New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Perception of Musical Pitch Uses Separate Parts of Brain

The brain identifies individual musical notes differently from how it decides whether the pitch is high or low, according to a report published online this week by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Researchers believe the brain may process sound in this way in order to help distinguish between multiple sources of noise, such as different voices in a crowded room.

All music (with the exception of the most avant-garde compositions) is made up of just twelve notes: A, A-sharp, B, C, C-sharp, D, D-sharp, E, F, F-sharp, G and G-sharp. This sequence, called the chromatic scale, repeats from the lowest to the highest pitch. For example, an 88-key piano represents seven cycles of the chromatic scale, plus four extra notes. The interval between one note and its counterpart in the next cycle is called an octave. Thus, when a C-sharp and a C-sharp one octave higher are heard at the same time, the two notes are virtually indistinguishable. If the notes are alternated, however, it becomes easier to tell that one pitch is higher.

To test how the brain can understand the two C-sharps as the same note but also different pitches, Tim Griffiths of Newcastle University Medical School in Britain and his colleagues developed a new technique to isolate the height of a pitch from its place on the chromatic scale. By tweaking the harmonics and overtones of a musical note, the researchers could manufacture a tone that sounds up to an octave higher than the original pitch did. "What we¿ve done in the experiment is actually do something you can¿t do on the piano," says Griffiths.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


In the experiment, 10 subjects listened to both the manufactured tones and a series of normal musical notes while undergoing a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain scan. The researchers found that the height-manipulated tones stimulated brain activity near the front of an area known as the primary auditory cortex, whereas notes from the chromatic scale activated areas to the rear of this region. Griffiths suggests that this specialization in the brain may help to distinguish between male and female voices, while still listening to what the person is saying. "There might be two ¿what¿ pathways," he explains. " ¿What is the object [the voice]?¿ and ¿What is the information transmitted by the object?¿"

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe