
    23. 23. Hartmann, W. M., and Johnson, D.(1991). “Stream segregation and peripheral channeling,” Music Percept. 9, 155–183. Google ScholarCrossref
    24. 24. Houtsma, A. J. M., and Smurzynski, J.(1990). “Pitch identification and discrimination for complex tones with many harmonics,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 87, 304–310. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    25. 25. Iverson, P.(1995). “Auditory stream segregation by musical timbre: Effects of static and dynamic acoustic attributes,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 21, 751–763. Google ScholarCrossref
    26. 26. Kohlrausch, A., and Houtsma, A. J. M. (1992). “Pitch related to spectral edges of broadband signals,” in Processing of Complex Sounds by the Auditory System, edited by R. P. Carlyon, C. J. Darwin, and I. J. Russell (Oxford U.P., Oxford, UK), pp. 81–88. Google Scholar
    27. 27. Levitt, H.(1971). “Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 49, 467–477. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    28. 28. McCabe, S. L., and Denham, M. J.(1997). “A model of auditory streaming,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 101, 1611–1621. Google ScholarScitation
    29. 29. Miller, G. A., and Heise, G. A.(1950). “The trill threshold,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 22, 637–638. Google ScholarScitation
    30. 30. Moore, B. C. J. (2002). “Frequency resolution,” in Genetics and the Function of the Auditory System, edited by L. Tranebjærg, V. Christensen-Dalsgaard, T. Andersen, and T. Poulsen (Holmens Trykkeri, Copenhagen, Denmark), pp. 227–271. Google Scholar
    31. 31. Moore, B. C. J., and Gockel, H.(2002). “Factors influencing sequential stream segregation,” Acta Acust. Acust. 88, 320–333. Google Scholar
    32. 32. Moore, B. C. J., and Oxenham, A. J.(1998). “Psychoacoustic consequences of compression in the peripheral auditory system,” Psychol. Rev. 105, 108–124. Google ScholarCrossref, ISI
    33. 33. Moore, B. C. J., and Rosen, S. M.(1979). “Tune recognition with reduced pitch and interval information,” Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 31, 229–240. Google ScholarCrossref
    34. 34. Moore, B. C. J., Glasberg, B. R., and Baer, T.(1997). “A model for the prediction of thresholds, loudness, and partial loudness,” J. Audio Eng. Soc. 45, 224–240. Google ScholarISI
    35. 35. Ortmann, O.(1926). “On the melodic relativity of tones,” Psychol. Monogr. 35, 1–47 (Whole No. 162). Google ScholarCrossref
    36. 36. Pressnitzer, D., and Patterson, R. D. (2001). “Distortion products and the pitch of harmonic complex tones,” in Physiological and Psychophysical Bases of Auditory Function, edited by D. J. Breebaart, A. J. M. Houtsma, A. Kohlrausch, V. F. Prijs, and R. Schoonhoven (Shaker, Maastrict, The Netherlands), pp. 84–91. Google Scholar
    37. 37. Rice, S. O. (1954). “Mathematical analysis of random noise,” in Selected Papers on Noise and Stochastic Processes, edited by N. Wax (Dover, New York), pp. 133–294. Google Scholar
    38. 38. Ritsma, R. J.(1962). “Existence region of the tonal residue. I,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 34, 1224–1229. Google ScholarScitation
    39. 39. Ritsma, R. J.(1963). “Existence region of the tonal residue. II,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 35, 1241–1245. Google ScholarScitation
    40. 40. Schroeder, M. R.(1970). “Synthesis of low-peak-factor signals and binary sequences with low autocorrelation,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory IT-16, 85–89. Google ScholarCrossref
    41. 41. Shackleton, T. M., and Carlyon, R. P.(1994). “The role of resolved and unresolved harmonics in pitch perception and frequency modulation discrimination,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 3529–3540. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    42. 42. Shera, C. A., Guinan, J. J., and Oxenham, A. J.(2002). “Revised estimates of human cochlear tuning from otoacoustic and behavioral measurements,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99, 3318–3323. Google ScholarCrossref, ISI
    43. 43. Singh, P. G.(1987). “Perceptual organization of complex-tone sequences: A tradeoff between pitch and timbre?” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 82, 886–899. Google ScholarScitation
    44. 44. Singh, P. G., and Bregman, A. S.(1997). “The influence of different timbre attributes on the perceptual segregation of complex-tone sequences,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 102, 1943–1952. Google ScholarScitation
    45. 45. Smoorenburg, G. F.(1972). “Audibility region of combination tones,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 52, 603–614. Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    46. 46. Snedecor, G. W., and Cochran, W. G. (1967). Statistical Methods, 6th ed. (Iowa U.P., Ames, Iowa). Google Scholar
    47. 47. van Noorden, L. P. A. S. (1975). “Temporal coherence in the perception of tone sequences,” doctoral thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands. Google Scholar
    48. 48. Vliegen, J., and Oxenham, A. J.(1999). “Sequential stream segregation in the absence of spectral cues,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 105, 339–346. Google ScholarScitation
    49. 49. Vliegen, J., Moore, B. C. J., and Oxenham, A. J.(1999). “The role of spectral and periodicity cues in auditory stream segregation, measured using a temporal discrimination task,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 106, 938–945. Google ScholarScitation
    50. 50. von Bismarck, G.(1974). “Timbre of steady sounds: A factorial investigation of its verbal attributes,” Acustica 30, 146–159. Google Scholar
    51. 51. Warren, R. M., Obusek, C. J., Farmer, R. M., and Warren, R. P.(1969). “Auditory sequence: Confusion of patterns other than speech and music,” Science 164, 586–587. Google ScholarCrossref
    52. 52. Wessel, D. L.(1979). “Timbre space as a musical control structure,” Comput. Music J. 3, 45–52. Google ScholarCrossref
    1. © 2002 Acoustical Society of America.

    Article Metrics

    Views
    137
    Citations
    Crossref 98
    Web of Science
    ISI 112

    Altmetric

    Please Note: The number of views represents the full text views from December 2016 to date. Article views prior to December 2016 are not included.