Auditory stream segregation thresholds depend on note rate and frequency separation

Evidence

A difference in periodicity between simultaneous complex sounds is a strong segregation cue under quiet, anechoic conditions (Brokx and Nooteboom 1982 ). However, noise and reverberation can both degrade speech intelligibility under realistic “cocktail-party” listening conditions (Nabelek 1993 ; Culling et al. 1994 , 2003 ). Neurophysiological studies of concurrent-sound segregation have concentrated on harmonic complex sounds, with a fundamental-frequency difference (ΔF0), heard under idealized (quiet, anechoic) conditions (e.g., Palmer 1990 ; Keilson et al. 1997 ; Larsen et al. 2008 ). We examine the effects of noise and reverberation, separately, on periodicity-based neural segregation of ΔF0 concurrent vowels, with and without simulated intonation, in the ventral cochlear nucleus (VCN); the first processing station in the auditory brain stem. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5026 (#qualifies, via linked claim)

Categorization

• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim
• XREF: connects to: Complex listening relies on higher-level signal segregation beyond energetic masking; Within-stream pattern comparisons are easier than between-stream comparisons in auditory streaming; Periodicity differences segregate concurrent sounds only under idealized quiet conditions — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5026

Related

• Periodicity differences segregate concurrent sounds only under idealized quiet conditions (similarity 0.92)
• Noise and reverberation damage speech segregation through different neural mechanisms (similarity 0.85)
• Periodicity-based sound segregation begins at the auditory brain stem (similarity 0.84)
• Reverberation and intonation interact to impair auditory segregation while noise acts independently (similarity 0.83)
• Reverberation disrupts periodicity-based speech segregation only when pitch is intonated (similarity 0.83)
• Complex listening relies on higher-level signal segregation beyond energetic masking (similarity 0.81)
• Noise and reverberation distort concurrent speech perception through different mechanisms (similarity 0.80)
• Reverberation hampers speech segregation only for intonated vowels, while noise hampers it regardless. (similarity 0.80)
• High-frequency auditory nerve fibers receive far more broadband noise power than low-frequency fibers. (similarity 0.79)
• Reverberation and natural pitch modulation combine to impair vowel segregation more than either alone (similarity 0.79)

Broader Connections

• Within-stream pattern comparisons are easier than between-stream comparisons in auditory streaming #expands (0.80)
• Periodicity differences segregate concurrent sounds only under idealized quiet conditions #qualifies (0.75) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 5026