Advertisement

Optimizing self-organizing timbre maps: Two approaches

IV. From Timbre to Texture
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1317)

Abstract

The effect of using different auditory images and distance metrics on the final configuration of a self-organized timbre map is examined by comparing distance matrices obtained from simulations with a similarity rating matrix, obtained using the same set of stimuli as in the simulations. Two approaches are described. In the static approach, each stimulus is represented as a single multi-component vector. Gradient images, which are intended to represent idealizations of physiological gradient maps in the auditory pathway, are constructed. The optimal auditory image and distance metric, with respect to the similarity rating data, are searched using the gradient method. In the dynamic approach, each input stimulus is represented by a set of spectral vectors.The response patterns are constructed through temporal integration. The onset portions of the stimuli are emphasized using a scaling procedure which operates qualitatively in the same way as lateral inhibition.

Keywords

Spectral Image Auditory Cortex Temporal Integration Gradient Image Distance Metrics 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cosi, P., De Poli, G., & Lauzzana, G. (1994). Auditory modelling and selforganizing neural networks for timbre classification. Journal of New Music Research, 23, 71–98.Google Scholar
  2. De Poli, G., Prandoni, P., & Tonella, P. (1993). Timbre clustering by selforganizing neural networks. In G. Haus & I. Pighi (Eds.), Proceedings of the Xth Colloquio di Informatica Musicale. Milan: AIMI.Google Scholar
  3. Feiten, B., & Günzel, S. (1994). Automatic indexing of a sound database using self-organizing neural nets. Computer Music Journal, 18, 53–65.Google Scholar
  4. Iverson, P., & Krumhansl, C. (1993). Isolating the dynamic attributes of musical timbre. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 94, 2595–2603.Google Scholar
  5. Kohonen, T. (1995). Self-organizing maps. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  6. Leman, M. (1994). Schema-based tone center recognition of musical signals. Journal of New Music Research, 23, 169–204.Google Scholar
  7. Pickles, J. (1982). An introduction to the physiology of hearing. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  8. Ru, P., & Shamma, S. (1997). Representation of musical timbre in the auditory cortex. Journal of New Music Research, 26.Google Scholar
  9. Shamma, S., Vranic, S., & Wiser, P. (1992). Spectral gradient columns in primary auditory cortex: Physiological and psychoacoustical correlates. Advances in the Biosciences, 83, 397–404.Google Scholar
  10. Steiger, H., & Bregman, A. (1981). Capturing frequency components of glided tones: Frequency separation, orientation, and alignment. Perception and Psychophysics, 30, 425–435.Google Scholar
  11. Toiviainen, P. (1996). Optimizing auditory images and distance metrics for self-organizing timbre maps. Journal of New Music Research, 25, 1–30.Google Scholar
  12. Toiviainen, P., Kaipainen, M., & Louhivuori, J. (1995). Musical timbre: Similarity ratings correlate with computational feature space distances. Journal of New Music Research, 24, 282–298.Google Scholar
  13. Van Immerseel, L., & Martens, J. (1992). Pitch and voiced/unvoiced determination with an auditory model. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 91, 3511–3526.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MusicologyUniversity of JyväskyläJyväskyläFinland

Personalised recommendations