Contribution of frequency bands to the loudness of broadband sounds: Tonal and noise stimuli.
Journal
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
ISSN: 1520-8524
Titre abrégé: J Acoust Soc Am
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7503051
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2019
06 2019
Historique:
entrez:
1
7
2019
pubmed:
1
7
2019
medline:
24
9
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Contributions of individual frequency bands to judgments of total loudness can be assessed by varying the level of each band independently from one presentation to the next and determining the relation between the change in level of each band and the loudness judgment. In a previous study, measures of perceptual weight obtained in this way for noise stimuli consisting of 15 bands showed greater weight associated with the highest and lowest bands than loudness models would predict. This was true even for noise with the long-term average speech spectrum, where the highest band contained little energy. One explanation is that listeners were basing decisions on some attribute other than loudness. The current study replicated earlier results for noise stimuli and included conditions using 15 tones located at the center frequencies of the noise bands. Although the two types of stimuli sound very different, the patterns of perceptual weight were nearly identical, suggesting that both sets of results are based on loudness judgments and that the edge bands play an important role in those judgments. The importance of the highest band was confirmed in a loudness-matching task involving all combinations of noise and tonal stimuli.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31255128
doi: 10.1121/1.5111751
pmc: PMC6584171
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3586Subventions
Organisme : NIGMS NIH HHS
ID : U54 GM115458
Pays : United States
Références
J Acoust Soc Am. 2003 Jun;113(6):3306-22
pubmed: 12822803
J Acoust Soc Am. 2006 Dec;120(6):3853-60
pubmed: 17225412
J Acoust Soc Am. 2008 Feb;123(2):963-72
pubmed: 18247899
J Acoust Soc Am. 2008 Jul;124(1):218-26
pubmed: 18646969
Ear Hear. 2008 Dec;29(6):907-22
pubmed: 18685497
J Acoust Soc Am. 1991 Aug;90(2 Pt 1):858-65
pubmed: 1939890
J Acoust Soc Am. 2009 Sep;126(3):951-4
pubmed: 19739706
J Acoust Soc Am. 2009 Dec;126(6):3168-78
pubmed: 20000930
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2011 Jan;73(1):189-208
pubmed: 21258919
Hear Res. 1990 Aug 1;47(1-2):103-38
pubmed: 2228789
PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e50184
pubmed: 23209670
J Acoust Soc Am. 1990 Jul;88(1):149-58
pubmed: 2380443
Trends Hear. 2014 Oct 13;18:null
pubmed: 25315375
J Acoust Soc Am. 2016 Jan;139(1):373-83
pubmed: 26827032
J Acoust Soc Am. 2017 Sep;142(3):1597
pubmed: 28964048
J Acoust Soc Am. 2018 Feb;143(2):943
pubmed: 29495718
J Acoust Soc Am. 2018 May;143(5):2697
pubmed: 29857716
J Acoust Soc Am. 1983 Feb;73(2):652-62
pubmed: 6841805
J Acoust Soc Am. 1981 Aug;70(2):356-69
pubmed: 7288024
Percept Psychophys. 1980 Jul;28(1):85-8
pubmed: 7413416
J Acoust Soc Am. 1994 Jan;95(1):423-34
pubmed: 8120253