Perception of musical timbre by cochlear implant listeners: A multidimensional scaling study

Ear and Hearing

Volumn 34, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 426-436

  Macherey, Olivier ^a,b   Delpierre, Alexia ^c  

^a MRC COGNITION AND BRAIN SCIENCES UNIT   (United Kingdom)

^b AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITY   (France)

^c BRUGMANN UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ASSOCIATION; CASE CONTROL STUDY; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION; HEARING; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMAN; MIDDLE AGED; MUSIC; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOPHYSICS; RECOGNITION; YOUNG ADULT; ARTICLE; IMPLANTATION; PERCEPTION DEAFNESS;

ADULT; AGED; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; CUES; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; MUSIC; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84881547590     PISSN: 01960202     EISSN: 15384667     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31827535f8     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Aramaki, M., Kronland-Martinet, R., Voinier, T., et al. (2006). A percussive sound synthesizer based on physical and perceptual attributes. Computer Music Journal, 302, 32-41.
2. Caclin, A., McAdams, S., Smith, B. K., et al (2005). Acoustic correlates of timbre space dimensions: A confrmatory study using synthetic tones. J Acoust Soc Am, 118, 471-482.
3. Carlyon, R. P., and Long., C. J., Deeks, J. M., et al (2007). Concurrent sound segregation in electric and acoustic hearing. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol, 8, 119-133.
4. Carlyon, R. P., Macherey, O., Frijns, J. H., et al (2010). Pitch comparisons between electrical stimulation of a cochlear implant and acoustic stimuli presented to a normal-hearing contralateral ear. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol, 11, 625-640.
5. Carroll, J. D., & Chang, J. J. (1970). Analysis of individual differences in multidimensional scaling via an n-way generalization of "Eckart-Young" decomposition. Psychometrika, 35, 283-319.
6. Drennan, W. R., & Rubinstein, J. T. (2008). Music perception in cochlear implant users and its relationship with psychophysical capabilities. J Rehabil Res Dev, 45, 779-789.
7. Driscoll, V. D., Oleson, J., Jiang, D., et al (2009). Effects of training on recognition of musical instruments presented through cochlear implant simulations. J Am Acad Audiol, 20, 71-82.
8. Francart, T., van Wieringen, A., Wouters, J. (2008). APEX 3: A multi-purpose test platform for auditory psychophysical experiments. J Neurosci Methods, 172, 283-293.
9. Friesen, L. M., and Shannon., R. V., Baskent, D., et al (2001). Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: Comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am, 110, 1150-1163.
10. Geurts, L., & Wouters, J. (1999). Enhancing the speech envelope of continuous interleaved sampling processors for cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am, 105, 2476-2484.
11. Gfeller, K., and Knutson., J. F., Woodworth, G., et al (1998). Timbral recognition and appraisal by adult cochlear implant users and normal-hearing adults. J Am Acad Audiol, 9, 1-19.
12. Gfeller, K., Witt, S., Woodworth, G., et al (2002). Effects of frequency, instrumental family, and cochlear implant type on timbre recognition and appraisal. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol, 111, 349-356.
13. Gfeller, K., Witt, S., Adamek, M., et al (2002). Effects of training on timbre recognition and appraisal by postlingually deafiened cochlear implant recipients. J Am Acad Audiol, 13, 132-145.
14. Greenwood, D. D. (1990). A cochlear frequency-position function for several species-29 years later. J Acoust Soc Am, 87, 2592-2605.
15. Grey, J. M. (1977). Multidimensional perceptual scaling of musical timbres. J Acoust Soc Am, 61, 1270-1277.
16. Hajda, J. M. (2007). The effect of dynamic acoustical features on musical timbre. In J. Beauchamp (ed). Analysis, Synthesis, and Perception of Musical Sounds: The Sound of Music (pp. 250-271). New York, NY: Springer.
17. Heng, J., Cantarero, G., Elhilali, M., et al (2011). Impaired perception of temporal fine structure and musical timbre in cochlear implant users. Hear Res, 280, 192-200.
18. Ihlefeld, A., Shinn-Cunningham, B. G., Carlyon, R. P. (2012). Comodulation masking release in speech identification with real and simulated cochlear-implant hearing. J Acoust Soc Am, 131, 1315-1324.
19. Iverson, P., & Krumhansl, C. L. (1993). Isolating the dynamic attributes of musical timbre. J Acoust Soc Am, 94, 2595-2603.
20. Kendall, R. A. (1986). The role of acoustic signal partitions in listener categorization of musical phrases. Music Perception, 4, 185-214.
21. Kong, Y. Y., Mullangi, A., Marozeau, J., et al (2011). Temporal and spectral cues for musical timbre perception in electric hearing. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 54, 981-994.
22. Krimphoff, J., McAdams, S., & Winsberg, S. (1994). Caractérisation du timbre des sons complexes. II: Analyses acoustiques et quantification psychophysique. Journal de Physique, 4, 625-628.
23. Kruskal, J. B. (1964). Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis. Psychometrika, 1, 1-27.
24. Laneau, J., & Wouters, J. (2004). Multichannel place pitch sensitivity in cochlear implant recipients. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol, 5, 285-294.
25. Laneau, J., Boets, B., Moonen, M., et al (2005). A flexible auditory research platform using acoustic or electric stimuli for adults and young children. J Neurosci Methods, 142, 131-136.
26. Leal, M. C., and Shin., Y. J., Laborde, M. L., et al (2003). Music perception in adult cochlear implant recipients. Acta Otolaryngol, 123, 826-835.
27. Looi, V., McDermott, H., McKay, C., et al (2008). Music perception of cochlear implant users compared with that of hearing aid users. Ear Hear, 29, 421-434.
28. Luo, X., & Fu, Q. J. (2009). Concurrent-vowel and tone recognitions in acoustic and simulated electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am, 125, 3223-3233.
29. MacCallum, R. C. (1977). Effects of conditionality on INDSCAL and ALS-CAL weights. Psychometrika, 42, 297-305.
30. Marozeau, J., de Cheveigné, A., McAdams, S., et al. (2003). The dependency of timbre on fundamental frequency. J Acoust Soc Am, 114, 2946-2957.
31. McAdams, S., Winsberg, S., Donnadieu, S., et al (1995). Perceptual scaling of synthesized musical timbres: common dimensions, specificities, and latent subject classes. Psychol Res, 58, 177-192.
32. McDermott, H. J. (2004). Music perception with cochlear implants: A review. Trends Amplifi, 8, 49-82.
33. McKay, C. M., O'Brien, A., James, C. J. (1999). Effect of current level on electrode discrimination in electrical stimulation. Hear Res, 136, 159-164.
34. Moore, B. C., & Glasberg, B. R. (1983). Suggested formulae for calculating auditory-filter bandwidths and excitation patterns. J Acoust Soc Am, 74, 750-753.
35. Nelson, P. B., and Jin., S. H., Carney, A. E., et al (2003). Understanding speech in modulated interference: Cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 113, 961-968.
36. Nimmons, G. L., and Kang., R. S., Drennan, W. R., et al (2008). Clinical assessment of music perception in cochlear implant listeners. Otol Neurotol, 29, 149-155.
37. Nogueira, W., Litvak, L., Edler, B., et al (2009). Signal processing strategies for cochlear implants using current steering. EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing, Article Id 531213.
38. Peeters, G., and Giordano., B. L., Susini, P., et al (2011). The Timbre Toolbox: Extracting audio descriptors from musical signals. J Acoust Soc Am, 130, 2902-2916.
39. Pressnitzer, D., Bestel, J., Fraysse, B. (2005). Music to electric ears: Pitch and timbre perception by cochlear implant patients. Ann N Y Acad Sci, 1060, 343-345.
40. Stainsby, T., McDermott, H., McKay, C., et al (2002). Musical timbre perception with cochlear implants: Investigations using forward masking. Proceedings of the 7th international conference on music perception and cognition, Sydney, Australia, 604-607.
41. Stickney, G. S., and Zeng., F. G., Litovsky, R., et al (2004). Cochlear implant speech recognition with speech maskers. J Acoust Soc Am, 116, 1081-1091.
42. Vandali, A. E. (2001). Emphasis of short-duration acoustic speech cues for cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am, 109(5 pt 1), 2049-2061.
43. Young, F. W., Takane, Y., Lewyckyj, R. (1978). A nonmetric multidimensional scaling program with several difference options. Behav Res Meth Instrum, 10, 451-453.
44. Zhu, M., Chen, B., Galvin, J. J. 3rd, et al. (2011). Influence of pitch, timbre and timing cues on melodic contour identification with a competing masker (L). J Acoust Soc Am, 130, 3562-3565.