Interaction Between Pitch and Timbre Perception in Normal-Hearing Listeners and Cochlear Implant Users
Despite their mutually exclusive definitions, pitch and timbre perception interact with each other in normal-hearing (NH) listeners. Cochlear implant (CI) users have worse than normal pitch and timbre perception. However, the pitch-timbre interaction with CIs is not well understood. This study tested the interaction between pitch and sharpness (an aspect of timbre) perception related to the fundamental frequency (F0) and spectral slope of harmonic complex tones, respectively, in both NH listeners and CI users. In experiment 1, the F0 (and spectral slope) difference limens (DLs) were measured with a fixed spectral slope (and F0) and 20-dB amplitude roving. Then, the F0 and spectral slope were varied congruently or incongruently by the same multiple of individual DLs to assess the pitch and sharpness ranking sensitivity. Both NH and CI subjects had significantly higher pitch and sharpness ranking sensitivity with congruent than with incongruent F0 and spectral slope variations, and showed a similar symmetric interaction between pitch and timbre perception. In experiment 2, CI users’ melodic contour identification (MCI) was tested in three spectral slope (no, congruent, and incongruent spectral slope variations by the same multiple of individual DLs as the F0 variations) and two amplitude conditions (0- and 20-dB amplitude roving). When there was no amplitude roving, the MCI scores were significantly higher with congruent than with no, and in turn than with incongruent spectral slope variations. The 20-dB amplitude roving significantly reduced the overall MCI scores and the effect of spectral slope variations. These results reflected a confusion between higher (or lower) pitch and sharper (or duller) timbre and offered important implications for understanding and enhancing pitch and timbre perception with CIs.
Keywordscochlear implant pitch timbre fundamental frequency spectral slope
We are grateful to all the subjects for their participation in this study. Research was supported by Arizona State University.
- ANSI (1994) S1.1-1994, American Standard Acoustical Terminology (R2004). American National Standards Institute, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Galvin JJ, Fu Q-J, Nogaki G (2007) Melodic contour identification by cochlear implant listeners. Ear Hear 28:302–319. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aud.0000261689.35445.20 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Garner WR (1974) The processing of information and structure. Erlbaum, PotomacGoogle Scholar
- Shannon RV, Zeng FG, Kamath V, Wygonski J, Ekelid M (1995) Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues. Science 80. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.270.5234.303
- von Bismarck G (1974a) Timbre of steady sounds: a factorial investigation of its verbal attributes. Acustica 30:146–159Google Scholar
- von Bismarck G (1974b) Sharpness as an attribute of the timbre of steady sounds. Acustica 30:159–172Google Scholar