Extracting spectral envelopes: formant frequency matching between sounds on different and modulated fundamental frequencies.

The four experiments reported here measure listeners' accuracy and consistency in adjusting a formant frequency of one- or two-formant complex sounds to match the timbre of a target sound. By presenting the target and the adjustable sound on different fundamental frequencies, listeners are prevented from performing the task by comparing the absolute or relative levels of resolved spectral components. Experiment 1 uses two-formant vowellike sounds. When the two sounds have the same F0, the variability of matches (within-subject standard deviation) for either the first or the second formant is around 1%-3%, which is comparable to existing data on formant frequency discrimination thresholds. With a difference in F0, variability increases to around 8% for first-formant matches, but to only about 4% for second-formant matches. Experiment 2 uses sounds with a single formant at 1100 or 1200 Hz with both sounds on either low or high fundamental frequencies. The increase in variability produced by a difference in F0 is greater for high F0's (where the harmonics close to the formant peak are resolved) than it is for low F0's (where they are unresolved). Listeners also showed systematic errors in their mean matches to sounds with different high F0's. The direction of the systematic errors was towards the most intense harmonic. Experiments 3 and 4 showed that introduction of a vibratolike frequency modulation (FM) on F0 reduces the variability of matches, but does not reduce the systematic error. The experiments demonstrate, for the specific frequencies and FM used, that there is a perceptual cost to interpolating a spectral envelope across resolved harmonics.

[1]  P. Lieberman,et al.  Fundamental frequency and vowel perception. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  S. McAdams Segregation of concurrent sounds. I: Effects of frequency modulation coherence. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  C. J. Darwin,et al.  Which harmonics contribute to the estimation of first formant frequency? , 1985, Speech Commun..

[4]  Frequency discrimination of stylized synthetic vowels with two formants. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  J. W. Horst,et al.  Frequency discrimination of stylized synthetic vowels with a single formant. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  P. Lieberman,et al.  Fundamental frequency and vowel perception , 1981 .

[7]  Xavier Rodet,et al.  The Role of FM-induced AM in Dynamic Spectral Profile Analysis , 1988 .

[8]  B. Moore,et al.  Suggested formulae for calculating auditory-filter bandwidths and excitation patterns. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[10]  R. J. Watt,et al.  Mechanisms of interpolation in human spatial vision , 1982, Nature.

[11]  Q Summerfield,et al.  The role of frequency modulation in the perceptual segregation of concurrent vowels. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  R B Gardner,et al.  Grouping of vowel harmonics by frequency modulation: Absence of effects on phonemic categorization , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.

[13]  Thresholds for formant-frequency discrimination of vowels in consonantal context. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  P F Assmann,et al.  Perception of front vowels: the role of harmonics in the first formant region. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  R. Carlyon,et al.  Discriminating between coherent and incoherent frequency modulation of complex tones. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  R. B. Gardner,et al.  Perceptual grouping of formants with static and dynamic differences in fundamental frequency , 1989 .

[17]  D. Kewley-Port,et al.  Fundamental frequency effects on thresholds for vowel formant discrimination. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  Christopher W. Tyler,et al.  How much of the visual object is used in estimating its position? , 1998, Vision Research.

[19]  C. Watson,et al.  Formant-frequency discrimination for isolated English vowels. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  T. M. Nearey,et al.  Identification of resynthesized /hVd/ utterances: effects of formant contour. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  C. M. Marin,et al.  Segregation of concurrent sounds. II: Effects of spectral envelope tracing, frequency modulation coherence, and frequency modulation width. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  C. Darwin,et al.  Effects of frequency and amplitude modulation on the pitch of a complex tone with a mistuned harmonic. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  L. Demany,et al.  The effect of vibrato on the recognition of masked vowels , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[24]  Dennis H. Klatt The perceptual reality of a formant frequency , 1985 .

[25]  D Kewley-Port,et al.  Modeling formant frequency discrimination of female vowels. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  J. W. Horst,et al.  Frequency discrimination of bandlimited harmonic complexes related to vowel formants , 1995 .