Perceived loudness of time-varying sounds tracks near-peak levels, not averages

Evidence

Section 10.2 introduced a simple loudness model that accurately estimates the loudness perception evoked by many relatively simple signals. Such models have been found to be unable to derive accurate loudness estimates for spectrally complex and time-variant signals. This shortcoming has motivated the design of more advanced loudness models (Florentine et al., 2005), of which two approaches are briefly touched upon next. The first one (Zwicker, 1977) processes the signal in the time domain and produces a continuous signal representing the loudness as a function of time. This approach opens up the possibility of predicting the loudness perception evoked by a time-variant signal based on the peak values in the model output. The second model (Glasberg and Moore, 2002) divides the signal into overlapping time frames and extracts short-term loudness values from each time frame. The model also emulates the temporal integration of loudness between adjacent time frames, and consequently, the model provides accurate estimates for time-variant signals as well, although this estimate is derived by simply averaging across the short-term loudness values. Despite the improved accuracy in predicting perceived loudness of complex signals, the different models cannot yet fully explain loudness perception. — Ville Pulkki, Matti Karjalainen, Communication Acoustics- An…, 1659 (#expands, via linked claim)

Although the peak amplitude provides an unambiguous descriptor of the size of the sine wave, it is rarely appropriate for complex sounds because many of these sounds experience large amplitude changes with time. To demonstrate this point, the waveform of a harmonic sound is shown in Figure 2–4. In this stimulus, the peak (maximum) amplitude does not provide a strong depiction of the overall amplitude characteristics of that sound. The majority of amplitude in this sound is low relative to the peak amplitude. Consequently, it is common to represent the amplitude of a sound using metrics other than the peak amplitude. — Jennifer Lentz, Psychoacoustics- Perception of Normal…, 197 (#qualifies, via linked claim)

Intensity, while it has concrete bearing on what sound will do to the hearing apparatus, is not the same metric as perceived loudness, which doubles with every ten-decibel increase, so that going from 40 to 50 decibels equals a rise of 100 percent. — George Michelsen Foy, Zero Decibels, 53 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim
• XREF: connects to: Two competing loudness models predict time-variant loudness by peak tracking or frame averaging — Ville Pulkki, Matti Karjalainen, Communication Acoustics- An…, 1659; Perceived loudness does not map one-to-one onto acoustic amplitude — David M. Howard, Jamie Angus, Acoustics and Psychoacoustics, 616; Perceived loudness and physical sound intensity follow different, non-intuitive mathematical scales — George Michelsen Foy, Zero Decibels: The Quest for Absolute…, 53 (+6 more)

Related

• Two competing loudness models predict time-variant loudness by peak tracking or frame averaging (similarity 0.90)
• Sound level meters trade average level against tracking speed via time response. (similarity 0.88)
• Peak amplitude misrepresents complex sounds with varying amplitude (similarity 0.87)
• A simple high-pass filter can replace elaborate loudness models (similarity 0.87)
• Static loudness models fail on time-variant sounds, motivating frame-based temporal integration models (similarity 0.86)
• Long-term averaging obscures transient attack and release sounds (similarity 0.85)
• Perceived loudness of time-varying sounds is set by short-time peak values. (similarity 0.85)
• Perceived loudness does not map one-to-one onto acoustic amplitude (similarity 0.85)
• Time-varying sound loudness is set by integrated loudness peaks, not moment-to-moment level (similarity 0.85)
• Loudness is perceptual and unmeasurable directly, while intensity is acoustic and directly quantifiable (similarity 0.84)
• Loudness depends on more than physical sound intensity alone (similarity 0.84)
• Loudness growth with intensity requires experimental quantification, not intuition (similarity 0.83)
• Loudness depends on frequency, angle, duration, and envelope, not just level (similarity 0.83)
• Loudness scales with frequency squared, requiring large amplitude at low frequencies (similarity 0.83)
• Loudness perception involves central mechanisms beyond cochlear vibration (similarity 0.83)

Broader Connections

• Two competing loudness models predict time-variant loudness by peak tracking or frame averaging #expands (0.95) — Ville Pulkki, Matti Karjalainen, Communication Acoustics- An…, 1659
• Peak amplitude misrepresents complex sounds with varying amplitude #qualifies (0.75) — Jennifer Lentz, Psychoacoustics- Perception of Normal…, 197
• Perceived loudness and physical sound intensity follow different, non-intuitive mathematical scales #expands (0.72) — George Michelsen Foy, Zero Decibels, 53
• Perceived loudness does not map one-to-one onto acoustic amplitude #expands (0.70) — David M. Howard, Jamie Angus, Acoustics and Psychoacoustics, 616