User:Sintel/Validation of common consonance measures: Difference between revisions
→Roughness: Footnote |
|||
| Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
First proposed by [[Helmholtz]], these models are quite popular in the psychoacoustics literature, and many variations have been developed over the years. | First proposed by [[Helmholtz]], these models are quite popular in the psychoacoustics literature, and many variations have been developed over the years. | ||
Here, I will use the classic roughness curve as derived by Plomp and Levelt in 1965.<ref>R. Plomp, W. J. M. Levelt (1965) [https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1909741 ''Tonal Consonance and Critical Bandwidth'']. J. Acoust. Soc. Am.</ref> | Here, I will use the classic roughness curve as derived by Plomp and Levelt in 1965.<ref>R. Plomp, W. J. M. Levelt (1965) [https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1909741 ''Tonal Consonance and Critical Bandwidth'']. J. Acoust. Soc. Am.</ref> | ||
<ref group="note">This model does not take into account the amplitude of the partials. One may object that we should weight the contribution of beating according to the amplitude of the harmonics (i.e. 1/''n'') but this only makes the model worse (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.592).</ref> | |||
[[File:Consonance_ratings_roughness.png|500px|thumb|none|Roughness model from Plomp and Levelt. They consider beating between harmonic tones with 6 partials.]] | [[File:Consonance_ratings_roughness.png|500px|thumb|none|Roughness model from Plomp and Levelt. They consider beating between harmonic tones with 6 partials.]] | ||