The role of acoustic signal partitions in listener categorization of musical phrases.

An experiment was designed to assess the relative contribution to listener categorization strategies of various temporal partitions of the acoustic signal for trumpet, clarinet, and violin. The role of context, whole phrase versus single note, was also evaluated. Analog recordings of three folk-song phrases performed on two clarinets, violins, and trumpets were digitized. A computer program was developed for digital signal editing. Signal edit conditions included normal, time-variant steady-state alone, transients alone, and static steady state with and without transients. Musicians and nonmusicians responded to a matching procedure in which unedited signals of one phrase were choice stimuli and edited signals for two different phrases served as models. Two replications of all possible combinations of instrument, phrase, and edit conditions were presented for a total of 72 items. Two additional groups of musicians and nonmusicians participated in an identical procedure in which the stimuli were single notes extracted from two phrases. Analyses revealed that, for the whole-phrase signals, there was no case in which the means obtained with the "normal" signal and the "time variant steady state alone" signal were statistically different; these means were always statistically higher than the "transients alone" mean. It was concluded that transients were neither sufficient nor necessary for the categorization of trumpet, clarinet, and violin in whole-phrase contexts. The time- variant quasi-steady state was sufficient and necessary for the categorization of trumpet and violin phrases, and it was sufficient but not necessary for the categorization of clarinet phrases. For the single- note stimuli, "transients alone" yielded means statistically equivalent to the "normal" and "time variant steady state alone" means. It was concluded that transients were sufficient, but not necessary, for instrument categorization in single-note contexts. The whole-phrase context yielded significantly higher means than the single-note context; music majors performed the task with greater accuracy than nonmusic majors.

[1]  J. F. Corso,et al.  Timbre Cues and the Identification of Musical Instruments , 1962 .

[2]  M. Metfessel Sonance as a form of tonal fusion. , 1926 .

[3]  S. S. Stevens,et al.  Critical Band Width in Loudness Summation , 1957 .

[4]  Juan G. Roederer,et al.  Introduction to the physics and psychophysics of music , 1973 .

[5]  D. A. Luce Physical correlates of nonpercussive musical instrument tones , 1963 .

[6]  Rudolf E. Radocy,et al.  Psychological Foundations of Musical Behavior , 1979 .

[7]  J. C. R. Licklider Effects of Changes in the Phase Pattern upon the Sound of a 16‐Harmonic Tone , 1957 .

[8]  P. E. Stopp Frequency analysis and periodicity detection in hearing 1971, Plomp and Smoorenburg (Editors). Leiden, Netherlands: Sijthoff Leiden. Cloth, Fl. 60 , 1971 .

[9]  Bertram Scharf,et al.  Loudness Summation and Spectrum Shape , 1961 .

[10]  Carl Stumpf,et al.  Die Sprachlaute: Experimentell-Phonetische Untersuchungen , 1926 .

[11]  D. Hodges Handbook of Music Psychology , 1980 .

[12]  Lloyd A. Jeffress,et al.  Effect of Phase on the Quality of a Two‐Component Tone , 1962 .

[13]  Charles A. Elliott Attacks and Releases as Factors in Instrument Identification , 1975 .

[14]  H. Helmholtz,et al.  On the Sensations of Tone as a Physiological Basis for the Theory of Music , 2005 .

[15]  A M Liberman,et al.  Perception of the speech code. , 1967, Psychological review.

[16]  J. C. Risset,et al.  Computer Study of Trumpet Tones , 1965 .

[17]  R. Plomp,et al.  Effect of phase on the timbre of complex tones. , 1969, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  Leonard B. Meyer Emotion and Meaning in Music , 1957 .

[19]  J. L. Goldstein Auditory spectral filtering and monaural phase perception. , 1967, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  Roger A. Kendall,et al.  Difference Thresholds for Timbre Related to Amplitude Spectra of Complex Sounds , 1975 .

[21]  B. Moore,et al.  Frequency and intensity difference limens for harmonics within complex tones. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  W. Strong,et al.  Synthesis of Wind‐Instrument Tones , 1967 .

[23]  D. Berlyne,et al.  Aesthetics and Psychobiology , 1975 .

[24]  Reinier Plomp,et al.  Aspects of tone sensation , 1976 .

[25]  Melville Clark,et al.  Preliminary Experiments on the Aural Significance of Parts of Tones of Orchestral Instruments and on Choral Tones , 1963 .

[26]  E D Schubert,et al.  Recognition of phase changes in octave complexes. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  Melville Clark,et al.  Duration of Attack Transients of Nonpercussive Orchestral Instruments , 1965 .

[28]  L. Wedin,et al.  Dimension analysis of the perception of instrumental timbre. , 1972, Scandinavian journal of psychology.

[29]  James L. Mursell,et al.  Book and Music Reviews , 1938 .

[30]  Will Earhart The Polk Song Sight Singing Series , 1935 .

[31]  K. Berger Some Factors in the Recognition of Timbre , 1964 .

[32]  M. David Freedman,et al.  Technique for the Analysis of Musical‐Instrument Tones , 1965 .

[33]  E D Schubert,et al.  Use of noise bands to establish noise pitch. , 1968, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[34]  Ralph C. Thayer The Effect of the Attack Transient on Aural Recognition of Instrumental Timbres , 1974 .