Abstract
(full paper in .pdf format)
The 1st
pitch-shift effect describes the relationship between pitch and center
frequency of complex stimuli with equally spaced frequency components and fixed
frequency spacing. The 2nd pitch shift effect describes a drop in
the perceived pitch of a complex stimulus with fixed center frequency, when the
frequency spacing among its components is slightly increased. The present study
demonstrates that the model explaining the 1st pitch-shift effect,
introduced by de Boer (1956, Doctoral
dissertation, Univ. of Amsterdam) and modified here based on Smoorenburg’s
argument (1970, JASA, 48(4/2): 1055-1060), predicts, without further
modification, the second pitch-shift effect as well.
The same model also
predicts that the perceived pitch of a complex stimulus will not always drop
when increasing the frequency spacing among its components, but may rise
depending on the structure of the initial stimulus. To test this
prediction a perceptual experiment was conducted using nine synthesized complex
stimuli. For eight of the stimuli the model predicted a rise in pitch with
increasing frequency spacing while for the ninth stimulus the opposite was
predicted. The results indicate that
a) the pitch of a complex
stimulus and the frequency spacing between its
components do not necessarily have to move in opposite directions and
b) the specific direction of pitch change can be predicted in each case by the
same model that explains the first pitch shift effect.
The proposed single
model is therefore able to predict the pitch of any complex stimulus with
equally spaced components a) regardless of whether it
has resulted from shifting (1st pitch-shift effect) or stretching (2nd
pitch-shift effect) the components of some complex spectrum and b) without the restrictions for fixed frequency spacing (1st pitch
shift effect) or fixed center frequency (2nd pitch-shift
effect). The results of an experiment
testing this more general claim are presented and its implications are
discussed.
|