Sound source mechanics and musical timbre perception: Evidence from previous studies

Music Perception

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 155-168

  Giordano, Bruno L ^a   McAdams, Stephen ^a  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Dissimilarity ratings; Identification; Musical instruments; Sound source perception; Timbre perception

Indexed keywords

EID: 78650231639     PISSN: 07307829     EISSN: 15338312     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1525/mp.2010.28.2.155     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. AGRESTI, A. (1996). An introduction to categorical data analysis. New York: Wiley.
2. American National Standards Institute. (1973). Psychoacoustical terminology. ANSI S3.20-1973 (p. 56). New York: American National Standards Institute.
3. ARAMAKI, M., BAILLÈRES, H., BRANCHERIAU, L., KRONLANDMARTINET, R., & YSTAD, S. (2007). Sound quality assessment of wood for xylophone bars. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 121, 2407-2420.
4. ASHBY, F. G. (1992). Multidimensional models of perception and cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5. ASHBY, F. G., & LEE, W. W. (1991). Predicting similarity and categorization from identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 150-172.
6. ASHBY, F. G., & MADDOX, W. T. (1998). Stimulus categorization. In M. H. Birnbaum (Ed.), Measurement, judgment, and decision making (pp. 251-301). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
7. BERGER, K. W. (1964). Some factors in the recognition of timbre. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 36, 1888-1891.
8. BORG, I., & GROENEN, P. (1997). Modern multidimensional scaling. New York: Springer-Verlag.
9. BREGMAN, A. S. (1990). Auditory scene analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
10. BUKSNOWITZ, C., TEISCHINGER, A., MÜLLER, U., PAHLER, A., & EVANS, R. (2007). Resonance wood [Picea abies (L.) Karst.]-Evaluation and prediction of violin maker' quality-grading. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 121, 2384-2395.
11. CACLIN, A., MCADAMS, S., SMITH, B. K., & WINSBERG, S. (2005). Acoustic correlates of timbre space dimensions: A confirmatory study using synthetic tones. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 118, 471-482.
12. CHARTRAND, J. P., & BELIN, P. (2006). Superior voice timbre processing in musicians. Neuroscience Letters, 405, 164-167.
13. CLARK, M., LUCE, D., ABRAMS, R., SCHLOSSBERG, H., & ROME, J. (1963). Preliminary experiments on the aural significance of parts of tones of orchestral instruments and on choral tones. Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, 11, 45-54.
14. CORTER, J. E., & TVERSKY, A. (1986). Extended similarity trees. Psychometrika, 51, 429-451.
15. EFRON, B., & TIBISHIRANI, R. J. (1993). An introduction to the bootstrap. New York: Chapman & Hall.
16. ELLIOTT, C. (1975). Attacks and releases as factors in instrument identification. Journal of Research in Music Education, 23, 35-40.
17. FANT, G. (1960). Acoustic theory of speech production. The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton & Co.
18. FLETCHER, N. H., & ROSSING, T. D. (1991). The physics of musical instruments. New York: Springer-Verlag.
19. FREED, D. J. (1990). Auditory correlates of perceived mallet hardness for a set of recorded percussive events. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 87, 311-322.
20. GAVER, W. W. (1993). What in the world do we hear? An ecological approach to auditory event perception. Ecological Psychology, 5, 1-29.
21. GFELLER, K., KNUTSON, J., WOODWORTH, G., WITT, S., & DEBUS, B. (1998). Timbral recognition and appraisal by adult cochlear implant users and normal-hearing adults. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 9, 1-19.
22. GIORDANO, B. L., ROCCHESSO, D., & MCADAMS, S. (2010). Integration of acoustical information in the perception of impacted sound sources: The role of information accuracy and exploitability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 462-476.
23. GOLDSTONE, R. L., MEDIN, D., & HALBERSTADT, J. (1997). Similarity in context. Memory and Cognition, 25, 237-255.
24. GREY, J. M. (1977). Multidimensional perceptual scaling of musical timbres. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 61, 1270-1277.
25. HAJDA, J. M. (1995). The relationship between perceptual and acoustical analyses of natural and synthetic impulse signals. Unpublished master's thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.
26. HAJDA, J. M., KENDALL, R. A., CARTERETTE, E. C, & HARSHBERGER, M. L. (1997). Methodological issues in timbre research. In I. Deliege & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), The perception and cognition of music (pp. 253-306). London: L. Erlbaum.
27. HALPERN, A. R., ZATORRE, R. J., BOUFFARD, M., & JOHNSON, J. A. (2004). Behavioral and neural correlates of perceived and imagined musical timbre. Neuropsychologia, 42, 1281-1292.
28. HANDEL, S. (1989). Listening: An introduction to the perception of auditory events. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. HANDEL, S. (1995). Timbre perception and auditory object identification. In B. C. J. Moore (Ed.), Hearing (pp. 425-461). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
30. HANDEL, S. (2006). Perceptual coherence: Hearing and seeing. New York: Oxford University Press.
31. HANDEL, S., & ERICKSON, M. L. (2001). A rule of thumb: The bandwidth for timbre invariance is one octave. Music Perception, 19, 121-126.
32. HANDEL, S., & ERICKSON, M. L. (2004). Sound source identification: The possible role of timbre transformations. Music Perception, 21, 587-610.
33. HERRERA-BOYER, P., PEETERS, G., & DUBNOV, S. (2003). Automatic classification of musical instrument sounds. Journal of New Music Research, 32, 3-21.
34. HUBERT, L. J., & ARABIE, P. (1985). Comparing partitions. Journal of Classification, 2, 193-218.
35. HUTCHINS, C. M. (1981). The acoustics of violin plates. Scientific American, 245, 170-186.
36. IVERSON, P., & KRUMHANSL, C. L. (1993). Isolating the dynamic attributes of musical timbre. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 94, 2595-2603.
37. KENDALL, R. A., & CARTERETTE, E. C. (1991). Perceptual scaling of simultaneous wind instrument timbres. Music Perception, 8, 369-404.
38. KENDALL, R. A., CARTERETTE, E. C, & HAJDA, J. M. (1999). Perceptual and acoustical features of natural and synthetic orchestral instrument tones. Music Perception, 16, 327-364.
39. KRUMHANSL, C. L. (1989). Why is musical timbre so hard to understand? In S. Niélzen & O. Olsson (Eds.), Structure and perception of electroacoustic sound and music (pp. 43-51). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Excerpta Medica.
40. LAKATOS, S. (2000). A common perceptual space for harmonic and percussive timbres. Perception and Psychophysics, 62, 1426-1439.
41. LEVITIN, D. J. (1999). Memory for musical attributes. In P. R. Cook (Ed.), Music, cognition, and computerized sound: An introduction to psychoacoustics (pp. 209-227). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42. LUTFI, R. A. (2007). Human sound source identification. In W. A. Yost, R. R. Fay, & A. N. Popper (Eds.), Auditory perception of sound sources (pp. 13-42). New York: Springer.
43. MAROZEAU, J., DE CHEVEIGNÉ, A., MCADAMS, S., & WINSBERG, S. (2003). The dependency of timbre on fundamental frequency. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 114, 2946-2957.
44. MARTIN, K. D. (1999). Sound-source recognition: A theory and a computational model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
45. MCADAMS, S. (1993). Recognition of sound sources and events. In S. McAdams & E. Bigand (Eds.), Thinking in sound: The cognitive psychology of human audition (pp. 146-198). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
46. MCADAMS, S., & BREGMAN, A. S. (1979). Hearing musical streams. Computer Music Journal, 3, 26-43.
47. MCADAMS, S., CHAIGNE, A., & ROUSSARIE, V. (2004). The psychomechanics of simulated sound sources: Material properties of impacted bars. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115, 1306-1320.
48. MCADAMS, S., & GIORDANO, B. L. (2006). Generalizing timbre space data across stimulus contexts: The meta-analytic approach. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119, 3395.
49. MCADAMS, S., & GIORDANO, B. L. (2009). The perception of musical timbre. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 72-80). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
50. MCADAMS, S., GIORDANO, B. L., SUSINI, P., PEETERS, G., & RIOUX, V. (2006). A meta-analysis of acoustic correlates of timbre dimensions. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 120, 3275-3276.
51. MCADAMS, S., WINSBERG, S., DONNADIEU, S., DE SOETE, G., & KRIMPHOFF, J. (1995). Perceptual scaling of synthesized musical timbres: Common dimensions, specificities, and latent subject classes. Psychological Research, 58, 177-192.
52. PARASKEVA, S., & MCADAMS, S. (1997). Influence of timbre, presence/absence of tonal hierarchy and musical training on the perception of tension/relaxation schemas of musical phrases. In Proceedings of the 1997 International Computer Music Conference (pp. 438-441). Thessaloniki, Greece: International Computer Music Association.
53. POIRSON, E., PETIOT, J. F., & GILBERT, J. (2005). Study of the brightness of trumpet tones. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 118, 2656-2666.
54. SALDANHA, E. L., & CORSO, J. F. (1964). Timbre cues and the identification of musical instruments. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 36, 2021-2026.
55. SAMSON, S., ZATORRE, R. J., & RAMSAY, J. O. (2002). Deficits of musical timbre perception after unilateral temporal-lobe lesion revealed with multidimensional scaling. Brain, 125, 511-523.
56. SANDELL, G. J. (1995). Roles for spectral centroid and other factors in determining "blended" instrument pairings in orchestration. Music Perception, 13, 209-246.
57. SMITH, D. R. R., & PATTERSON, R. D. (2005). The interaction of glottal-pulse rate and vocal-tract length in judgments of speaker size, sex, and age. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 118, 3177-3186.
58. SMITS, R., SERENO, J., & JONGMAN, A. (2006). Categorization of sounds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 733-754.
59. SRINIVASAN, A., SULLIVAN, D., & FUJINAGA, I. (2002). Recognition of isolated instrument tones by conservatory students. In C. Stevens, D. Burnham, G. McPherson, E. Schubert, & E. Renwick (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Music Perception and Cognition, Sidney (pp. 720-723). Adelaide, Australia: Casual Productions.
60. STEELE, K. M., & WILLIAMS, A. K. (2006). Is the bandwidth for timbre invariance only one octave? Music Perception, 23, 215-220.
61. STRONG, W., & CLARK, M. (1967). Synthesis of windinstrument tones. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 41, 39-52.
62. TILLMANN, B., & MCADAMS, S. (2004). Implicit learning of musical timbre sequences: Statistical regularities confronted with acoustical (dis) similarities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 1131-1142.
63. VAN DINTHER, R., & PATTERSON, R. D. (2006). Perception of acoustic scale and size in musical instrument sounds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 120, 2158-2176.
64. VON HORNBOSTEL, E. M., & SACHS, C. (1914). Systematik der Musilcinstrumente. Ein Versuch [An attempt at a systematic classification of musical instruments]. Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 4-5, 553-590.
65. WEDIN, L., & GOUDE, G. (1972). Dimension analysis of the perception of instrumental timbre. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 13, 228-240.
66. WESSEL, D. L. (1973). Psychoacoustics and music: A report from Michigan State University. PACE: Bulletin of the Computer Arts Society, 30, 1-2.