1:1

What if the receptors on the basilar membrane were not laid out
logarithmcally, and there was, instead, a 1:1 relationship between the
stimulus (tone-producing vibration) and the sensation ("pitch"). I
wonder what the harmonic series would sound like...all octaves?

Kelly

2008/12/29 traktus5 <kj4321@...>:
> What if the receptors on the basilar membrane were not laid out
> logarithmcally, and there was, instead, a 1:1 relationship between the
> stimulus (tone-producing vibration) and the sensation ("pitch"). I
> wonder what the harmonic series would sound like...all octaves?

Assuming perception followed the mechanics of your ear (which is
reasonable --all those hairs would be wasted otherwise) you'd have
good pitch discrimination for the highest tones you can hear and
everything in lower registers would be bunched up together. That'd
make it different to hear voices in different registers so your voice
would naturally be about the same pitch as other members of your
species. You'd probably have good absolute pitch but poor relative
pitch for low notes.

Logarithmic perception is normal for things that need to be
distinguished over a large range. Loudness is also perceived roughly
logarithmically. It's useful to be able to listen to quiet things
without loud things deafening you. Visual frequencies are perceived
more linearly and over a range of roughly one octave I think (I didn't
look it up). If we only needed to hear sounds in one octave we'd
naturally hear linearly. And so, for your example, a harmonic series
would only be heard as a bunch of equally separated tones within an
octave, the lower the pitch the more tones. By a visual analogy, the
lower the note the paler it'd sound, because pale colors have more
white light mixed in. Notes in the register you can hear would be
like primary colors, and notes in the registers below would be like
secondary colors, until very low notes would sound like white noise.

Graham

"equally separated" in terms of frequency, or interval size?

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Graham Breed" <gbreed@...> wrote:
>
> 2008/12/29 traktus5 <kj4321@...>:
> > What if the receptors on the basilar membrane were not laid out
> > logarithmcally, and there was, instead, a 1:1 relationship
between the
> > stimulus (tone-producing vibration) and the sensation ("pitch").
I
> > wonder what the harmonic series would sound like...all octaves?
>
> Assuming perception followed the mechanics of your ear (which is
> reasonable --all those hairs would be wasted otherwise) you'd have
> good pitch discrimination for the highest tones you can hear and
> everything in lower registers would be bunched up together. That'd
> make it different to hear voices in different registers so your
voice
> would naturally be about the same pitch as other members of your
> species. You'd probably have good absolute pitch but poor relative
> pitch for low notes.
>
> Logarithmic perception is normal for things that need to be
> distinguished over a large range. Loudness is also perceived
roughly
> logarithmically. It's useful to be able to listen to quiet things
> without loud things deafening you. Visual frequencies are perceived
> more linearly and over a range of roughly one octave I think (I
didn't
> look it up). If we only needed to hear sounds in one octave we'd
> naturally hear linearly. And so, for your example, a harmonic
series
> would only be heard as a bunch of equally separated tones within an
> octave, the lower the pitch the more tones. By a visual analogy,
the
> lower the note the paler it'd sound, because pale colors have more
> white light mixed in. Notes in the register you can hear would be
> like primary colors, and notes in the registers below would be like
> secondary colors, until very low notes would sound like white noise.
>
>
> Graham
>

2008/12/29 traktus5 <kj4321@...>:
> "equally separated" in terms of frequency, or interval size?

If your hearing were linear-frequency, the two would be the same.

Graham

thanks Graham. That's very interesting. -Kelly

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "traktus5" <kj4321@...> wrote:
>
> What if the receptors on the basilar membrane were not laid out
> logarithmcally, and there was, instead, a 1:1 relationship between
the
> stimulus (tone-producing vibration) and the sensation ("pitch"). I
> wonder what the harmonic series would sound like...all octaves?
>
> Kelly
>

There's a lot of research out there, a casual google search for
"receptors basilar membrane pitch perception" will turn up a lot.
I haven't read a lot of this, but I've read some stuff, particularly
this book by a student of Francis Crick, Christof Koch
http://www.amazon.com/Quest-Consciousness-Neurobiological-Approach/
dp/0974707708/ref=sip_rech_dp_6

on the visual cortex that may have some relevance to the way auditory
perceptions are assembled.

The "receptors on the basilar membrane" may not be the most important
element - it's likely (analogizing from visual processes which may or
may not be truly relevant) that the wiring of the arrays of cells in
the auditory cortex is flexible, adaptable, and conditioned by
experience and by reinforcement through education and training, and
that perceptions vary widely between musicians and non-musicians and
between musicians of different training and persuasion.

Since the basilar membrane is a vibrating membrane, like a
microphone, and not a digital array of sensors prewired for any
particular perceptions, it
seems unlikely that there are 1:1 correspondences of any kind
involved at the level of the basilar membrane, and that instead the
perception of pitch is assembled further up the perception chain in
the arrays of cells in the auditory cortex, where (to extrapolate
from the visual cortex research) there should be "zillions" of
individual cells devoted - as a matter of reinforced conditioning on
many levels up to and including music education - each to, at the
most basic level, registering the presence or absence of particular
elements of pitch, timbre, and timing, and at higher levels,
assembling those more or less digital perceptual components into
perceptual arrays. This is a very flexible system in which the
feedback coming from reinforcement of the usefullness of a given
percept dramatically affects how much brain power is devoted to
working out and separating the details of any particular type of
perception.

The logarithms are a part of the structure of the physical sound
waves, but since human hearing is in a fairly narrow range, and
relevant information which is reinforced culturally and
experientially is probably in certain even narrower frequency bands,
you can probably expect a distorted perceptual curve without any 1:1
correspondences at all. Even if at some level of the perceptual chain
there were 1:1 correspondence "arrays", the reinforced perceptions
would have much larger "processing arrays" devoted to them, resulting
in a distorted map farther up the chain.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "traktus5" <kj4321@...> wrote:
> What if the receptors on the basilar membrane were not laid out
> logarithmcally, and there was, instead, a 1:1 relationship between
the
> stimulus (tone-producing vibration) and the sensation ("pitch"). I
> wonder what the harmonic series would sound like...all octaves?
> Kelly

(Following up previous post,)
Here's a snippet from

http://www.acoustics.org/press/137th/roederer.html

of which the most relevant sentence is this:

"Today, even the basic operation of pitch perception is viewed as a
pattern recognition process by the brain, in analogy to the more
familiar pattern recognition processes in the visual system."

[quote]
... Why do we perceive only one pitch when we listen to a musical
tone made up of many harmonics? Why do we perceive this pitch even
when the fundamental frequency is absent? Why do we resolve pitch so
well, despite the relatively broad mechanical resonance regions on
the basilar membrane? Concerning the first two questions,
psychoacoustical and neurophysiological experiments show that for
pitch identification, in addition to the position of the resonance
region the brain may also use information on the temporal shape of
the acoustical vibration pattern. For low frequencies this
information is encoded in the form of the time-sequence of electrical
nerve pulses--a sort of "neural Morse code". This result may explain
why when hearing a musical tone we perceive a single pitch--that of
the first harmonic or fundamental--even if this frequency is
physically absent in the stimulus. This part of the course can be
illustrated with several psychoacoustical demonstrations using
"laboratory" equipment such as a reasonably sized pipe organ!

Concerning the third question above, it was not until 15 years ago
that in vivo measurements revealed the astounding fact that some of
the acoustical detector cells on the basilar membrane have motility.
They vibrate "on their own power" at acoustical frequencies and act
as feedback-controlled "electromechanical" amplifiers of the external
stimulus, thus greatly sharpening the resonance regions! At times
these cells vibrate on their own without any external input--our ears
are not only acoustical receptors, but can also be acoustical
emitters!

Today, even the basic operation of pitch perception is viewed as a
pattern recognition process by the brain, in analogy to the more
familiar pattern recognition processes in the visual system. Our
brain carries (or builds through experience) "templates" against
which the signals of incoming sounds are compared--if there is a
match with the template that corresponds to a harmonic tone, a
musical tone sensation with definite pitch is evoked. This is not
unlike the graphic symbol A evoking in your brain a single cognitive
signal "it's an A" (and not "it's two inclined lines forming a vertex
with a horizontal bar across"). And just as happens with the optical
system, if part of the acoustical stimulus is missing, or if the
stimulus is somewhat distorted, our brain is still capable of
providing the correct sensation! Today, we even speak of "acoustical
illusions" to describe many of these effects! An important spin-off
of these studies is the formulation of a neural network-based theory
of harmony, as well as the explanation of many musical "universals"
such as the role of the almighty octave, consonance and dissonance,
etc.
[end quote]

hi Kent (and others)... great quotes and info on this topic.
hmmm...pattern recognition....that's why I"ve always suspected that
harmonic dualism is correct with regard to the tonal power of the
minor triad, even though it supposedly isn't explained by the
harmonic series...that, since the harmonic series is processed at
a 'high level' as a pattern, that 'flipping it around' (inverted
series) is a 'piece of cake'..if you know what I mean! In a sense,
it's not the sereis, but the image of the series...or something like
that...however the fuck the brain works!! -Kelly

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jack" <gvr.jack@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "traktus5" <kj4321@> wrote:
> > What if the receptors on the basilar membrane were not laid out
> > logarithmcally, and there was, instead, a 1:1 relationship
between
> the
> > stimulus (tone-producing vibration) and the sensation ("pitch").
I
> > wonder what the harmonic series would sound like...all octaves?
> > Kelly
>
> (Following up previous post,)
> Here's a snippet from
>
> http://www.acoustics.org/press/137th/roederer.html
>
> of which the most relevant sentence is this:
>
> "Today, even the basic operation of pitch perception is viewed as a
> pattern recognition process by the brain, in analogy to the more
> familiar pattern recognition processes in the visual system."
>
> [quote]
> ... Why do we perceive only one pitch when we listen to a musical
> tone made up of many harmonics? Why do we perceive this pitch even
> when the fundamental frequency is absent? Why do we resolve pitch
so
> well, despite the relatively broad mechanical resonance regions on
> the basilar membrane? Concerning the first two questions,
> psychoacoustical and neurophysiological experiments show that for
> pitch identification, in addition to the position of the resonance
> region the brain may also use information on the temporal shape of
> the acoustical vibration pattern. For low frequencies this
> information is encoded in the form of the time-sequence of
electrical
> nerve pulses--a sort of "neural Morse code". This result may
explain
> why when hearing a musical tone we perceive a single pitch--that of
> the first harmonic or fundamental--even if this frequency is
> physically absent in the stimulus. This part of the course can be
> illustrated with several psychoacoustical demonstrations using
> "laboratory" equipment such as a reasonably sized pipe organ!
>
> Concerning the third question above, it was not until 15 years ago
> that in vivo measurements revealed the astounding fact that some of
> the acoustical detector cells on the basilar membrane have
motility.
> They vibrate "on their own power" at acoustical frequencies and act
> as feedback-controlled "electromechanical" amplifiers of the
external
> stimulus, thus greatly sharpening the resonance regions! At times
> these cells vibrate on their own without any external input--our
ears
> are not only acoustical receptors, but can also be acoustical
> emitters!
>
> Today, even the basic operation of pitch perception is viewed as a
> pattern recognition process by the brain, in analogy to the more
> familiar pattern recognition processes in the visual system. Our
> brain carries (or builds through experience) "templates" against
> which the signals of incoming sounds are compared--if there is a
> match with the template that corresponds to a harmonic tone, a
> musical tone sensation with definite pitch is evoked. This is not
> unlike the graphic symbol A evoking in your brain a single
cognitive
> signal "it's an A" (and not "it's two inclined lines forming a
vertex
> with a horizontal bar across"). And just as happens with the
optical
> system, if part of the acoustical stimulus is missing, or if the
> stimulus is somewhat distorted, our brain is still capable of
> providing the correct sensation! Today, we even speak
of "acoustical
> illusions" to describe many of these effects! An important spin-off
> of these studies is the formulation of a neural network-based
theory
> of harmony, as well as the explanation of many musical "universals"
> such as the role of the almighty octave, consonance and dissonance,
> etc.
> [end quote]
>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "traktus5" <kj4321@...> wrote:
>
> hi Kent (and others)... great quotes and info on this topic.
> hmmm...pattern recognition....that's why I"ve always suspected that
> harmonic dualism is correct with regard to the tonal power of the
> minor triad, even though it supposedly isn't explained by the
> harmonic series...that, since the harmonic series is processed at
> a 'high level' as a pattern, that 'flipping it around' (inverted
> series) is a 'piece of cake'..if you know what I mean! In a
sense,
> it's not the sereis, but the image of the series...or something
like
> that...however the fuck the brain works!! -Kelly
>
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jack" <gvr.jack@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "traktus5" <kj4321@> wrote:
> > > What if the receptors on the basilar membrane were not laid out
> > > logarithmcally, and there was, instead, a 1:1 relationship
> between
> > the
> > > stimulus (tone-producing vibration) and the sensation
("pitch").
> I
> > > wonder what the harmonic series would sound like...all
octaves?
> > > Kelly
> >
> > (Following up previous post,)
> > Here's a snippet from
> >
> > http://www.acoustics.org/press/137th/roederer.html
> >
> > of which the most relevant sentence is this:
> >
> > "Today, even the basic operation of pitch perception is viewed as
a
> > pattern recognition process by the brain, in analogy to the more
> > familiar pattern recognition processes in the visual system."
> >
> > [quote]
> > ... Why do we perceive only one pitch when we listen to a musical
> > tone made up of many harmonics? Why do we perceive this pitch
even
> > when the fundamental frequency is absent? Why do we resolve pitch
> so
> > well, despite the relatively broad mechanical resonance regions
on
> > the basilar membrane? Concerning the first two questions,
> > psychoacoustical and neurophysiological experiments show that for
> > pitch identification, in addition to the position of the
resonance
> > region the brain may also use information on the temporal shape
of
> > the acoustical vibration pattern. For low frequencies this
> > information is encoded in the form of the time-sequence of
> electrical
> > nerve pulses--a sort of "neural Morse code". This result may
> explain
> > why when hearing a musical tone we perceive a single pitch--that
of
> > the first harmonic or fundamental--even if this frequency is
> > physically absent in the stimulus. This part of the course can be
> > illustrated with several psychoacoustical demonstrations using
> > "laboratory" equipment such as a reasonably sized pipe organ!
> >
> > Concerning the third question above, it was not until 15 years
ago
> > that in vivo measurements revealed the astounding fact that some
of
> > the acoustical detector cells on the basilar membrane have
> motility.
> > They vibrate "on their own power" at acoustical frequencies and
act
> > as feedback-controlled "electromechanical" amplifiers of the
> external
> > stimulus, thus greatly sharpening the resonance regions! At times
> > these cells vibrate on their own without any external input--our
> ears
> > are not only acoustical receptors, but can also be acoustical
> > emitters!
> >
> > Today, even the basic operation of pitch perception is viewed as
a
> > pattern recognition process by the brain, in analogy to the more
> > familiar pattern recognition processes in the visual system. Our
> > brain carries (or builds through experience) "templates" against
> > which the signals of incoming sounds are compared--if there is a
> > match with the template that corresponds to a harmonic tone, a
> > musical tone sensation with definite pitch is evoked. This is not
> > unlike the graphic symbol A evoking in your brain a single
> cognitive
> > signal "it's an A" (and not "it's two inclined lines forming a
> vertex
> > with a horizontal bar across"). And just as happens with the
> optical
> > system, if part of the acoustical stimulus is missing, or if the
> > stimulus is somewhat distorted, our brain is still capable of
> > providing the correct sensation! Today, we even speak
> of "acoustical
> > illusions" to describe many of these effects! An important spin-
off
> > of these studies is the formulation of a neural network-based
> theory
> > of harmony, as well as the explanation of many
musical "universals"
> > such as the role of the almighty octave, consonance and
dissonance,
> > etc.
> > [end quote]
> >
>

I think that harmonic dualism (if that's what it's called) is a good
way to think of it, but I don't think that undertones with a common
overtone (like a minor triad) necessarily reflect anything in
particular about the way the brain works. I think they're just
something neat that humans have figured out over years and years of
toying around with stuff. The phantom fundamental that appears when an
interval or chord is played has something to do with a particular
psychoacoustic phenomenon, but playing a chord with the notes picked
so that an overtone on top will ring out I think is just something
that sounds neat that people have been playing with for years and
managed to make artistic sense out of. In that way there might be a
"third" neat thing to do with harmony that nobody's even thought of
yet - a good candidate might be perhaps the recent experiments with
metastable intervals, in which there is no easily perceptible common
overtone nor a viable virtual fundamental.

-Mike

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 8:58 PM, traktus5 <kj4321@...> wrote:
> hi Kent (and others)... great quotes and info on this topic.
> hmmm...pattern recognition....that's why I"ve always suspected that
> harmonic dualism is correct with regard to the tonal power of the
> minor triad, even though it supposedly isn't explained by the
> harmonic series...that, since the harmonic series is processed at
> a 'high level' as a pattern, that 'flipping it around' (inverted
> series) is a 'piece of cake'..if you know what I mean! In a sense,
> it's not the sereis, but the image of the series...or something like
> that...however the fuck the brain works!! -Kelly
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jack" <gvr.jack@...> wrote:
>>
>> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "traktus5" <kj4321@> wrote:
>> > What if the receptors on the basilar membrane were not laid out
>> > logarithmcally, and there was, instead, a 1:1 relationship
> between
>> the
>> > stimulus (tone-producing vibration) and the sensation ("pitch").
> I
>> > wonder what the harmonic series would sound like...all octaves?
>> > Kelly
>>
>> (Following up previous post,)
>> Here's a snippet from
>>
>> http://www.acoustics.org/press/137th/roederer.html
>>
>> of which the most relevant sentence is this:
>>
>> "Today, even the basic operation of pitch perception is viewed as a
>> pattern recognition process by the brain, in analogy to the more
>> familiar pattern recognition processes in the visual system."
>>
>> [quote]
>> ... Why do we perceive only one pitch when we listen to a musical
>> tone made up of many harmonics? Why do we perceive this pitch even
>> when the fundamental frequency is absent? Why do we resolve pitch
> so
>> well, despite the relatively broad mechanical resonance regions on
>> the basilar membrane? Concerning the first two questions,
>> psychoacoustical and neurophysiological experiments show that for
>> pitch identification, in addition to the position of the resonance
>> region the brain may also use information on the temporal shape of
>> the acoustical vibration pattern. For low frequencies this
>> information is encoded in the form of the time-sequence of
> electrical
>> nerve pulses--a sort of "neural Morse code". This result may
> explain
>> why when hearing a musical tone we perceive a single pitch--that of
>> the first harmonic or fundamental--even if this frequency is
>> physically absent in the stimulus. This part of the course can be
>> illustrated with several psychoacoustical demonstrations using
>> "laboratory" equipment such as a reasonably sized pipe organ!
>>
>> Concerning the third question above, it was not until 15 years ago
>> that in vivo measurements revealed the astounding fact that some of
>> the acoustical detector cells on the basilar membrane have
> motility.
>> They vibrate "on their own power" at acoustical frequencies and act
>> as feedback-controlled "electromechanical" amplifiers of the
> external
>> stimulus, thus greatly sharpening the resonance regions! At times
>> these cells vibrate on their own without any external input--our
> ears
>> are not only acoustical receptors, but can also be acoustical
>> emitters!
>>
>> Today, even the basic operation of pitch perception is viewed as a
>> pattern recognition process by the brain, in analogy to the more
>> familiar pattern recognition processes in the visual system. Our
>> brain carries (or builds through experience) "templates" against
>> which the signals of incoming sounds are compared--if there is a
>> match with the template that corresponds to a harmonic tone, a
>> musical tone sensation with definite pitch is evoked. This is not
>> unlike the graphic symbol A evoking in your brain a single
> cognitive
>> signal "it's an A" (and not "it's two inclined lines forming a
> vertex
>> with a horizontal bar across"). And just as happens with the
> optical
>> system, if part of the acoustical stimulus is missing, or if the
>> stimulus is somewhat distorted, our brain is still capable of
>> providing the correct sensation! Today, we even speak
> of "acoustical
>> illusions" to describe many of these effects! An important spin-off
>> of these studies is the formulation of a neural network-based
> theory
>> of harmony, as well as the explanation of many musical "universals"
>> such as the role of the almighty octave, consonance and dissonance,
>> etc.
>> [end quote]
>>
>
>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jack" <gvr.jack@...> wrote:
>
> Here's a snippet from
>
> http://www.acoustics.org/press/137th/roederer.html
> .....it was not until 15 years ago
> that in vivo measurements revealed the astounding fact that some of
> the acoustical detector cells on the basilar membrane have motility.
> They vibrate "on their own power" at acoustical frequencies and act
> as feedback-controlled "electromechanical" amplifiers of the external
> stimulus, thus greatly sharpening the resonance regions! At times
> these cells vibrate on their own without any external input--our ears
> are not only acoustical receptors, but can also be acoustical
> emitters!

that penomenon consists in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otoacoustic_emissions

http://www.aro.org/archives/1996/99.html
http://bmb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/63/1/223

bye
A.S