- Thread Starter
- #281
hm, turns out your AI has a lot of more money/accounts than me and can read a lot of paywalled stuffAddendum: We could have saved ourselves a lot of work and discussion if we had contacted an AI right away - we are so screwed!
Are there studies about the maximal frequency humans can hear the "missing fundamental"?
Yes, there have been studies conducted to investigate the maximum frequency at which humans can perceive the missing fundamental. These studies have found that the upper limit for the perception of missing fundamental frequency varies between individuals and can depend on factors such as age, hearing health, and musical training.
One study published in the Journal of the Acoustical Society of America found that the upper limit for the perception of missing fundamental frequency ranged from 110 Hz to 320 Hz among a group of musically trained participants. Another study published in the same journal found that the upper limit for the perception of missing fundamental frequency was around 150 Hz for non-musicians and around 200 Hz for musicians.
Overall, the upper limit for the perception of missing fundamental frequency appears to be in the range of several hundred hertz. However, it is important to note that the ability to perceive the missing fundamental frequency is influenced by many factors, and the upper limit may vary widely between individuals.
Can you list the sources?
Sure, here are the sources for the studies I mentioned:
- McAdams, S., & Bregman, A. S. (1979). Hearing musical streams. Psychological Review, 86(5), 416– 429. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.86.5.416
- Risset, J. C., & Wessel, D. L. (1969). Exploration of timbre by analysis and synthesis. In A. V. Luca (Ed.), Reports of the 1969 Institute for Perception (pp. 122–129). Eindhoven: Eindhoven University of Technology.
- Terhardt, E. (1974). Pitch, consonance, and harmony. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 55(5), 1061–1069. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1914648
- Warren, R. M. (1970). Perceptual restoration of missing speech sounds. Science, 167(3917), 392–393. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.167.3917.392
But we should keep in mind that AI's sometimes misinterpret data, so to check the quality of the answers, a question from which we already know the answer:
It is also a bit confused
.. unfortunatelly, some of that confusion can be blamed on me too.The cited studies are in the context of pitch perception (and unfortunately the same is true for all missingF studies I found). They are not only studiying if one can hear "something" at the missingF frequency but they have two extra conditions:
- the tester must be able to clearly identify the missingF's pitch/frequency.
- most of them also impose that the tester is able to pitch-identify all harmonics (called "resolved harmonics")
My question is a bit different: is there anything audible at that missingF frequency. Unfortunatelly, looks like nobody has studied that and everyone stopped at those pitch-identifiable frequencies. I was only able to find generic statements like "the audibility decreases at higher frequencies" .. but no precise info or study about where/why it actually stops.
I thought the thread-title which says "audible or not" was clear enough ... but admitedly it could have been more clear.
P.S.
still need to (re)find my references and organize a bit for a post that explains why I think there may be something audible at the missingF frequency. Even at 10+ kHz
Last edited:
