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: 03 June 2019 Accepted: 24 July 2019 Published Online: 14 August 2019

  • On the loudness of low-frequency sounds with fluctuating amplitudes

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 146, 1142 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5121700
Carlos Juradoa) and Darío Gordillo
  • Escuela de Ingenierıa en Sonido y Acustica, Universidad de Las Américas, Avenue Granados and Colimes, Quito EC170125, Ecuador
    • Brian C. J. Moore
  • Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EB, United Kingdom
    • more...View Affiliations
    View Contributors
    • Carlos Jurado
    • Darío Gordillo
    • Brian C. J. Moore
    ABSTRACT
    Some environmental sounds have strong amplitude fluctuations that may affect their perceived loudness and annoyance. This study assessed the effect of beat rate (fb) and center frequency (fc) on the loudness of low-frequency beating tones. The loudness of two-tone complexes (TTCs) with fc = 40, 63, 80, and 1000 Hz was matched with that of unmodulated tones (UTs). Frequency differences between the TTC components, corresponding to fb = 1, 2, 5, and 12 Hz, were used. To compensate for the steep decline in hearing sensitivity below 100 Hz, prior to the loudness match, subjects adjusted the relative levels (ΔL) of the TTC components to give maximum beat perception. Twenty-four normal-hearing subjects were tested. The values of ΔL giving best beats were well predicted from the transfer function of the middle ear and the estimated shapes of the auditory filters, assuming that the auditory filter whose output dominated the beat percept was centered somewhat above fc. At the same root-mean-square level and independent of fc, TTCs were perceived as louder than UTs for fb ≤ 2 Hz, had roughly equal loudness to UTs for fb = 5 Hz, and were less loud than UTs for fb = 12 Hz.

    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

    We thank Dr. Torsten Marquardt for his helpful advice on methodological aspects related to the tests. We are also grateful to Juan Vizuete for his help with the apparatus and Juan Velazco and Ismael Cevallos for their help with data collection. Finally, we thank two reviewers for very helpful comments.

    REFERENCES

    1. 1. Alaerts, J., Luts, H., Hofmann, M., and Wouters, J. (2009). “ Cortical auditory steady-state responses to low modulation rates,” Int. J. Audiol. 48, 582–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/14992020902894558, Google ScholarCrossref
    2. 2. Andresen, J., and Møller, H. (1984). “ Equal annoyance contours for infrasonic frequencies,” J. Low Freq. Noise Vib. 3, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/026309238400300301, Google ScholarCrossref
    3. 3. Baliatsas, C., van Kamp, I., van Poll, R., and Yzermans, J. (2016). “ Health effects from low-frequency noise and infrasound in the general population: Is it time to listen? A systematic review of observational studies,” Sci. Total Environ. 557–558, 163–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.03.065, Google ScholarCrossref
    4. 4. Bauch, H. (1956). “ Die Bedeutung der Frequenzgruppe für die Lautheit von Klängen” (“On the implications of critical bandwidths for the loudness of complex sounds”), Acustica 6, 40–45. Google Scholar
    5. 5. Bradley, J. S. (1994). “ Annoyance caused by constant-amplitude and amplitude-modulated sounds containing rumble,” Noise Control Eng. 42, 203–208. https://doi.org/10.3397/1.2828357, Google ScholarCrossref
    6. 6. Brainard, D. H. (1997). “ The Psychophysics Toolbox,” Spat. Vis. 10, 433–436. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856897X00357, Google ScholarCrossref
    7. 7. British Society of Audiology (2011). “ Pure-tone air-conduction and bone-conduction threshold audiometry with and without masking: Recommended procedure” (British Society of Audiology, Reading, UK). Google Scholar
    8. 8. Broner, N., and Leventhall, H. G. (1985). “ Annoyance loudness and unacceptability of higher level low frequency noise,” J. Low Freq. Noise Vib. 4, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/026309238500400101, Google ScholarCrossref
    9. 9. Dittrich, K., and Oberfeld, D. (2009). “ A comparison of the temporal weighting of annoyance and loudness,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 126, 3168–3178. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3238233, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    10. 10. Ears II (2019). “ Metrology for modern hearing assessment and protecting public health from emerging noise sources,” European Metrology Programme for Innovation and Research (EMPIR). Google Scholar
    11. 11. Eeckhoutte, M. Van, Wouters, J., and Francart, T. (2016). “ Auditory steady-state responses as neural correlates of loudness growth,” Hear. Res. 342, 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2016.09.009, Google ScholarCrossref
    12. 12. Fastl, H. (1993). “ Loudness evaluation by subjects and by a loudness meter,” in Sensory Research: Multimodal Perspectives, edited by R. T. Verrillo ( Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NY), pp. 199–210. Google Scholar
    13. 13. Fastl, H., and Zwicker, E. (2007). Psychoacoustics—Facts and Models, 3rd ed. ( Springer-Verlag, Berlin), pp. 1–463. Google ScholarCrossref
    14. 14. Gerken, G. M., Bhat, V. K., and Hutchison–Clutter, M. (1990). “ Auditory temporal integration and the power function model,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88, 767–778. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.399726, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    15. 15. Glasberg, B. R., and Moore, B. C. J. (2002). “ A model of loudness applicable to time-varying sounds,” J. Audio Eng. Soc. 50, 331–342. Google ScholarISI
    16. 16. Hellman, R. P. (1985). “ Perceived magnitude of two-tone-noise complexes: Loudness, annoyance, and noisiness,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 77, 1497–1504. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.392044, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    17. 17. Herdman, A. T., Lins, O., Van Roon, P., Stapells, D. R., Scherg, M., and Picton, T. W. (2002). “ Intracerebral sources of human auditory steady-state responses,” Brain Topog. 15(2), 69–86. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021470822922, Google ScholarCrossref
    18. 18. Hochberg, Y., and Tamhane, A. C. (1987). Multiple Comparison Procedures ( Wiley, Hoboken, NJ), pp. 1–450. Google ScholarCrossref
    19. 19. Hongisto, V., Oliva, D., and Keränen, J. (2017). “ Indoor noise annoyance due to 3–5 megawatt wind turbines—An exposure–response relationship,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 142, 2185–2196. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5006903, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    20. 20. Ioannidou, C., Santurette, S., and Jeong, C. (2016). “ Effect of modulation depth, frequency, and intermittence on wind turbine noise annoyance,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 139, 1241–1251. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4944570, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    21. 21. ISO 226 (2003). “Acoustics—normal equal-loudness contours” (International Organization for Standardization, Geneva). Google Scholar
    22. 22. Jurado, C., Gallegos, P., Gordillo, D., and Moore, B. C. J. (2017). “ The detailed shapes of equal-loudness-level contours at low frequencies,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 142, 3821–3832. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5018428, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    23. 23. Jurado, C., and Marquardt, T. (2016). “ The effect of the helicotrema on low-frequency loudness perception,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 140, 3799–3809. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4967295, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    24. 24. Jurado, C., and Moore, B. C. J. (2010). “ Frequency selectivity for frequencies below 100 Hz: Comparisons with mid-frequencies,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128, 3585–3596. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3504657, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    25. 25. Jurado, C., Pedersen, C. S., and Moore, B. C. J. (2011). “ Psychophysical tuning curves for frequencies below 100 Hz,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 129, 3166–3180. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3560535, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    26. 26. Keith, S. E., Michaud, D. S., Feder, K. P., Soukhovtsev, V., Voicescu, S. A., Denning, A. R., Tsang, J., Broner, N., and Richarz, W. G. (2019). “ Wind turbine audibility calculations inside dwellings,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 145, 2435–2444. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5098776, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    27. 27. Krahé, D., Schreckenberg, D., Ebner, F., Eulitz, C., and Möhler, U. (2014). “ Machbarkeitsstudie zu Wirkungen von Infraschall - Entwicklung von Untersuchungsdesigns für die Ermittlung der Auswirkungen von Infraschall auf den Menschen durch unterschiedliche Quellen” (“Development of investigative designs for the determination of the effects of infrasound from different sources on humans”), http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/publikationen/machbarkeitsstudie-zu-wirkungen-von-infraschall (Last viewed January 19, 2019). Google Scholar
    28. 28. Kühler, R., Fedtke, T., and Hensel, J. (2015a). “ Infrasonic and low-frequency insert earphone hearing threshold,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 137, EL347–EL353. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4916795, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    29. 29. Kühler, R., Hensel, J., Koch, C., Bauer, M., and Sander-Thömmes, T. (2015b). “ Auditory cortex activation by infrasonic and low- frequency sound of equalized individual loudness,” in EuroNoise 2015, Maastricht, pp. 2577–2582. Google Scholar
    30. 30. Lavoie, M. C., and Soulodre, G. A. (2006). “ Development and evaluation of short-term loudness meters,” AES Conv. 121, San Francisco, CA, Paper 6889, pp. 1–10. Google Scholar
    31. 31. Lee, S., Kim, K., Choi, W., and Lee, S. (2011). “ Annoyance caused by amplitude modulation of wind turbine noise,” Noise Control Eng. 59, 38–46. https://doi.org/10.3397/1.3531797, Google ScholarCrossref
    32. 32. Leventhall, G. (2003). “ A review of published research on low frequency noise and its effects,” DEFRA Rep., http://westminsterresearch.wmin.ac.uk/4141/1/Benton_2003.pdf (Last viewed February 10, 2019). Google Scholar
    33. 33. Leventhall, G. (2004). “ Low frequency noise and annoyance,” Noise Health 6, 59–72. Google Scholar
    34. 34. Leventhall, G. (2009). “ Low frequency noise. What we know, what we do not know, and what we would like to know,” J. Low Freq. Noise Vib. 28, 79–104. https://doi.org/10.1260/0263-0923.28.2.79, Google ScholarCrossref
    35. 35. Marquardt, T., Hensel, J., Mrowinski, D., and Scholz, G. (2007). “ Low-frequency characteristics of human and guinea pig cochleae,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121, 3628–3638. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2722506, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    36. 36. Moore, B. C. J., Glasberg, B. R., Varathanathan, A., and Schlittenlacher, J. (2016). “ A loudness model for time-varying sounds incorporating binaural inhibition,” Trends Hear. 20, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/2331216516682698, Google ScholarCrossref
    37. 37. Moore, B. C. J., Jervis, M., Harries, L., and Schlittenlacher, J. (2018). “ Testing and refining a loudness model for time-varying sounds incorporating binaural inhibition,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 143, 1504–1513. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5027246, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    38. 38. Moore, B. C. J., Launer, S., Vickers, D., and Baer, T. (1998). “ Loudness of modulated sounds as a function of modulation rate, modulation depth, modulation waveform and overall level,” in Psychophysical and Physiological Advances in Hearing, edited by A. R. Palmer , A. Rees , A. Q. Summerfield , and R. Meddis ( Whurr, London), pp. 465–471. Google Scholar
    39. 39. Moore, B. C. J., Vickers, D. A., Baer, T., and Launer, S. (1999). “ Factors affecting the loudness of modulated sounds,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 105, 2757–2772. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.426893, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    40. 40. Moorhouse, A. T., Waddington, D. C., and Adams, M. D. (2007). “ The effect of fluctuations on the perception of low frequency sound,” J. Low Freq. Noise Vib. Act. Control 26, 81–89. https://doi.org/10.1260/026309207781894851, Google ScholarCrossref
    41. 41. Picton, T. W., John, M. S., Dimitrijevic, A., and Purcell, D. (2003). “ Human auditory steady-state responses,” Int. J. Audiol. 42, 177–219. https://doi.org/10.3109/14992020309101316, Google ScholarCrossref
    42. 42. Schmidt, J. H., and Klokker, M. (2014). “ Health effects related to wind turbine noise exposure: A systematic review,” PLoS One 9, e114183. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114183, Google ScholarCrossref
    43. 43. Seong, Y., Lee, S., Gwak, D. Y., Cho, Y., Hong, J., and Lee, S. (2013). “ An experimental study on annoyance scale for assessment of wind turbine noise,” J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 5, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4821811, Google ScholarCrossref
    44. 44. Thwaites, A., Glasberg, B. R., Nimmo-Smith, I., Marslen-Wilsen, W. D., and Moore, B. C. J. (2016). “ Representation of instantaneous and short-term loudness in the human cortex,” Front. Neurosci. 10, 183. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2016.00183, Google ScholarCrossref
    45. 45. Thwaites, A., Schlittenlacher, J., Nimmo-Smith, I., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., and Moore, B. C. J. (2017). “ Tonotopic representation of loudness in the human cortex,” Hear. Res. 344, 244–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2016.11.015, Google ScholarCrossref
    46. 46. Uppenkamp, S., and Röhl, M. (2014). “ Human auditory neuroimaging of intensity and loudness,” Hear. Res. 307, 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2013.08.005, Google ScholarCrossref
    47. 47. Yoon, K., Gwak, D. Y., Seong, Y., Lee, S., Hong, J., and Lee, S. (2016). “ Effects of amplitude modulation on perception of wind turbine noise,” J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 30, 4503–4509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12206-016-0918-7, Google ScholarCrossref
    48. 48. Zajamšek, B., Hansen, K. L., Doolan, C. J., and Hansen, C. H. (2016). “ Characterisation of wind farm infrasound and low-frequency noise,” J. Sound Vib. 370, 176–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2016.02.001, Google ScholarCrossref
    49. 49. Zenker Castro, F., Barajas de Prat, J., and Larumbe Zabala, E. (2008). “ Loudness and auditory steady-state responses in normal-hearing subjects,” Int. J. Audiol. 47, 269–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/14992020801945501, Google ScholarCrossref
    50. 50. Zhang, C., and Zeng, F. (1997). “ Loudness of dynamic stimuli in acoustic and electric hearing,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 102, 2925–2934. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.420347, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    1. © 2019 Acoustical Society of America.

    Article Metrics

    Views
    376
    Citations
    Crossref 2
    Web of Science
    ISI 1

    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.