Superposition of masking releases

We are constantly exposed to a mixture of sounds of which only few are important to consider. In order to improve detectability and to segregate important sounds from less important sounds, the auditory system uses different aspects of natural sound sources. Among these are (a) its specific location and (b) synchronous envelope fluctuations in different frequency regions. Such a comodulation of different frequency bands facilitates the detection of tones in noise, a phenomenon known as comodulation masking release (CMR). Physiological as well as psychoacoustical studies usually investigate only one of these strategies to segregate sounds. Here we present psychoacoustical data on CMR for various virtual locations of the signal by varying its interaural phase difference (IPD). The results indicate that the masking release in conditions with binaural (interaural phase differences) and across-frequency (synchronous envelope fluctuations, i.e. comodulation) cues present is equal to the sum of the masking releases for each of the cues separately. Data and model predictions with a simplified model of the auditory system indicate an independent and serial processing of binaural cues and monaural across-frequency cues, maximizing the benefits from the envelope comparison across frequency and the comparison of fine structure across ears.

[1]  Israel Nelken,et al.  Responses of auditory-cortex neurons to structural features of natural sounds , 1999, Nature.

[2]  J H Grose,et al.  Some factors affecting the magnitude of comodulation masking release. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  Stephan M A Ernst,et al.  Role of suppression and retro-cochlear processes in comodulation masking release. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  A. Nieder,et al.  Signal detection in amplitude‐modulated maskers. II. Processing in the songbird's auditory forebrain , 2001, The European journal of neuroscience.

[5]  A R Palmer,et al.  Level dependence of cochlear nucleus onset unit responses and facilitation by second tones or broadband noise. , 1995, Journal of neurophysiology.

[6]  I. Winter,et al.  Frequency extent of two-tone facilitation in onset units in the ventral cochlear nucleus. , 1996, Journal of neurophysiology.

[7]  S Buus,et al.  Release from masking caused by envelope fluctuations. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  Ian M. Winter,et al.  Responses of Dorsal Cochlear Nucleus Neurons to Signals in the Presence of Modulated Maskers , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[9]  J W Hall,et al.  Combined monaural and binaural masking release. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  Ray Meddis,et al.  Physiological Correlates of Comodulation Masking Release in the Mammalian Ventral Cochlear Nucleus , 2001, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[11]  S van de Par,et al.  A new approach to comparing binaural masking level differences at low and high frequencies. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  Torsten Dau,et al.  Modeling comodulation masking release using an equalization-cancellation mechanism. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  Christopher J. Plack,et al.  Linear and nonlinear processes in temporal masking , 2002 .

[14]  V. Richards,et al.  Monaural envelope correlation perception. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  A. Kohlrausch,et al.  Binaural processing model based on contralateral inhibition. I. Model structure. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  D. Sinex,et al.  Responses of inferior colliculus neurons to SAM tones located in inhibitory response areas , 2006, Hearing Research.

[17]  S van de Par,et al.  Dependence of binaural masking level differences on center frequency, masker bandwidth, and interaural parameters. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  Benedikt Grothe,et al.  Experience-dependent refinement of inhibitory inputs to auditory coincidence-detector neurons , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[19]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[20]  Joseph W. Hall,et al.  Detection in noise by spectro-temporal pattern analysis. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  B A Wright,et al.  Temporal decline of masking and comodulation masking release. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  I. Winter,et al.  Contralateral inhibitory and excitatory frequency response maps in the mammalian cochlear nucleus , 2006, The European journal of neuroscience.

[23]  M. Liberman,et al.  Cochlear efferent feedback balances interaural sensitivity , 2006, Nature Neuroscience.

[24]  A. Oxenham,et al.  Forward masking: adaptation or integration? , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  Ulrike Feudel,et al.  The role of the auditory periphery in comodulation detection difference and comodulation masking release , 2007, Biological Cybernetics.

[26]  J H Grose,et al.  Effects of flanking band proximity, number, and modulation pattern on comodulation masking release. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  S van de Par,et al.  Binaural processing model based on contralateral inhibition. II. Dependence on spectral parameters. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  B C Moore,et al.  Comodulation masking release as a function of level. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[29]  I. Nelken,et al.  Representation of Tone in Fluctuating Maskers in the Ascending Auditory System , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[30]  Daniel Pressnitzer,et al.  The psychophysics and physiology of comodulation masking release , 2003, Experimental Brain Research.

[31]  L. A. Jeffress,et al.  Masking of Tonal Signals , 1956 .

[32]  N. Viemeister Temporal modulation transfer functions based upon modulation thresholds. , 1979, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  N. Durlach Equalization and Cancellation Theory of Binaural Masking‐Level Differences , 1963 .

[34]  Joseph W. Hall,et al.  Binaural comodulation masking release: effects of masker interaural correlation. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[35]  B C Moore,et al.  Comodulation masking release for various monaural and binaural combinations of the signal, on-frequency, and flanking bands. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[36]  T. Dau,et al.  Characterizing frequency selectivity for envelope fluctuations. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  Jesko L. Verhey,et al.  Peripheral and central aspects of auditory across-frequency processing , 2008, Brain Research.

[38]  J W Hall,et al.  Comodulation masking release (CMR): effects of gating as a function of number of flanking bands and masker bandwidth. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[39]  Torsten Marquardt,et al.  Representation of interaural time delay in the human auditory midbrain , 2006, Nature Neuroscience.

[40]  D M Green On the similarity of two theories of comodulation masking release. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[41]  Ray Meddis,et al.  A model of signal processing in the cochlear nucleus: comodulation masking release , 2002 .

[42]  Jan Rennies,et al.  Influence of envelope distributions on signal detection , 2007 .

[43]  H. Levitt Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[44]  N. Viemeister,et al.  Cues for discrimination of envelopes. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.