Sensitivity to Envelope Interaural Time Differences at High Modulation Rates

Sensitivity to interaural time differences (ITDs) conveyed in the temporal fine structure of low-frequency tones and the modulated envelopes of high-frequency sounds are considered comparable, particularly for envelopes shaped to transmit similar fidelity of temporal information normally present for low-frequency sounds. Nevertheless, discrimination performance for envelope modulation rates above a few hundred Hertz is reported to be poor—to the point of discrimination thresholds being unattainable—compared with the much higher (>1,000 Hz) limit for low-frequency ITD sensitivity, suggesting the presence of a low-pass filter in the envelope domain. Further, performance for identical modulation rates appears to decline with increasing carrier frequency, supporting the view that the low-pass characteristics observed for envelope ITD processing is carrier-frequency dependent. Here, we assessed listeners’ sensitivity to ITDs conveyed in pure tones and in the modulated envelopes of high-frequency tones. ITD discrimination for the modulated high-frequency tones was measured as a function of both modulation rate and carrier frequency. Some well-trained listeners appear able to discriminate ITDs extremely well, even at modulation rates well beyond 500 Hz, for 4-kHz carriers. For one listener, thresholds were even obtained for a modulation rate of 800 Hz. The highest modulation rate for which thresholds could be obtained declined with increasing carrier frequency for all listeners. At 10 kHz, the highest modulation rate at which thresholds could be obtained was 600 Hz. The upper limit of sensitivity to ITDs conveyed in the envelope of high-frequency modulated sounds appears to be higher than previously considered.

[1]  R. Litovsky,et al.  Limitations on Monaural and Binaural Temporal Processing in Bilateral Cochlear Implant Listeners , 2015, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[2]  Yoojin Chung,et al.  Neural ITD coding with bilateral cochlear implants: effect of binaurally coherent jitter. , 2012, Journal of neurophysiology.

[3]  Volker Hohmann,et al.  The effect of overall level on sensitivity to interaural differences of time and level at high frequencies. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[5]  Ying-Yee Kong,et al.  Temporal pitch perception at high rates in cochlear implants. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  B. Moore,et al.  Basic Aspects of Hearing , 2013, Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology.

[7]  R. Tyler,et al.  Speech perception, localization, and lateralization with bilateral cochlear implants. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  G Christopher Stecker,et al.  Temporal weighting functions for interaural time and level differences. IV. Effects of carrier frequency. , 2014, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Torsten Dau,et al.  Experimental Evidence for a Cochlear Source of the Precedence Effect , 2013, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[10]  B C Moore,et al.  Temporal modulation transfer functions obtained using sinusoidal carriers with normally hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  Blake S. Wilson,et al.  Engineering Design of Cochlear Implants , 2004 .

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

[13]  D. McFadden,et al.  Lateralization of high frequencies based on interaural time differences. , 1976, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  Leslie R Bernstein,et al.  Enhancing sensitivity to interaural delays at high frequencies by using "transposed stimuli". , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  Effects of center frequency and rate on the sensitivity to interaural delay in high-frequency click trains. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  G. Henning Detectability of interaural delay in high-frequency complex waveforms. , 1974, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  Brian R Glasberg,et al.  Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data , 1990, Hearing Research.

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

[19]  R. Carlyon,et al.  Relationships between auditory nerve activity and temporal pitch perception in cochlear implant users. , 2013, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[20]  Piotr Majdak,et al.  Effects of envelope shape on interaural envelope delay sensitivity in acoustic and electric hearing. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  Mathias Dietz,et al.  Emphasis of spatial cues in the temporal fine structure during the rising segments of amplitude-modulated sounds , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[22]  Ervin R. Hafter,et al.  Discrimination of interaural delays in complex waveforms: Spectral effects , 1981 .

[23]  Michiel W. H. Remme,et al.  Subthreshold resonance properties contribute to the efficient coding of auditory spatial cues , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  J. C. Middlebrooks,et al.  Listener weighting of cues for lateral angle: the duplex theory of sound localization revisited. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  Leslie R Bernstein,et al.  Sensitivity to envelope-based interaural delays at high frequencies: center frequency affects the envelope rate-limitation. , 2014, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  Jessica J. M. Monaghan,et al.  Factors affecting the use of envelope interaural time differences in reverberation. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  Volker Hohmann,et al.  Comparing the effect of pause duration on threshold interaural time differences between exponential and squared-sine envelopes (L). , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  W. Baumgartner,et al.  Effects of interaural time differences in fine structure and envelope on lateral discrimination in electric hearing. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[29]  R. Carlyon,et al.  Limitations on rate discrimination. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[30]  Kohlrausch,et al.  The influence of carrier level and frequency on modulation and beat-detection thresholds for sinusoidal carriers , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  H. S. Colburn,et al.  An auditory‐nerve model for interaural time discrimination of high‐frequency complex stimuli , 1976 .

[32]  Robert V Shannon,et al.  Training improves cochlear implant rate discrimination on a psychophysical task. , 2014, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  Margaret Barnes-Davies,et al.  Kv1 currents mediate a gradient of principal neuron excitability across the tonotopic axis in the rat lateral superior olive , 2004, The European journal of neuroscience.

[34]  Andrew J Oxenham,et al.  Correct tonotopic representation is necessary for complex pitch perception. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[35]  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.

[36]  Leslie R Bernstein,et al.  Lateralization produced by envelope-based interaural temporal disparities of high-frequency, raised-sine stimuli: empirical data and modeling. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  Rainer Hartmann,et al.  Discharge patterns of cat primary auditory fibers with electrical stimulation of the cochlea , 1984, Hearing Research.

[38]  Piotr Majdak,et al.  Binaural jitter improves interaural time-difference sensitivity of cochlear implantees at high pulse rates , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[39]  Piotr Majdak,et al.  Lateralization discrimination of interaural time delays in four-pulse sequences in electric and acoustic hearing. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  C Trahiotis,et al.  Detection of interaural delay in high-frequency sinusoidally amplitude-modulated tones, two-tone complexes, and bands of noise. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[41]  Colette M McKay,et al.  The upper limit of temporal pitch for cochlear-implant listeners: stimulus duration, conditioner pulses, and the number of electrodes stimulated. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[42]  Jing Xia,et al.  Isolating mechanisms that influence measures of the precedence effect: theoretical predictions and behavioral tests. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[43]  G. C. Stecker,et al.  Temporal weighting functions for interaural time and level differences. II. The effect of binaurally synchronous temporal jitter. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[44]  J. Zwislocki,et al.  Just Noticeable Differences in Dichotic Phase , 1956 .

[45]  T. Yin,et al.  Responses to amplitude-modulated tones in the auditory nerve of the cat. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[46]  Piotr Majdak,et al.  Enhancing sensitivity to interaural time differences at high modulation rates by introducing temporal jitter. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[47]  Richard Van Hoesel Binaural jitter with cochlear implants, improved interaural time-delay sensitivity, and normal hearing , 2008 .

[48]  R. G. Klumpp,et al.  Some Measurements of Interaural Time Difference Thresholds , 1956 .

[49]  Volker Hohmann,et al.  The influence of different segments of the ongoing envelope on sensitivity to interaural time delays. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.