Pitches of concurrent vowels.

When two vowels are presented simultaneously, listeners can report their phonemic identities more accurately if their fundamental frequencies (F0's) are different rather than the same. If the F0 difference (delta F0) is large, listeners hear two vowels on different pitches; if the delta F0 is small the vowels are identified less accurately and they do not evoke different pitches. The present study used a matching task to obtain judgments of the pitches evoked by "double vowels" created from pairwise combinations of steady-state synthetic vowels /i/, /a/, /u/, /ae/, and /[symbol: see text]/. One F0 was always 100 Hz; the other F0 was either 0, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, or 4 semitones higher. Experienced listeners adjusted the F0 of a tone complex to assign pitch matches to 50-ms or 200-ms double vowels. For delta F0's up to two semitones, listeners' matches formed a single cluster in the frequency region spanned by the two F0's. When the delta F0 was 4 semitones, the matches generally formed two clusters close to the F0 of each vowel, suggesting that listeners perceive two distinct pitches when the delta F0 is 4 semitones but only one clear pitch (possibly accompanied by one or more weaker pitches) with smaller delta F0's. When the duration was reduced from 200 ms to 50 ms, only a subset of the vowel pairs with a delta F0 of 4 semitones produced a bimodal distribution of matches. In general, 50-ms stimuli were matched less consistently than their 200-ms counterparts, indicating that the pitches of concurrent vowels emerge less clearly when the stimuli are brief. Comparisons of pitch and vowel identification data revealed a moderate correlation between match intervals (defined as the absolute frequency difference between first and second pitch matches) and identification accuracy for the 200-ms stimuli with the largest delta F0 of 4 semitones. The link between match intervals and vowel identification was weak or absent in conditions where the stimuli evoked only one pitch.

[1]  C. Darwin,et al.  Effects of onset asynchrony on pitch perception: adaptation or grouping? , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  B. Moore,et al.  Thresholds for the detection of inharmonicity in complex tones. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  B. Moore,et al.  Relative dominance of individual partials in determining the pitch of complex tones , 1985 .

[4]  R D Patterson,et al.  The time course of auditory segregation: concurrent vowels that vary in duration. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  Q Summerfield,et al.  Perception of concurrent vowels: effects of harmonic misalignment and pitch-period asynchrony. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  J. Culling,et al.  Perceptual and computational separation of simultaneous vowels: cues arising from low-frequency beating. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  C J Darwin,et al.  Grouping in pitch perception: evidence for sequential constraints. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  A J Houtsma,et al.  Pitch identification of simultaneous diotic and dichotic two-tone complexes. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  E. Terhardt Pitch, consonance, and harmony. , 1974, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  U. Tilmann Zwicker,et al.  Auditory recognition of diotic and dichotic vowel pairs , 1984, Speech Commun..

[11]  R Meddis,et al.  Modeling the identification of concurrent vowels with different fundamental frequencies. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  Q. Summerfield,et al.  Modeling the perception of concurrent vowels: vowels with different fundamental frequencies. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  A. Bregman,et al.  The perceptual segregation of simultaneous auditory signals: Pulse train segregation and vowel segregation , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  R. Carlyon,et al.  The role of resolved and unresolved harmonics in pitch perception and frequency modulation discrimination. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  P F Assmann The role of formant transitions in the perception of concurrent vowels. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  R. Plomp Pitch of complex tones. , 1966, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  Q Summerfield,et al.  The contribution of waveform interactions to the perception of concurrent vowels. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  C. Darwin,et al.  Perceptual separation of simultaneous vowels: within and across-formant grouping by F0. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  J. Denis McKeown Perception of concurrent vowels: The effect of varying their relative level , 1992, Speech Commun..

[20]  J G Beerends The influence of duration on the perception of pitch in single and simultaneous complex tones. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  Dennis H. Klatt,et al.  Software for a cascade/parallel formant synthesizer , 1980 .

[22]  R. Ritsma Frequencies dominant in the perception of the pitch of complex sounds. , 1966, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.