Masking by harmonic complexes in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus)

Marjorie R. Leek, Micheal L. Dent, Robert J. Dooling

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In humans, masking by harmonic complexes is dependent not only on the frequency content of the masker, but also its phase spectrum. Complexes that have highly modulated temporal waveforms due to the selection of their component phases usually provide less masking than those with flatter temporal envelopes. Moreover, harmonic complexes that are created with negative Schroeder phases (component phases monotonically decreasing with increasing harmonic frequency) may provide more masking than those created with positive schroeder phases (monotonically increasing phase), even though both temporal envelopes are equally flat. To date, there has been little comparative work on the masking effectiveness of harmonic complexes. Using operant conditioning and the method of constant stimuli, masking of pure tones by harmonic complexes was examined in budgerigars at several different masker levels for complexes constructed with two different fundamental frequencies. In contrast to humans, thresholds in budgerigars differed very little for the two Schroeder-phase waveforms. Moreover, when there was a difference in masking by these two waveforms, the positive Schroeder was the more effective masker - the reverse of that described for humans. Control experiments showed that phase selection was relevant to the masking ability of harmonic complexes in budgerigars. Release from masking occurred when the components were in coherent phase, compared with a complex with random phases selected for each component. It is suggested that these psychoacoustic differences may emerge from structural and functional differences between the avian and mammalian peripheral auditory systems involving traveling wave mechanics and spectral tuning characteristics. (C) 2000 Acoustical Society of America.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1737-1744
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of the Acoustical Society of America
Volume107
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2000

Fingerprint

masking
harmonics
waveforms
envelopes
psychoacoustics
Harmonics
Masking
conditioning
traveling waves
stimuli
tuning
thresholds

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Acoustics and Ultrasonics

Cite this

Masking by harmonic complexes in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus). / Leek, Marjorie R.; Dent, Micheal L.; Dooling, Robert J.

In: Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol. 107, No. 3, 03.2000, p. 1737-1744.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Leek, Marjorie R. ; Dent, Micheal L. ; Dooling, Robert J. / Masking by harmonic complexes in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus). In: Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2000 ; Vol. 107, No. 3. pp. 1737-1744.
@article{9d943e573d9f483ba77db91381156c40,
title = "Masking by harmonic complexes in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus)",
abstract = "In humans, masking by harmonic complexes is dependent not only on the frequency content of the masker, but also its phase spectrum. Complexes that have highly modulated temporal waveforms due to the selection of their component phases usually provide less masking than those with flatter temporal envelopes. Moreover, harmonic complexes that are created with negative Schroeder phases (component phases monotonically decreasing with increasing harmonic frequency) may provide more masking than those created with positive schroeder phases (monotonically increasing phase), even though both temporal envelopes are equally flat. To date, there has been little comparative work on the masking effectiveness of harmonic complexes. Using operant conditioning and the method of constant stimuli, masking of pure tones by harmonic complexes was examined in budgerigars at several different masker levels for complexes constructed with two different fundamental frequencies. In contrast to humans, thresholds in budgerigars differed very little for the two Schroeder-phase waveforms. Moreover, when there was a difference in masking by these two waveforms, the positive Schroeder was the more effective masker - the reverse of that described for humans. Control experiments showed that phase selection was relevant to the masking ability of harmonic complexes in budgerigars. Release from masking occurred when the components were in coherent phase, compared with a complex with random phases selected for each component. It is suggested that these psychoacoustic differences may emerge from structural and functional differences between the avian and mammalian peripheral auditory systems involving traveling wave mechanics and spectral tuning characteristics. (C) 2000 Acoustical Society of America.",
author = "Leek, {Marjorie R.} and Dent, {Micheal L.} and Dooling, {Robert J.}",
year = "2000",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1121/1.428455",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "107",
pages = "1737--1744",
journal = "Journal of the Acoustical Society of America",
issn = "0001-4966",
publisher = "Acoustical Society of America",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Masking by harmonic complexes in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus)

AU - Leek, Marjorie R.

AU - Dent, Micheal L.

AU - Dooling, Robert J.

PY - 2000/3

Y1 - 2000/3

N2 - In humans, masking by harmonic complexes is dependent not only on the frequency content of the masker, but also its phase spectrum. Complexes that have highly modulated temporal waveforms due to the selection of their component phases usually provide less masking than those with flatter temporal envelopes. Moreover, harmonic complexes that are created with negative Schroeder phases (component phases monotonically decreasing with increasing harmonic frequency) may provide more masking than those created with positive schroeder phases (monotonically increasing phase), even though both temporal envelopes are equally flat. To date, there has been little comparative work on the masking effectiveness of harmonic complexes. Using operant conditioning and the method of constant stimuli, masking of pure tones by harmonic complexes was examined in budgerigars at several different masker levels for complexes constructed with two different fundamental frequencies. In contrast to humans, thresholds in budgerigars differed very little for the two Schroeder-phase waveforms. Moreover, when there was a difference in masking by these two waveforms, the positive Schroeder was the more effective masker - the reverse of that described for humans. Control experiments showed that phase selection was relevant to the masking ability of harmonic complexes in budgerigars. Release from masking occurred when the components were in coherent phase, compared with a complex with random phases selected for each component. It is suggested that these psychoacoustic differences may emerge from structural and functional differences between the avian and mammalian peripheral auditory systems involving traveling wave mechanics and spectral tuning characteristics. (C) 2000 Acoustical Society of America.

AB - In humans, masking by harmonic complexes is dependent not only on the frequency content of the masker, but also its phase spectrum. Complexes that have highly modulated temporal waveforms due to the selection of their component phases usually provide less masking than those with flatter temporal envelopes. Moreover, harmonic complexes that are created with negative Schroeder phases (component phases monotonically decreasing with increasing harmonic frequency) may provide more masking than those created with positive schroeder phases (monotonically increasing phase), even though both temporal envelopes are equally flat. To date, there has been little comparative work on the masking effectiveness of harmonic complexes. Using operant conditioning and the method of constant stimuli, masking of pure tones by harmonic complexes was examined in budgerigars at several different masker levels for complexes constructed with two different fundamental frequencies. In contrast to humans, thresholds in budgerigars differed very little for the two Schroeder-phase waveforms. Moreover, when there was a difference in masking by these two waveforms, the positive Schroeder was the more effective masker - the reverse of that described for humans. Control experiments showed that phase selection was relevant to the masking ability of harmonic complexes in budgerigars. Release from masking occurred when the components were in coherent phase, compared with a complex with random phases selected for each component. It is suggested that these psychoacoustic differences may emerge from structural and functional differences between the avian and mammalian peripheral auditory systems involving traveling wave mechanics and spectral tuning characteristics. (C) 2000 Acoustical Society of America.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034052979&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034052979&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1121/1.428455

DO - 10.1121/1.428455

M3 - Article

C2 - 10738825

AN - SCOPUS:0034052979

VL - 107

SP - 1737

EP - 1744

JO - Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

JF - Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

SN - 0001-4966

IS - 3

ER -