In the study of popular and non-Western musics, scholars have recognized that tone color often plays an essential role in defining and differentiating various genres, styles, treatments, and gestures. Unfortunately, when analyzing timbre, the modern scholar is able to draw on only modest theoretical foundations. Theories of timbre are rare (e.g., Slawson, 1985) and those that exist are contentious (see McAdams, 1986). Analytic descriptions of timbre are often impressionistic, and in the case of non-Western musics, the scholar must guard against possible cultural bias.
Music cognition researchers have commented on the notorious difficulty of studying timbre (see e.g., Krumhansl, 1989; Hajda, Kendall, Carterette & Harshberger, 1997). Three approaches have dominated past timbre research: acoustic feature detection (e.g. Freed, 1990), multi-dimensional scaling (e.g., Grey, 1975, 1977), and ecological acoustics (e.g., Warren & Verbrugge, 1984; Li, Logan & Pastore, 1991). Of these three approaches, the ecological approach has proved to be the most promising.
This paper presents an ecological theory of timbre. The paper begins with a review and assessment of the extant research. The presented theory distinguishes two components to timbre perception: a denotative and an associative component. The associative component entails learned aspects of timbre perception, while the denotative component entails acoustic cues that inform listeners about the state of sound sources. (No account is offered for how the denotative or associative aspects of timbre evoke or portray emotion for the listener.) The theory is illustrated by referring to experimental research on acoustic cues for aggressivity, timidity, cuteness, and intimacy (Hogg, 1992; Huron, Kinney, and Precoda, 2000). The application of the theory to analysis is illustrated via several contrasting musical examples. Limitations of the theory are discussed, including issues of cross-cultural validity (see Ohala, 1994).
Bregman, A.S. (1990). Auditory Scene Analysis: The Perceptual Organization of Sound. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Chomyszyn, J. P. (1995). Distance of sound in reverberant fields (source distance, apparent loudness). PhD dissertation, Stanford University.
Dimberg, U. (1987). Facial reactions and autonomic activity to auditory stimuli with high and low intensity. Psychophysiology, 24, 586.
Freed, D. J. (1990). Auditory correlates of perceived mallet hardness for a set of recorded percussive sound events. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 87, 311-322.
Grey, J. M. (1975). An exploration of musical timbre. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.
Grey, J. M. (1977). Multidimensional perceptual scaling of musical timbres. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 61, 1270-1277.
Guirao, M. (1989). Perceived distance and loudness-softness functions. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 85, Supplement 1, S108.
Hajda, J. M., Kendall, R. A., Carterette, E. C. & Harshberger, M. L. (1997). Methodological issues in timbre research. In: Deliège & Sloboda (eds.), The Perception and Cognition of Music. London: L. Erlbaum, pp. 253-306.
Hogg, K. The relationship between size and pitch: A developmental study. Unpublished undergraduate thesis, University of Waterloo, 1992.
Kendall, R.A., Carterette, E.C. & Hajda, J.M. (1999). Perceptual and acoustical features of natural and synthetic orchestral instrument tones. Music Perception, 16(3) 327-364.
Kitayama, S. & Markus, H. R. (eds.) (1994). Emotion and Culture: Empirical Studies of Mutual Influence. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Krumhansl, C. L. (1989). Why is musical timbre so hard to understand? In: Structure and perception of electroacoustic sound and music. New York: Excerpta Medica, 43-54.
Laver, J. (1980). The Phonetic Description of Voice Quality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
LeDoux, J. (1996). The Emotional Brain. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Li, X.F., Logan, R.J. & Pastore, R.E. (1991). Perception of acoustic source characteristics: Walking sounds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 90, 3036-3049.
McAdams, S., Winsberg, W., Donnadieu, S., De Soete, G. & Krimphoff, J. (1995). Perceptual scaling of synthesized musical timbres: Common dimensions, specificities, and latent subject classes. Psychological Research, 58, 177-192.
Meyer, R.K., Palmer, C. & Mazo, M. (1998). Affective and coherence responses to Russian laments. Music Perception, 16(1), 135-150.
Miller, W. I. (1997). The Anatomy of Disgust. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Morton, E. (1994). Sound symbolism and its role in non-human vertebrate communication. In L. Hinton, J. Nichols & J. Ohala (editors), Sound Symbolism, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 348-365.
Murray, I. R., & Arnott, J. L. (1993). Toward the simulation of emotion in synthetic speech: A review of the literature on human vocal emotion. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 93(2), 1097-1108.
Ohala, J. (1994). The frequency code underlies the sound-symbolic use of voice pitch. In L. Hinton, J. Nichols & J. Ohala (editors), Sound Symbolism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 325-347.
Schaeffer, P. (1966). Traité des objets musicaus. Paris.
Scherer, K. R. (1986). Vocal affect expression: A review and a model for future research. Psychological Bulletin, 99(2), 143-165.
Scherer, K. R., & Oshinky, J. S. (1977). Cue utilization in emotion attribution from auditory stimuli. Motivation and Emotion, 1(4), 331-346.
Slawson, W. (1985). Sound Color. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Tartter, V. C. (1980). Happy talk: Perceptual and acoustic effects of smiling on speech. Perception & Psychophysics, 27, 24-27.
Warren, H. & Verbrugge, R.R. (1984). Auditory perception of breaking and bouncing events: A case study in ecological acoustics. Journal of Experimental Psychology; Human Perception and Performance, 10, 704-712.