» Articles » PMID: 23654388

On the Balance of Envelope and Temporal Fine Structure in the Encoding of Speech in the Early Auditory System

Overview
Journal J Acoust Soc Am
Date 2013 May 10
PMID 23654388
Citations 43
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

There is much debate on how the spectrotemporal modulations of speech (or its spectrogram) are encoded in the responses of the auditory nerve, and whether speech intelligibility is best conveyed via the "envelope" (E) or "temporal fine-structure" (TFS) of the neural responses. Wide use of vocoders to resolve this question has commonly assumed that manipulating the amplitude-modulation and frequency-modulation components of the vocoded signal alters the relative importance of E or TFS encoding on the nerve, thus facilitating assessment of their relative importance to intelligibility. Here we argue that this assumption is incorrect, and that the vocoder approach is ineffective in differentially altering the neural E and TFS. In fact, we demonstrate using a simplified model of early auditory processing that both neural E and TFS encode the speech spectrogram with constant and comparable relative effectiveness regardless of the vocoder manipulations. However, we also show that neural TFS cues are less vulnerable than their E counterparts under severe noisy conditions, and hence should play a more prominent role in cochlear stimulation strategies.

Citing Articles

Models optimized for real-world tasks reveal the task-dependent necessity of precise temporal coding in hearing.

Saddler M, McDermott J Nat Commun. 2024; 15(1):10590.

PMID: 39632854 PMC: 11618365. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-54700-5.


Is Recognition of Speech in Noise Related to Memory Disruption Caused by Irrelevant Sound?.

Oberfeld D, Staab K, Kattner F, Ellermeier W Trends Hear. 2024; 28:23312165241262517.

PMID: 39051688 PMC: 11273587. DOI: 10.1177/23312165241262517.


Models optimized for real-world tasks reveal the task-dependent necessity of precise temporal coding in hearing.

Saddler M, McDermott J bioRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 38712054 PMC: 11071365. DOI: 10.1101/2024.04.21.590435.


How to vocode: Using channel vocoders for cochlear-implant research.

Cychosz M, Winn M, Goupell M J Acoust Soc Am. 2024; 155(4):2407-2437.

PMID: 38568143 PMC: 10994674. DOI: 10.1121/10.0025274.


Effect of inter-aural temporal envelope differences on inter-aural time difference thresholds for amplitude modulated noise.

Kanagokar V, Fathima H, Bhat J, Muthu A Codas. 2024; 36(2):e20220261.

PMID: 38324806 PMC: 10903954. DOI: 10.1590/2317-1782/20232022261.


References
1.
Zeng F, Nie K, Stickney G, Kong Y, Vongphoe M, Bhargave A . Speech recognition with amplitude and frequency modulations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005; 102(7):2293-8. PMC: 546014. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0406460102. View

2.
Loeb G, WHITE M, Merzenich M . Spatial cross-correlation. A proposed mechanism for acoustic pitch perception. Biol Cybern. 1983; 47(3):149-63. DOI: 10.1007/BF00337005. View

3.
Hopkins K, Moore B, Stone M . Effects of moderate cochlear hearing loss on the ability to benefit from temporal fine structure information in speech. J Acoust Soc Am. 2008; 123(2):1140-53. PMC: 2688774. DOI: 10.1121/1.2824018. View

4.
Hopkins K, Moore B, Stone M . The effects of the addition of low-level, low-noise noise on the intelligibility of sentences processed to remove temporal envelope information. J Acoust Soc Am. 2010; 128(4):2150-61. DOI: 10.1121/1.3478773. View

5.
Smith Z, Delgutte B, Oxenham A . Chimaeric sounds reveal dichotomies in auditory perception. Nature. 2002; 416(6876):87-90. PMC: 2268248. DOI: 10.1038/416087a. View