Skip to main content

A Temporal Code for Huggins Pitch?

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
  • 1335 Accesses

Abstract

Periodic sound waves produce periodic patterns of phase-locked activity in the auditory nerve and in nuclei throughout the auditory brainstem. It has been suggested that this temporal code is the basis for our sensation of pitch. However, some stimuli evoke a pitch without monaural pitch information (temporal or otherwise). Huggins pitch (HP) is produced by presenting the same wideband noise to both ears except for a narrow frequency band which is interaurally decorrelated. “Complex” HP (CHP) can be produced by generating HP components at harmonic frequencies. The frequency-following response (FFR) is an electrophysiological measure of phase locking in the upper brainstem. The FFR was measured for a 300-Hz CHP in a 0-2 kHz noise, and a perceptually similar stimulus comprising a series of narrowband noise (NBN) harmonics of a 300-Hz fundamental presented in a 0-2 kHz background noise at different relative levels of NBN and background. The FFR measurements revealed a phase-locked response to the NBN harmonics, even for NBN stimuli with pitch salience below that of the CHP. Little evidence for phase locking to the CHP stimulus was found, although there was a weak component in the FFR at 300 Hz relative to neighboring frequencies. The results suggest that HP is not associated with an enhanced temporal response to the decorrelated frequency band at the level of the upper brainstem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Akeroyd MA, Moore BCJ, Moore GA (2001) Melody recognition using three types of dichotic-pitch stimulus. J Acoust Soc Am 110:1498–1504

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Attneave F, Olson RK (1971) Pitch as a medium: a new approach to psychophysical scaling. Am J Psychol 84:147–166

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bilsen FA (1977) Pitch of noise signals: evidence for a central spectrum. J Acoust Soc Am 61:150–161

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cramer EM, Huggins WH (1958) Creation of pitch through binaural interaction. J Acoust Soc Am 30:413–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Cheveigné A (1998) Cancellation model of pitch perception. J Acoust Soc Am 103:1261–1271

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Durlach NI (1963) Equalization and cancellation theory of binaural masking-level differences. J Acoust Soc Am 35:1206–1218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gockel HE, Carlyon RP, Plack CJ (2009) Pitch discrimination interference between binaural and monaural or diotic pitches. J Acoust Soc Am 126:281–290

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg S, Marsh JT, Brown WS, Smith JC (1987) Neural temporal coding of low pitch. I. Human frequency-following responses to complex tones. Hear Res 25:91–114

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnan A (2006) Frequency-following Response. In: Burkhard RF, Don M, Eggermont J (eds) Auditory evoked potentials: basic principles and clinical application. Lipincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Licklider JCR (1951) A duplex theory of pitch perception. Experientia 7:128–133

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Meddis R, O’Mard L (1997) A unitary model of pitch perception. J Acoust Soc Am 102:1811–1820

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Oxenham AJ, Bernstein JGW, Penagos H (2004) Correct tonotopic representation is necessary for complex pitch perception. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 101:1421–1425

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Patterson RD (1994) The sound of a sinusoid: time-interval models. J Acoust Soc Am 96:1419–1428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plack CJ, Oxenham AJ, Fay RR, Popper AN (eds) (2005) Pitch: neural coding and perception. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson JR, Krishnan A (2005) Human frequency-following responses to binaural masking level difference stimuli. J Am Acad Audiol 16:184–195

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are most grateful to Dr. Ravi Krishnan for his expert advice and support regarding the recording equipment, the experimental design, and the interpretation of the FFR.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher J. Plack .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this paper

Cite this paper

Plack, C.J., Fitzpatrick, S., Carlyon, R.P., Gockel, H.E. (2010). A Temporal Code for Huggins Pitch?. In: Lopez-Poveda, E., Palmer, A., Meddis, R. (eds) The Neurophysiological Bases of Auditory Perception. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5686-6_18

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics