Elevation localization rests on spectral recognition of familiar sounds, not spatial cues.

Evidence

However, vertical localization is mainly a spectral/timbral recognition exercise, which is a very different phenomenon. Vertical localization “blur” (uncertainty) is about 17° for an unfamiliar voice, about 9° for a familiar voice and 4° for white noise (Blauert, 1996). Being more precise about vertical angles, the range of angular uncertainty for continuous speech by a familiar person is about 18° horizontally in front, 20° at 30° elevation, 26° at 74° elevation, and 44° at 18° behind directly overhead (Damaske and Wagener, 1969, 207. as reported in Blauert, 1996). These are huge uncertainties, however confident we feel about our perceived localizations. If we have no idea of the spectral content of a specific sound, there is no assurance that we would automatically perceive it at its true elevation. — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 748

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines elevation localization as a timbral recognition task rather than a spatial one — a foundational conceptual distinction in psychoacoustics.
• XREF: connects to: Environmental sounds remain identifiable even when severely spectrally filtered — Almo Farina, Soundscape Ecology: Principles,…, 995; A stationary tone’s frequency alone can shift perceived elevation in the median plane. — Ville Pulkki, Matti Karjalainen, Communication Acoustics- An…, 1452