Subjective Phase Effects and Combination Tones

  • T. J. F. Buunen
  • F. A. Bilsen
Part of the Communication and Cybernetics book series (COMMUNICATION, volume 8)


One of the problems in psychoacoustics is the question which temporal aspects of a signal are coded and contribute to the sensation. For example, the sensation of “roughness” seems to correspond to envelope detection (Terhardt, 1968). Another subjective aspect of sound which is fairly often ascribed to time-structure detection is the “residuepitch” or “periodicity pitch” (Schouten et al., 1962). For three-component signals, Mathes and Miller (1947), de Boer (1956) and Goldstein (1967a) have reported changes in the prominence of residue pitch, as well as timbre and roughness as the time structure changed while the power spectrum remained constant.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bilsen, F.A. (1968), On the interaction of a sound with its repetition,Doctoral Dissertation, Univ. of Delft.Google Scholar
  2. Boer, E. de (1956), On the residue in hearing, Doctoral Dissertation,Univ. of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  3. Boer, E. de (1961), A note on phase distortion and hearing, Acustica 11, 182–184.Google Scholar
  4. Buunen, T.J.F., J.M. Festen, F.A. Bilsen and G. v.d. Brink (1974),Phase effects in a three-component signal, J. Acoust.Soc.Am. 55, 297–303.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Goldstein, J.L. (1967a), Auditory spectral filtering and monaural phaseperception, J. Acoust.Soc.Am. 41, 458–479.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Goldstein, J.L. (1967b), Auditory nonlinearity, J. Acoust.Soc.Am. 41, 676–689.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Houtsma, A.H.., and J.L. Goldstein (1972), The central origin of thepitch of complex tones: Evidence from musical interval recognition. J. Acoust.Soc.Am. JH, 520–529.Google Scholar
  8. Mathes, R.C. and R.L. Miller (1947), Phase effects in monaural perception,J. Acoust.Soc.Am. 19, 780–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Plomp, R. (1965), Detectability threshold for combination tones,J. Acoust.Soc.Am. 37, 1110–1123.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Plomp, R. (1970), Timbre as a multidimensional attribute of complex tones, in Frequency Analysis and Periodicity Detection in Hearing, Plomp and Smoorenburg Eds, Sythoff, Leiden p. 397–411.Google Scholar
  11. Smoorenburg, G.F. (1972a), Audibility region of combination tones,J. Acoust.Soc.Am. 52, 603–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Smoorenburg, G.F. (1972b), Combination tones and their origin,J. Acoust.Soc.Am. 52, 615–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Schouten, J.F., R.J. Ritsma and B.L. Cardozo (1962), Pitch of the residue,J. Acoust.Soc.Am. 34, 1418–1424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Terhardt, E. (1968), Uber die durch amplitudenmodulierte Sinustöne hervorgerufene Empfindung, Acustica 20, 210–214.Google Scholar
  15. Terhardt, E. (1972), Zur Tonhöhenwahrnehmung von Klängen I. Psycho-akustische Grundlagen, Acustica 26, 173–186.Google Scholar
  16. Zwicker, E. (1952), Die Grenzen der Hörbarkeit der Amplituden-modulationund der Frequenzmodulation eines Tones, Acustica 2, 125–133.Google Scholar
  17. Zwicker, E. (1955), Der ungewöhnliche Amplitudengang der nichtlinearen Verzerrungen des Ohres, Acustica 5, 67–74Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Spinger-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1974

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. J. F. Buunen
    • 1
  • F. A. Bilsen
    • 1
  1. 1.Biophysics Group, Applied Physics DepartmentDelft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations