Tonality of low-frequency synthesized piano tones

• Autorzy: Cuddy L. L. , Russo F. A. , Galembo A.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The influences of inharmonicity and bandwidth on sensitivity to tonality in the lowfrequency range (A0 to G#1) were tested in a listening experiment. Participants were presented a key-defining context (do-mi-do-so) and were asked to rate the goodness of fit of probe tones to the context. Probe tones were the 12 tones of the chromatic scale beginning on do. The set of 12 ratings, called the probe-tone profile, was compared to an established standardized profile for the Western tonal hierarchy. Prior research employing this method with real (sampled) piano tones has suggested that sensitivity to tonality is influenced by inharmonicity, particularly in the lowest octaves of the piano where inharmonicity levels are substantially above the detection threshold. In the present experiment, sensitivity to tonality was tested using synthesized piano-like tones that were either harmonic or inharmonic. Participants were tested in either a broadband (no filtering) or low-pass (low-pass filtered at 1 KHz) condition. Sensitivity to tonality was highest in the broadband harmonic condition followed by the broadband inharmonic condition. No sensitivity to tonality was found for the low-pass conditions; rather, for both harmonic and inharmonic tones, participants rated probe tones as increasingly good fit as pitch distance from do decreased.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

musical pitch; tonality; probe-tone technique; inharmonicity; piano acoustics

• Wydawca: Instytut Podstawowych Problemów Techniki PAN ; Komitet Akustyki PAN ; Polskie Towarzystwo Akustyczne
• Czasopismo: Archives of Acoustics
• Rocznik: 2007
• Tom: Vol. 32, No. 3
• Strony: 541--550
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 26 poz., rys.

Twórcy

autor

Cuddy L. L.

• (1)Queen’s University Department of Psychology, Kingston, Canada

autor

Russo F. A.

• Ryerson University Department of Psychology, Toronto, Canada

autor

Galembo A.

• Russian Academy of Sciences Setchenov Institute of Evolutionary Physiology and Biochemistry, St. Petersburg, Russia

Bibliografia

• [1] KRUMHANSL C. L., Cognitive foundations of musical pitch, Oxford University Press, New York 1990.
• [2] LERDAHL F., Tonal pitch space, Oxford University Press, New York 2001.
• [3] PISTON W., Harmony, 5th ed., W.W. Norton & Company, Inc, New York 1987.
• [4] KRUMHANSL C. L., Rhythm and pitch in music cognition, Psychological Bulletin, 126, 1, 159–179 (2000).
• [5] KRUMHANSL C. L., KESSLER E. J., Tracing the dynamic changes in perceived tonal organization in a spatial representation of musical keys, Psychological Review, 89, 4, 334–368 (1982).
• [6] RAKOWSKI A., MISKIEWICZ A., Pitch discrimination of low-frequency tones, Proceedings of the 7-th International Conference on Music Perception and Cognition, Sydney, 538-540, 2002.
• [7] RITSMA R. J., Existence region of the tonal residue: Part I, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 34, 9A, 1224–1229 (1962).
• [8] RITSMA R. J., Existence region of the tonal residue: Part II, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 35, 8, 1241–1245 (1963).
• [9] KRUMBHOLTZ K., PATTERSON R. D., PRESSNITZER D., The lower limit of pitch as determined by rate discrimination, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 108, 3, 1170–1180 (2000).
• [10] PRESSNITZER D., PATTERSON R. D., KRUMBHOLZ K., The lower limit of melodic pitch, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 109, 5, 2074–2084 (2001).
• [11] FLETCHER H., Normal vibration frequencies of a stiff piano string, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 36, 1, 203–209 (1964).
• [12] JÄRVELÄINEN H., VALIMAKI V., KARJALAINEN M., Audibility of the timbral effects of inharmonicity in stringed instrument tones, Acoustics Research Letters Online, 2, 3, 79–84 (2001).
• [13] RUSSO F. A., CUDDY L. L., GALEMBO A., THOMPSON W. F., Sensitivity to tonality across the pitch range, Perception, 36, in press.
• [14] TERHARDT E., STOLL G., SEEWANN M., Pitch of complex signals according to virtual-pitch theory: Test, examples, and predictions, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 71, 3, 671–678 (1982).
• [15] PATTERSON R. D., The effects of relative phase and the number of components on residue pitch, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 53, 6, 1565-1572 (1973).
• [16] SCHOUTEN J. F., RITSMA R. J., CARDOZO B. L., Pitch of the residue, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 34, 9B, 1418–1424 (1962).
• [17] TERHARDT E., Pitch, consonance and harmony, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 55, 5, 1061–1069 (1974).
• [18] WIGHTMAN F. L., The pattern-transformation model of pitch, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 54, 2, 407–416 (1973).
• [19] GALEMBO A., ASKENFELT A., CUDDY L. L., RUSSO F. A., Perceptual significance of inharmonicity and spectral envelope in the piano bass range, Acta Acustica, 90, 3, 528–536 (2004).
• [20] SCHUCK O. H., YOUNG R. W., Observations on the vibrations of piano strings, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 15, 1, 1–11 (1943).
• [21] NYVALLA, Soundswell signal workstation, Stockholm, Sweden, 1997.
• [22] RASCH A., HEETVELT V., String inharmonicity and piano tuning, Music Perception, 3, 2, 171–190 (1985).
• [23] CONKLIN H. A., Generation of partials due to nonlinear mixing in stringed instruments, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 105, 1, 536–545 (1999).
• [24] FLETCHER H., BLACKHAM E. D., STRATTON R., Quality of piano tones, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 34, 6, 749–761 (1962).
• [25] SHEPARD R. N., Geometrical approximations to the structure of musical pitch, Psychological Review, 89, 4, 305–33 (1982).
• [26] ROCCHESSO D., SCALCON F., Bandwidth of perceived inharmonicity for physical modeling of dispersive strings, IEEE Transactions in Speech and Audio Processing, 7, 5, 597–601 (1999).