See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/232005318

Organised Sound, Mental Imageries and the Future of Music Technology: a

neuroscience outlook

Article  in  Organised Sound · April 2010

DOI: 10.1017/S1355771809990227

CITATIONS READS

2 341

1 author:

Eduardo Reck Miranda

University of Plymouth
293 PUBLICATIONS   2,541 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

BCMI MIdAS - http://cmr.soc.plymouth.ac.uk/bcmi View project

Bionic Brain & Nonlinear Media Computers View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Eduardo Reck Miranda on 30 March 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Organised Sound, Mental Imageries and the
Future of Music Technology: a neuroscience
outlook*

EDUARDO RECK MIRANDA

Interdisciplinary Centre for Computer Music Research (ICCMR), Faculty of Arts, University of Plymouth, Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK
E-mail: [email protected]

The prospect of being able to gain a better understanding of Music is an interesting topic for the neurosciences2
how the brain processes music is very exciting for musicians because it engages a number of neural mechanisms in
and developers of music technology. Composers would concerted ways. It is an ideal domain for the study of
certainly welcome the possibility of being able to predict brain connectivity: how different parts of the brain
more objectively the effect of particular musical
communicate, interact with one another and perform
configurations on their audiences. Furthermore, new music
concurrent multitasking (Miranda and Overy 2009).
technologies are bound to emerge from such understanding.
Despite an impressive amount of ongoing research into the The levels of engagement of those neural mechanisms
neuroscience of music, progress in this field still remains are very much dependent on the intrinsic physiolo-
largely uncharted for musicians and unexplored by gical properties of the brain and on learning from
developers of technology: the literature is complex and past experience. Moreover, specific characteristics of
difficult to disentangle. This paper is an attempt to chart the the auditory stimuli also determine how the brain
field for the readership of this journal. It articulates a processes them. In simpler words, different types of
working hypothesis for the neural basis of mental imageries music engage the brain differently.
elicited by music, based on the notion that such imageries For musicians and developers of music technology,
are by-products of the inherent abstracting and predicting the prospect of being able to gain a better under-
properties of the brain. It is argued that such mental
standing of the musical brain is very exciting.
imageries are scaffolds for music perception. The paper also
speculates on the impact that a better understanding of the
Composers would certainly welcome the possibility of
musical brain may have on the development of future being able to predict more objectively the effect of
technology for electroacoustic music, which may include the particular musical configurations on their audiences.
development of new analysis tools such as the olivogram and Furthermore, we believe that such understanding
the thalamogram. may lead to the development of new music technol-
ogies based on, or inspired by, the neurosciences. To
some extent such developments have already started:
a new area of investigation at the crossroads of the
neurosciences, engineering and music, music neuro-
1. INTRODUCTION
technology, is on the rise (Miranda and Matthias
The first decade of the twenty-first century has seen 2009; Miranda, Bull, Gueguen and Uroukov 2009).
an extraordinary increasing number of publications However, despite its thriving research activity, the
reporting research into how the brain processes music neuroscience of music still remains largely uncharted
from a neuroscientific perspective. A relatively new for musicians and unexplored by technologists. The
field of research, referred to as the neuroscience of literature is complex and highly specialist, making
music,1 is actively thriving (Zatorre and Peretz 2001; it difficult to disentangle for most of those who are
Peretz and Zatorre 2003; Avanzini, Lopez, Koelsch not neuroscientists. Obviously, this literature, which is
and Majno 2005). written by neuroscientists for neuroscientists, addresses
issues concerning the brain and not music as such.
*The author is thankful to Dr Simon Durrant for the fMRI images Conversely, the field of music remains largely
used in figure 1 and for his insights into the auditory pathways, uncharted for neuroscientists. Contemporary music
which contributed to the difficult task of summarising their func-
tioning in this paper. The author acknowledges the funding support
2
of EPSRC for the project ‘Learning the Structure of Music’, grant The term ‘neuroscience’ refers to the scientific study of the brain
EP/D0629341. The author thanks Elsevier for granting permission and nervous system from a number of perspectives, ranging from
to reproduce the image of the brain in figure 2. neurophysiology (the branch that studies the physiology of the
1
Although it would be more appropriate to refer to this emerging nervous system) to cognitive neuroscience (the branch that studies
field as cognitive neuroscience of music, in this paper we opted for the biology of mental phenomena), hence it often appears in plural
the more generic label neuroscience of music. in the literature; that is, neurosciences.

Organised Sound 15(1): 13–25 & Cambridge University Press, 2010. doi:10.1017/S1355771809990227
14 Eduardo Reck Miranda

developments, such electroacoustic music, remain on the future of electroacoustic music technology
anathema to the great majority of researchers into based on, or inspired by, the neurosciences.
neuroscience of music. Lack of beat or metre, noise,
non-melodic pitch sequences, and cacophony are well-
accepted components of our contemporary musical 2. AUDITORY PATHWAYS
vocabulary, and yet the great majority of the research The auditory system may be divided into two pathways,
focuses on regular rhythm, pitch, melody and tonality. or stages: early auditory pathways, which lead from the
Notwithstanding its current narrow scope, research outer ear through a number of subcortical regions and
into the neuroscience of music is nevertheless unra- terminate in the primary auditory cortex, and cortical
velling a number of facts about music processing in auditory pathways, which pass out activation from the
the brain. These are likely to apply across the board, primary auditory cortex to a number of other cortical
despite the existence of a plethora of musical genres areas (figure 1). Whereas the early pathways are essen-
and different philosophical takes on what music tially the same for all types of sounds (i.e., in the sense
might or might not be. However, any attempt at that pretty much everything we hear passes through the
putting the pieces of the musical brain jigsaw together same path), the cortical pathways largely depend on the
is not a trivial task, and indeed numerous parts of the nature of the auditory signal; that is, sounds may go
jigsaw are still missing. The objective of this paper is through different cortical pathways depending on their
threefold. specific characteristics. Also, it must be noted that early
Firstly, it endeavours to put together a few pieces auditory pathways deal mostly with the analysis of
of the musical-brain jigsaw, as an attempt to offer the single relatively short events, whilst cortical auditory
readership of this journal a reasonable picture of how pathways are primarily concerned with sequencing,
our brain listens to music – that is, organised sound– grouping, making abstractions, building representations
from a neuroscience perspective. and a number of other activities associated with music.
Secondly, as the paper introduces the technical Cortical pathways enjoy greater plasticity4 than early
aspects of the neural basis of listening, it unpacks a pathways and their functioning are subject to learning
working hypothesis for the neural basis of mental and acculturation.5 However, the fact that sounds go
imageries elicited by music, based on the notion that through the same early pathways does not mean that
such imageries are by-products of the inherent everybody processes them in the same way at this stage.
abstracting and predicting properties of the brain. In The brain differs slightly from person to person;
this sense, such mental imageries are regarded as therefore, degrees of functionality may differ slightly in
scaffolds for music perception. Our objective is not, the early auditory pathways.
however, to propose yet another definition of musical
imagery (see for example Godoy and Jorgensen 2001),
but to identify neural mechanisms that may yield such 2.1. Early auditory pathways
phenomena. In this context, musical mental imagery
While the pathways are introduced below in terms of
may be a rather abstract feeling (e.g., ‘this sound feels
ascending pathways, the reader must bear in mind
heavy’), and it may involve associations with other
that there are also descending pathways, which trace
sensory modalities, particularly in people who are
identical routes back from the primary auditory
prone to synaesthesia3 (e.g., lexical–gustatory synaes-
cortex all the way to the ear. The specific functions of
thesia whereby flavours are evoked by music).
the descending pathways are still subject to much
Thirdly, the paper indicates how a better under-
debate. It is generally agreed that they are involved in
standing of our musical brain may lead to the
top-down processes modulating the early processing
development of new music technologies, especially
of incoming sounds on the basis of previous sounds
for electroacoustic music.
(Schofield and Cant 1999). This notion is funda-
The paper is organised as follows. It begins with a
mental for the discussions on mental imageries
review of the physiology of the auditory pathways,
elicited by music, which will be introduced later.6
including the early auditory pathways and cortical
The early auditory pathways will be introduced
auditory pathways. Then it discusses the notions of
below in terms of major points of functional con-
abstraction, representation, anticipation and organi-
vergence of neuronal structures, where significant
sation of auditory information, and their roles in the
development of mental imageries elicited by music.
4
Next, it presents a tentative functional map of the Brain plasticity refers to the brain’s ability to change throughout
life. A significant part of our brain circuitry is shaped by our
musical brain, followed by a speculative discussion activities and experiences.
5
Acculturation is the process by which somebody absorbs the
culture of a society from birth onward.
3 6
Synaesthesia is often described as a joining of the senses, where As we shall see later, the notion of traffic going in different
sensations in one modality (e.g., hearing) produce sensations in directions also applies to the cortical auditory pathways, albeit not
another modality (e.g., colour) as well as its own. specifically referred to in terms of ascending or descending.
 Organised Sound, Mental Imageries and the Future of Music Technology 15

Figure 1. The early auditory pathways begin at the ear and ends at the auditory cortex. 1 5 auditory nerve, 2 5 cochlear nuclei,
3 5 superior olivary complex, 4 5 lateral lemniscus, 5 5 inferior colliculus, 6 5 thalamus, 7 5 transverse termporal gyri (primary
auditory cortex). The schematic figure is combined with two fMRI scans indicating approximately where the various
components are located, viewing from the sagittal (to the right of the figure) and coronal (to the top of the figure) planes.

auditory signal processing seems to take place: high frequencies stimulating cells near the outer edge
cochlear nuclei, lateral lemniscus, superior olivary of the spiral, and the low frequencies stimulating cells
complex, inferior colliculus and thalamus (figure 1). near the centre. Note, however, that this notion of
tonotopy in the cochlea is not universally accepted.
2.1.1. Outer ear There are arguments suggesting that hair cell’s fre-
quency selectivity is actually derived from the auditory
Auditory signal processing in humans starts with the
cortex. A compromise here would be to consider that
outer ear, which channels sounds towards the tym-
such tonotopy is due to a combination of number of
panic membrane, or eardrum. The tympanic mem-
factors, which may indeed include an important con-
brane vibrates in response to air pressure changes and
tribution from the auditory cortex; hence the impor-
this vibration is relayed through the middle ear via
tance of the descending pathways mentioned earlier.
three small bones: the malleus, the incus and the
Spiral ganglion cells synapse onto the hair cells,
stapes. The last of these is connected to the oval
and due to a pattern of innervating nearby cells, also
window, which leads into the cochlea, which in turn is
show tonotopic frequency selectivity. They fire action
filled with fluid. The spiral-shaped cochlea forms the
potentials when stimulated, and their firing rate is
inner ear, and is responsible for transforming liquid
approximately linearly related to the intensity of the
motion into electrical neural signals. The movement
sound, hence this information is also encoded. Alto-
of the liquid results in the movement of the basilar
gether, the ear takes differences in air pressure, trans-
membrane and the subsequent stimulation of motion-
forms them first into liquid motion, and then into
sensitive hair cells. The basilar membrane gets wider
tonotopically organised neural signals that encode both
towards the centre of the spiral, and also decreases in
frequency and intensity (i.e., loudness) information.
stiffness. These two factors give it the crucial property
of tonotopic7 frequency selectivity: hair cells at given
locations will respond maximally to particular fre- 2.1.2. Cochlear nuclei
quencies8 and do so in an ordered fashion, with the
The axons of the spiral ganglion cells of the cochlea
form the auditory nerve (1, in figure 1), and from here
7
Tonotopic refers to cells having the quality of being spatially the signal moves from the ear to subcortical brain
organised by tone, or frequency. Tones whose frequencies are close regions, more specifically to the brainstem. The
to each other activate topologically neighbouring cells.
8
And to a lesser extent to adjacent frequencies, giving them a auditory nerve terminates in the cochlear nuclei (2, in
characteristic tuning curve. figure 1), which can be divided into one dorsal and
16 Eduardo Reck Miranda

two ventral regions. The ventral cochlear nuclei Connors and Paradiso 2001). The medial superior
contain stellate cells, which are frequency-specific and olive (part of the olivary complex) appears to be
encode intensity information within their firing rate, involved in identifying source location through the
and bushy cells, which fire once at a stimulus onset, use of timing information (which is more sensitive
thus providing sound onset timing information. to low-frequency sounds), while the lateral superior
As there are also substantial connections between olive (part of the olivary complex) appears to
the cochlear nuclei of the two hemispheres (Shore, identify location by using sound intensity infor-
Godfrey, Helfert, Altschuler and Bledsoe 1992), mation instead (which is more sensitive to high-
bushy cells also provide enough information to start frequency sounds). Thus two different types of
to encode horizontal position information (since source location mechanisms are available at this
this is dependent on timing between the two ears). early point in the auditory pathway. Basically, they
The dorsal cochlear nucleus contains fusiform cells,9 sense that sounds should be louder in the ear next
which appear to be involved in vertical position to the source. These combined with frequency
encoding, and tuberculoventral cells, which are information allows for rapid processing of locali-
involved in identifying and suppressing the response sation information.
of ventral bushy cells to echo sounds, thus allowing a
very rapid discrimination between a source sound
2.1.5. Inferior colliculus
and its echo.
The inferior colliculus (5, in figure 1) is where the
various early auditory pathways once again converge
2.1.3. Lateral lemniscus
and it appears to be engaged in further processing of
There are several pathways from the cochlear nuclei source location. The inferior colliculus also receives
onwards. The dorsal acoustic stria is a collection of inputs from inferior colliculus in the opposite hemi-
axons that represent one of the main pathways, sphere. It is arranged in layers, and orthogonal to these
leading from the dorsal cochlear nucleus to both the layers the organisation seems to reflect the tonotopic
lateral lemniscus (in the pons: 4, in figure 1) and the map of the basilar membrane. Two additional impor-
inferior colliculus (in the midbrain: 5, in figure 1). tant properties to note here are: (a) it receives somato-
Some of the axons from the cochlear nuclei terminate sensory inputs and (b) it has much greater processing
in the lateral lemniscus, but others use it as a relay power than lower structures, having some 400,000
station, passing their signal to other neurons that neurons, as opposed to about 34,000 in the superior
move on to the inferior colliculus. However, the olivary complex (Worden 1971).
majority simply pass right through the lateral lem- Perhaps as a result of these properties, the inferior
niscus, projecting directly to the inferior colliculus. colliculus function as some sort of processing bottle-
Like the cochlear nuclei, the lateral lemnisci in both neck in the auditory system. Lower inputs converge
hemispheres are also connected, allowing some form upon on it, and higher inputs to the superior colli-
of binaural processing at this stage. culus (which performs early integration with the
It is not entirely clear why most axons pass right visual system), to the reticular formation (involved in
through the lateral lemniscus, projecting directly to autonomic processing), to the cerebellum (important
the inferior colliculus, whereas only a few connect to centre of motor activity) and to the thalamus are
neurons in the lateral lemniscus, and others even projected from it.
terminate here. It is readily understood nevertheless Interestingly, and of particular relevance to compo-
that the brain begins to process binaural information sers interested in using space as a compositional
very early on, and it seems that some sort of filtering parameter, the processing of spatial localisation of
is taking place here. sound occurs very early on in the auditory system.10
The fact that the inferior colliculus sends some infor-
mation bypassing the auditory cortex to vital areas
2.1.4. Superior olivary complex
of the brain – such as the superior colliculus (which
In addition to the dorsal pathways (towards the performs early integration with the visualsystem), the
upper side of the brain), the main ventral pathway reticular formation (involved in autonomic processing)
(towards the lower side of the brain) projects first and the cerebellum (involved in motor coordination) –
to the superior olivary complex (3, in figure 1) in indicates that the brain begins to use information on
both hemispheres via the trapezoid body (Bear, sound localisation very early indeed.

9 10
This type of cells is otherwise found mostly in the cerebellum. The The fact that this is processed in subcortical areas indicate that
cerebellum, which has been traditionally associated with planning this ability appeared very early on in the evolution of the brain.
and coordination of motor movement, and equilibrium, also seems ‘Where it is coming from’, ‘what sort of pitch’ and ‘how loud’ are
to play a role in auditory function. very important for survival.
 Organised Sound, Mental Imageries and the Future of Music Technology 17

2.1.6. Thalamus
The thalamus (6, in figure 1), or more precisely, a
part of the thalamus referred to as the medial geni-
culate nucleus (MGN), represents the next stage in
the early auditory pathways. It is considered to be the
gateway to the cerebral cortex. The thalamus is lar-
gely responsible for control of attention; for example,
it enables us to focus on a particular instrument from
all other sounds in an orchestral piece. It seems that
its role is to direct information to the cortex or to
suppress it. The MGN receives inputs from the
inferior colliculus and from a variety of other areas,
which include visual and somatosensory areas. It is
here that sensory information from different mod- Figure 2. The early cortical pathways end at the transverse
alities is combined (Hodges, Hairston and Burdette temporal gyri, also known as the primary auditory cortex.
2005) and where visual information, for example, can The primary auditory cortex is tonotopically organised,
reflecting the organisation of hair cells in the basilar
effectively modulate the auditory signal. Neurons in
membrane. In the auditory cortex, low frequencies are
the MGN seem to be organised tonotopically and are
represented laterally, towards to the surface of the cortex,
frequency-specific (i.e., different groups of neurons and high frequencies represented medially, towards to the
respond to specific bands of frequencies) but at much centre of the brain. (The image of the brain was published
broader tuning curves than the neurons earlier in the in Nolte and Angevine (2007) and is reproduced with
auditory pathway. Some neurons here also specifi- permission from Mosby/Elsevier.)
cally encode sound intensity level.

The early auditory pathways end at A1, but audi-

tory processing certainly does not. However, from
2.2. Cortical auditory pathways
here onwards, there is no longer a clear principal
The MGN projects mostly onto the transverse tem- route for the auditory signal as we have seen in the
poral gyrus,11 bilaterally (i.e., on both lateral sides of early auditory pathways. Instead, which cortical
the brain), popularly known as the primary auditory areas are actively involved depend largely on the
cortex – hereafter referred to as A1 (7, in figure 1). characteristics of the sounds in question. Clearly, the
Some of it also projects to other neighbouring brain does not process music as a single monolithic
regions, such as the secondary auditory cortex. As in entity. Rather, music is processed as a set of auditory
preceding areas of the early auditory pathway, A1 is characteristics (pitch, rhythm, spectrum, etc.), each of
also tonotopically organised (figure 2). which may engage distinct neural structures, or music
Located on the superior surface of the temporal mental modules13 (Peretz and Morais 1989; Besson
lobe, A1 is a crucial neural area for auditory pro- and Schön 2003; Peretz and Coltheart 2003).
cessing, playing a central role in a process that has The notion of cortical music mental modules
been referred to as auditory Gestalten (Koelsch and (hereafter referred to as MMM) is more theoretical
Siebel 2005). It communicates with a number of than strictly anatomical. A MMM is not necessarily a
areas, which contribute to the formation of such particular cluster of neurons that one could clearly
Gestalten; for instance, its connectivity with the pin down in the brain. Rather, it should be thought of
cerebellum indicates influence of motor function in as a collection of neural structures, which are likely to
auditory processing, and vice versa. be spread out across the brain, that together tackle a
A variety of functional cortical networks develop particular class of problems. For instance, the MMM
from A1. One important distinction that appears in for processing pitch seems to involve (but not exclu-
the areas immediately surrounding A1 is between a sively): the superior temporal gyrus, which includes
‘what’ pathway and a ‘where’ pathway,12 with ‘what’ A1 (especially on the right hemisphere) (Griffiths
information being processed anterior to A1 on the 2003); the cerebellum (Parsons 2003, 2005); and the
superior temporal gyrus, and ‘where’ information sensorimotor cortex in the parietal lobe (Halpern
being processed posterior to A1 (Arnott, Grady, 2003). In contrast, the MMM for processing rhythm
Hevenor, Graham and Alain 2005).
13
This term ‘music mental modules’ is introduced here after the
11
Also called Heschl’s gyri, after Richard Ladislaus Heschl, the notion of mental modules proposed by philosopher Jerry Fodor
anatomist who is credited for being the first to study this area in the (1988). Fodor was very influential in the field Artificial Intelligence
1850s. due to his emphasis on characterising a mental module by its ability
12
There is an analogue of this in visual processing. to encapsulate information.
18 Eduardo Reck Miranda

Table 1. Examples of non-musical roles of neural

structures engaged in processing music.
Brain area Roles other than in music
Right superior Involved in solving problems with a
temporal gyrus unique process called insight,
accompanied by an ‘Aha!’ experience
(Jung-Beeman et al. 2004).
Cerebellum Controls our balance and postural
stability, and is involved in motor
coordination. Also plays a role in
processing speech and language
(Fabbro et al. 2000).
Sensorimotor cortex Plays an important role in capturing
and understanding the actions of
others (Pineda 2008).
Left inferior Involved in integrating information
temporal gyrus from different modalities, such as
action and language information
(e.g., hand gestures accompanying
speech) (Willems et al. 2009).
Figure 3. A functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) Bilateral middle Involved in recognition of known
brain scanning experiment with modulations around the temporal gyrus faces (Elfgren et al. 2006) and
circle of fifths detected increased blood flow in a number of accessing the meaning of words
neural structures, including bilateral activation of trans- (Binder 2009).
verse temporal gyrus (1, 2), right insula (3) and left anterior Right frontal Involved in emotional gesturing
cingulate gyrus (4). Top of the image is the front of the operculum (Ross and Mesulam 1979).
head. Thus, the image is reversed; that is, the left side of the Right insula Involved in risk-taking decision-
brain is shown on the right side of the image, and vice versa. making (Paulus et al. 2003).
Talairach x, y, z coordinates are as follows: right transverse Processing of emotion and
temporal gyrus 5 {51, 217, 10}, left transverse temporal integration of affective information
gyrus 5 {251, 218, 11}, right insula 5 {36, 17, 13} and left (Shah et al. 2009).
anterior cingulate gyrus 5 {21, 41, 11}. Talairach coordi- Left anterior Error detection (Stroop 1935),
nates are used to describe the location of brain structures cingulate gyrus attentive or effortful perception
on a generic model of the brain, independent from (Carter et al. 1997).
individual differences and size.

seems to involve (but not exclusively): the left inferior areas in response to modulations of chord sequences
temporal gyrus, the bilateral middle temporal gyrus around the circle of fifths. Obviously, some of these
(Parsons 2003) and the right frontal operculum neural structures may participate in more than one
(Limb, Kemeny, Ortigoza, Rouhani and Braun MMM. For instance, Parsons (2003) found that the
2006). At the Interdisciplinary Centre for Computer cerebellum is also involved in processing rhythm.
Music Research (ICCMR) in Plymouth, we detected Obviously, the neural structures of an MMM are not
evidence that the MMM for processing changes in necessarily dedicated to processing music only. They
tonal key may include A1, right insula and left may overlap with neural structures for other functions
anterior cingulated gyrus (Durrant, Hardoon, such as body movement, speech and emotion, to cite
Miranda, Shawe-Taylor, Brechmann and Scheich but three. Table 1 lists examples of roles of the afore-
2007; Durrant, Hardoon, Brechmann, Shawe-Taylor, mentioned neural structures in tasks other than music.
Miranda and Scheich 2009). Figure 3 shows a func- There have been a number of reports on a condition
tional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) image referred to as acquired amusia15 (Peretz 2003), where
where increase in blood flow14 was detected in such selective impairments in music recognition abilities
occurred after brain damage. Amusia can selectively
impact pitch, interval, contour, rhythm, metre, timbre
14
fMRI measures blood flows by taking advantage of magnetic and emotional response (Brust 2003), which further
properties of our blood. Neural activity causes variations in oxy-
genated blood, which leads to magnetic variation. Thus, it is
important to understand that fMRI does not detect neural activity
15
per se, but blood flow, which may be associated with increased or Amusia literally means the lack of music. It refers to someone’s
decreased neural activity in the millions of cells in each of the inability to recognise musical tones or to reproduce them. Amusia
voxels analysed. (A voxel is a tiny area of the brain; it is a ‘volume can be congenital (present at birth) or be acquired some time later
element’, comparable to a pixel, which is a ‘picture element’). in life (e.g., brain damage after an accident).
 Organised Sound, Mental Imageries and the Future of Music Technology 19

supports the existence of MMMs for different aspects 3. SEQUENCING AND HIGHER-ORDER
of music rather than a single, unitary musical proces- STRUCTURES
sing system in the brain. This should not necessarily
Obviously, the processing of a single sound is not music
imply that mental modules are readily available at
processing. Rather, music concerns sequences of sounds
birth. It is more likely that the cortex may to some
organised in some way; it is a time-based art form. Per-
extent begin as a general-purpose processor that
haps the most straightforward form of sound sequen-
becomes progressively more specific (Altenmüller 2003).
cing in music is the melody, which would normally
There certainly are, however, regions of the cortex that
involve sequencing sounds in function of their pitch.
are particularly relevant for musical processing from
Given that pitch and rhythm are important con-
birth (for instance, A1), which, during development and
stituents of melody, the MMM for melody processing
in engagement with some form of musical activity,
would certainly include neural structures for proces-
become progressively more reactive to music. For
sing pitch and rhythm. These may be combined
instance, ask a non-musician to close their eyes and
additively or interactively with respect to particular
imagine for a moment the sound of one note (any note)
cognitive functions, such as phrase perception (Palmer
on an instrument, say a flute. Then, ask the same
and Krumhansl 1987; Jusczyk and Krumhansl 1993)
person to imagine the instrument itself. Ask if they can
or metre perception (Hannon, Snyder, Eerola and
hear the note in their ‘mind’s ear’ as clearly as they can
Krumhansl 2004). In addition, melody processing
depict a flute in their ‘mind’s eye’. The answer would
involves representations that span over time. The
most probably be negative. But if you do the same
neural structures of the MMM for processing melody
exercise with a musician, then the answer would most
therefore include not only those for pitch and
probably be affirmative. Quoting Damasio (2001: 59)
rhythm, but also those involved in working memory
‘We come to this world with a brain equipped with a
and the processing of higher-order structure.
variety of preset circuits. Most of these have to do with
Griffiths (2003) reports findings that sequential
life regulation; they are located in the diencephalon and
pitch processing produces activity in the posterior
brain stem and they regulate basic biological functions,
superior temporal gyrus (planum temporale) and
which ensure our survival. After birth, most of the non-
frontal opercula (inferior frontal gyrus), with greater
preset brain circuitry begins to be shaped by our own
activity in the right hemisphere. These regions are
activities and experiences. The term ‘‘plasticity’’ refers
believed to be involved in the processing of sequences,
to that reshaping. Because our encounters with the
and may play a role in passing information to regions
environment are unique, the brain circuitries are shaped
of higher-order structure processing in the frontal
somewhat differently in each of us.’ To a large extent,
lobe. Consistent with this, Griffiths also highlights
to understand in greater detail how the brain of a
networks of frontal-lobe activation quite distinct from
particular individual processes music, one would need
those in the temporal lobe. This is in agreement with
to have access to their ‘learning biography’, some sort
the facts that the frontal lobe is known to be involved
of ontomemetic memory (Gimenes and Miranda forth-
in higher-order cognitive functions, whereas the tem-
coming), reflecting how particular neurological bonds
poral lobe, by contrast, seems to be involved in lower-
developed as a result of particular experiences.
level pitch and rhythm processing. Research by Peretz
So far we have stressed that the nature of the musical
(1990) and more recently by Stewart, Overath, Warren,
stimuli and the plasticity of the cortex define the cortical
Foxton and Griffiths (2008) suggests that higher-
auditory pathways and the extent to which certain
order structure processing does not necessarily take
MMMs may contribute to processing music. However,
place as a consequence of detailed processing of its
little has been said about another, perhaps even more
lower-level components. In the case of melody, some
important, detail: the type of the musical activity in
form of hierarchical cooperation seems to take place
question. Listening to music played through loudspea-
in the sense that the processing of contour may even
kers comfortably seated on a cosy sofa in the sitting
precede the processing of the specific pitches.
room, and listening to a work-in-progress piece of
electroacoustic music as it is being mixed in the studio
are different activities, which would most certainly
4. ABSTRACTION AND ANTICIPATION
engage the brain differently. And so would sight-reading
a Beethoven piano sonata and improvising in a jam Higher-order representation and processing in the
session on the piano. The auditory brain mechanisms brain involve a great deal of abstraction. The notion
discussed so far are somewhat generally applicable to of abstraction is hard to pin down. We will attempt to
the great majority of musical activities. But from shed light on this by means of a couple of examples.
hereafter the discussion becomes increasingly less The aforementioned suggestion that some higher-
generalised. Therefore, unless otherwise stated, from order structure processes the contour of a melody,
now on the first scenario above is assumed: that is, while some lower-order structure processes specific
listening to music played through loudspeakers. pitches, is a good example to illustrate what we mean
20 Eduardo Reck Miranda

by abstraction; that is, assuming that we come to an would process those tasks completely unconnected
understanding that the notion of a melodic contour is from each other. As we have briefly seen above, brain
more abstract than the notion of a sequence of pitch resources are shared, albeit it is not entirely clear how
values. Another example is the notions of beat and the brain manages simultaneous tasks whose resour-
metre. The perception of rhythm is structured by beat ces overlap. This is a problem of consciousness.
and metre induction mechanisms. Our brain always A discussion on consciousness is beyond the scope
tries to infer an underlying regular beat in a sequence of this paper. However, we would hardly need to
of tones. Even in a sequence of absolutely uniform plunge into such discussion to appreciate that the
tones (i.e., same pitch, duration, loudness and timbre) brain cannot afford the delay that it would take to
the brain would infer a beat by ‘imposing’ a metric wire from scratch billions of neurons for every leap of
template on the perceived signal.16 This phenomenon consciousness. We have evolved strategies to react to
does not seem to be dependent on training or attention, sensations as quickly as possible. Memory mechan-
which suggests that such a metric template is a high- isms of all sorts certainly optimise brain functioning,
level abstraction emerging from some low-level bio- but it still takes time to retrieve memorised neuro-
logical feature of the brain. Such mechanisms for logical configurations. Our reactions to most of the
abstracting higher-level musical structures in response stimuli around us are delayed to some extent and
to avalanches of lower-level auditory information music stimuli are not exceptions. One of the strategies
pervade our brain when we listen to music.17 that evolved in the brain to deal with huge amounts
Cortical neural processing of music is an incredibly of information flow and minimise reaction delays is
complex affair, which is still not well understood. It is to make predictions, or anticipations.19
clear, however, that the brain employs hierarchical Neuroscientists generally agree that the brain is
neural structures18 to process music (Griffiths, often prepared in advance by the very first incoming
Büchel, Frackowiack and Patterson 1998; Patterson, signals, for how it will react prior to actually pro-
Upperkamp, Johnsrude and Griffiths 2002; Stewart cessing the whole lot of sensory information that is
et al. 2008), and these processes may not necessarily coming in. Concerning auditory processing, our
happen sequentially. The brain is a complex dis- soundscape is normally composed of several simul-
tributed processing system, with various structures taneous sources. It is therefore important to keep
operating concurrently and at different time scales, track of sound sources by building representations to
from short-term to long-term musical forms. For distinguish between the sounds streaming from the
instance, whereas lower-level structures may take same source and the sounds originating from differ-
care of processing the pitches of a sound sequence, ent sources. The brain needs to evaluate how well
higher-level structures would take care of processing incoming sounds fit within the existing representa-
the melodic contour engendered by the pitches of tions, because the arrival of a sound that cannot be
those sounds. But these processes might not neces- deemed as a continuation of any of the previously
sarily be bottom-up; higher-level structures in the registered streams indicates either the beginning of a
brain may make estimations of how the contour new source or a change in the activity of an existing
should evolve and this may influence how lower-level source. In order to do this, the brain needs to build
structures process pitches. predictive models, whose purpose is to estimate pat-
The amount of information that flows in the brain terns in the incoming stimuli. These predictive models
is immense. Although this paper focuses on music allow the brain to interact with the world efficiently.
cognition, we ought to not turn our back to the fact
that the brain is in charge of running our entire body:
5. AN IMPELLING FORCE TO ORGANISE
it will be engaged in a number of other vital tasks
SOUND
while we listen to music. It is unlikely that the brain
We have seen earlier that whenever we hear a sound
16 sequence the brain separates out information relating to
The issue of rhythmic anticipation would certainly deserve a
detailed discussion on its own right, but this is beyond the scope of location, intensity, pitch, onset timing and so forth
this paper. The reader is advised to refer to the work of Jones and during its journey from the early auditory pathway to
colleagues (Yee, Holleran and Jones 1994; Klein and Jones 1996; the superior temporal gyrus, which contains A1. The
Jones and Yee 1997; Barnes and Jones 2000; Drake, Jones and
Baruch 2000, Jones, Moynihan, MacKenzie and Puente 2002). pitch of the melody is by and large processed in A1 and
17
See Temperley 2001 for an interesting account on modelling such surrounding areas, while the rhythm is processed else-
abstraction mechanisms on computers, including models for where, mostly in the temporal lobe (e.g., the bilateral
detecting metre, tonal key and harmonic structure in given scores.
18
The notion that the brain uses hierarchical structures to process middle temporal gyrus). Other information is processed
music is well discussed in the field of psychology of music. For a elsewhere, and so on. Then, all these features are
succinct introduction to psychological music structures, see chapter
6 of Sloboda 2005. This book is an excellent read for a glance at the
19
tremendous contributions of this field to the understanding of For a comprehensive discussion on anticipation in music please
music. refer to Huron 2006.
 Organised Sound, Mental Imageries and the Future of Music Technology 21

(re-)combined in the frontal lobe, where higher-order closely match the sensory experience. In this way, we
features, which may include information as to how the construct models of the world, which are increasingly
pitch and rhythm interact, are processed; this process is more specialised. Therefore, intrinsic innate proces-
referred to as binding. This frontal-lobe activity may sing strategies combined with evolving experience
include dorsolateral frontal areas involved in working drive our impelling force to organise sound.
memory.
Quoting Ratey (2001: 93), ‘We receive sound as an
6. TOWARDS A FUNCTIONAL MAP OF THE
incoming mishmash of pressure waves – not just one
MUSICAL BRAIN
vibration, but layer upon layer. y Part of our ability
to make sense of all this is due to the fact that we Essentially, the brain is a predictive organ, which
develop models of what we expect to hear: phonemes, strives to find structure in sensory information (or to
words, music. As we perceive sound, it either fulfils impose it). In order to do this efficiently, it needs to
our expected models or surprises us.’ make abstractions to fuel the relentless processes of
Our auditory system sports a rather sophisticated making internal representations of the world. Behind
filtering system, which helps us to focus on the primary these processes there is an impelling force to organise
sounds we are listening out for – or paying attention to – sensory information, which is driven by the physio-
as well as those that we would expect to experience. logical nature of our brain and its own evolving
Much of this filtering happens at the early auditory internal representations, or models, of the world.
pathways, notably at the thalamus, long before we are While we listen to music the auditory system
conscious of it. People with problems in the thalamus breaks down sensory information into elementary
often hear things that others do not. In severe cases they units, which are processed at various parts of the
become easily overwhelmed by the environment, which brain. At various stages through the cortical auditory
can be very frustrating for them; minor sounds that most pathways, the brain processes this information
people can ignore may become unbearable to people according to our memories of previous experiences.
with an impaired thalamus (Ratey 2001). This illustrates In figure 4 is an attempt at drawing a functional map
well the reason we have neurons projecting from the of the musical brain. The shaded circle represents the
brain to the ears as well as from the ears to the brain. auditory pathways; there are three concentric subareas
The brain actively detects patterns in auditory delimited by dashed lines representing the outer ear
input; this is referred to as active hearing. As we listen (where hearing begins), the early auditory pathways
to music, our brain will continuously seek for reg- and the cortical auditory pathways, respectively. The
ularities in the incoming stimuli. A range of features, lines are dashed because the functional boundaries are
or combinations of them, defines these regularities hazy. Labelled squared boxes represent the various
and, as we have seen earlier, they are extracted at functions that were mentioned in this article, which are
many different levels and timescales. Active hearing is deemed important for the emergence of mental ima-
not a flimsy concept: the brain really tries hard and it geries elicited by music. The functions are placed over
may make up something if necessary; for example, regions of the circle where they roughly take place, but
impose a metric template on a sequence of entirely they should be seen as drifting within their respective
uniform tones, as discussed earlier. Such metre is not hierarchical bandwidths. The closer a function is to the
in the signal; it is in the brain. outer border, the higher its order, and therefore the
Active hearing would not be possible without the more abstract the information at stake. On the left side,
descending pathways and all other projections from the two dashed arrows represent the traffic of neural
higher-order cortical functions to lower-order func- activation going in opposite directions, from ear to
tions. For instance, it is known that descending cortex (ascending) and from cortex to ear (descending).
pathways from the superior olivary complex to the These arrows indicate that while the brain breaks down
outer ear carry efferent signals to the ear, which affect sensory information into elementary units for bottom-
the vibration of its basilar membrane. This can up processing, it also applies a number of higher-level
change the response of the cochlea; for example, cognitive frameworks for top-down processing. For
modulating the gain of a sound in the affected instance, the brain makes a number of changes in the
cochlear region (Cooper and Guinan 2003). inner ear thorough the descending auditory pathways,
Building predictive models of the incoming sensory in order to maximise its ability to focus our hearing to
input through the extraction of regularities, towards what we need or, perhaps more so, what our brain
emergent (and not so emergent) abstractions, is a expects to hear. These cortex-to-ear pathways are
fundamental aspect of cognition. By adapting to central to our working hypothesis that mental ima-
patterns in the world, the brain becomes more geries elicited by music are a by-product of the inherent
sensitive to stimuli that differ from those implied abstracting and predicting properties of the brain; these
by the detected regularities. Such different signals pathways convey anticipations. They seem to act as
excite the brain to refine its representations to more scaffolds for music perception.
22 Eduardo Reck Miranda

Figure 4. Tentative functional map of the musical brain.

7. ENVISAGING THE FUTURE OF MUSIC analysis lag far behind the theoretical work of scho-
TECHNOLOGY: ANALYSIS OF lars such as Smalley (1997), Landy (2007) and
ELECTROACOUSTIC MUSIC Emmerson (2007), to cite but three examples. The
great majority of tools available for the analysis of
The emerging field of music neurotechnology draws
electroacoustic music are based on the Fourier
from research into the neurosciences to develop new
transform paradigm, which offers a spectrographic
technologies for music. For instance, ongoing devel-
representation of a sound. For instance, the Acous-
opments in this field include brain–computer inter-
mographe, developed by Le Groupe de Recherches
facing technology that uses electroencephalogram20
Musicales (GRM) in Paris is probably one of the best
information to steer generative rules to compose
tools available for the visualisation and annotation of
and perform music (Miranda 2006). This research
electroacoustic music. Yet the best it can offer in
is opening new possibilities in recreational and
terms of signal analysis is the spectrogram.
therapeutic devices for people with severe physical
In a paper read at the AHRC ICT Methods Net-
disability but able brain function.
work Workshop on New Protocols in Electroacoustic
In this section we speculate on possible develop-
Music Analysis, held at De Montfort University, in
ments that may have an impact on the electroacoustic
June 2007, this author speculated on the unprece-
music community: new technology for the analysis of
dented possibility of building tools for the analysis of
electroacoustic music.
electroacoustic music based on neurophysiologic
Despite tremendous advances in computing tech-
models of our auditory system. These tools would
nology, the tools available for electroacoustic music
reveal the ‘representation’21 that our brain produces
at various stages of the auditory pathways. To the
20
The electroencephalogram expresses the overall electrical activity
of millions of neurons in the brain by means of electrodes placed
21
either on the surface of the scalp or on the surface of the cortex The term ‘representation’ may not be the best to label this.
beneath the skull. Neuroscientists use the term ‘neural code’.
 Organised Sound, Mental Imageries and the Future of Music Technology 23

best of our knowledge, apart from the cochleogram22 auditory cortex (7, figure 1). The auditory cortico-
there have been no significant developments towards gram would extend the aforementioned thalamogram
tools for the analysis of electroacoustic music based by building representations and anticipations. One
on neurophysiologic models. However, research into could envisage some sort of ‘thalamocortical control
building computational models of auditory brain panel’, which would allow for building representa-
functioning is an area that is evolving rapidly, and tions combining different levels of attention to var-
progress at this front is bound to emerge in the near ious sound features, influences from other sensorial
future. modalities, and exposure. Ultimately, the thalamo-
Having described the journey that sounds take cortical control panel would allow one simulate and
through the early auditory pathways in section 2.1 predict the types of representations that would
above, below we enumerate the analysis tools that emerge from different ontologies. The analysis could
could be developed based on the various stages of this be furnished with different listening strategies based
journey and the types of information that they would on exposure to different sound worlds.
elicit. We envisage at least four of such analysis tools:
the cochlearnucleigram, the olivogram, the thalamo-
8. CONCLUDING REMARKS
gram and the auditory corticogram.
The cochlearnucleigram would give information One of the principal contributions of the burgeoning
related to the activity of the cochlear nuclei (2, in field of neuroscience of music to our understanding
figure 1). It would be a powerful source separation tool of our musical brain is the elucidation of various
based on minute onset and spatial information. The neural pathways through which the auditory signal is
cochlearnucleigram would be able to provide precise processed. At the introduction, the challenging task
onset information and trace the behaviour of the of understanding how the brain processes music was
sounds in the horizontal and in the vertical planes. metaphorically compared with the task of assembling
The olivogram would give information related to a complex jigsaw with missing parts. In this paper we
the activity of the superior olivary complex (3, in made an attempt at putting together a few pieces of
figure 1). This analysis would provide further infor- such a jigsaw in order to assemble a picture of how
mation about sound localisation using two types of our brain listens to music.
mechanisms: one based on timing information and There are various stages in the neural pathways
another based on sound intensity. Identification of through which music is processed, each of which
sound location through the use of timing information extracts different types of information from the signal.
would focus on low-frequency sounds whereas the Basically, once the sound enters our ears, our auditory
use of intensity information would focus on high- system decomposes the signal into a number of attri-
frequency sounds. butes on its way up to the brain cortex. Then the brain
The thalamogram would give information related to puts all these attributes back together. Interestingly,
the activity of the MGN in the thalamus (6, in figure 1). these attributes are modulated by other sensorial
As we have seen earlier, the thalamus controls atten- information before they are put back together.
tion: it enables the brain to suppress information in More research is needed, however, to bring to the
order to focus on particular aspects of incoming surface more evidence to back the hypothesis that
sounds. The thalamogram would reveal salient sound mental imageries elicited by music are by-products of
attributes that would be deemed more important than the inherent abstracting and predicting properties of
others in function of specific contexts or conditions. the brain. However, there is enough work out there
One could imagine the possibility of being able to suggesting that the brain strives to find or impose
specify such contexts as analyses parameters for simu- structure on sensory information (e.g., Stroh 1983;
lating the focus of the thalamus under different contexts Bressler 2000; Hampe and Grady 2005). In order to
or conditions. This would reveal the impact of different do this efficiently, it needs to make abstractions to
sensorial modalities on the auditory signal. A number fuel relentless processes of making internal repre-
of interesting analysis parameters could be envisaged sentations and anticipations, aimed at optimising the
here: the amount of modulation from other sensorial amount of neural processing the brain needs to make
modalities, the types of modalities to be considered sense of the world as the time goes by. Behind these
and/or ignored, modalities priorities, and so on. processes there is an impelling force to organise sen-
Finally, the auditory corticogram would give sory information, which is driven by the physiological
information related to the activity of the primary nature of our brain combined with its own internal
representations, or models, of the world. In this
sense, mental imageries elicited by music can be
22
The cochleogram provides patterns of excitation at the basilar regarded as a scaffold for music perception.
membrane of the cochlea in the inner ear as a function of time and
frequencies in Barks. An excellent cochleogram tool is provided Finally, research into the neurosciences is driving
with the Praat software (www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat). the development of a number of new technologies for
24 Eduardo Reck Miranda

all sorts of applications, including music. However, Attunement, Referent Period, Focal Attending. Cogni-
wider channels of communication need to be estab- tion 77: 251–88.
lished between neuroscientists and musicians in order Durrant, S., Hardoon, D., Miranda, E. R., Shawe-Taylor,
to ensure that the former address the right musical J., Brechmann, A. and Scheich, H. 2007. Neural
questions and the latter understand the implications Correlated of Tonality in Music. Proceedings of NIPS
Workshop on Music, Brain and Cognition. Whistler,
of neuroscientific answers. This would create a fertile
Canada, http://web.mac.com/davidrh/MBCworkshop07/
ground for musicologists and music technologists
Workshop.html (accessed on 27 July 2009).
to develop better theories and tools for the art of Durrant, S., Hardoon, D., Brechmann, A., Shawe-Taylor,
organised sound. J., Miranda, E. R. and Scheich, H. 2009. GLM and
SVM Analyses of Neural Response to Tonal and Atonal
Stimuli: New Techniques and a Comparison. Connection
REFERENCES
Science 21(2–3): 161–75.
Altenmüller, E. O. 2003. How Many Music Centres Are in Elfgren, C., van Westen, D., Passant, U., Larsson, E.-M.,
the Brain?. In I. Peretz and R. Zatorre (eds.) The Cog- Mannfolk, P. and Fransson, P. 2006. fMRI Activity
nitive Neuroscience of Music. Oxford: Oxford University in the Medial Temporal Lobe during Famous Face
Press, 346–53. Processing. NeuroImage 30(2): 6090–616.
Arnott, S. R., Grady, C. L., Hevenor, S. J., Graham, S. and Emmerson, S. 2007. Living Electronic Music. Aldershot:
Alain, C. 2005. The Functional Organization of Audi- Ashgate.
tory Working Memory as Revealed by fMRI. Journal of Fabbro, F., Moretti, R. and Bava, A. 2000. Language
Cognitive Neuroscience 17(5): 819–83. Impairments in Patients with Cerebellar Lesions.
Avanzini, G., Lopez, L., Koelsch, S. and Majno, M. (eds.) Journal of Neurolinguistics 13(203): 173–88.
2005. The Neurosciences of Music II: From Perception to Fodor, J. A. 1988. The Modularity of Mind: An Essay on
Performance. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Faculty Psychology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Vol. 1060. New York: The New York Academy of Sciences. Gimenes, M. and Miranda, E. R. forthcoming. An Onto-
Barnes, R. and Jones, M. R.. 2000. Expectancy, Attention, memetic Approach to Musical Intelligence. In E. R.
and Time. Cognitive Psychology 41: 254–311. Miranda (ed.) A-Life for Music: Music and Computer
Bear, M. K., Connors, B. W. and Paradiso, M. A. 2001. Models of Living Systems. Middleton: A-R Editions.
Neuroscience: Exploring the Brain (2nd ed.) Baltimore, Godoy, R. I. and Jorgensen, H (eds.) 2001. Musical Ima-
MD: Lippincott Williams Wilkins. gery. Milton Park: Routledge.
Besson, M. and Schön, D. 2003. Comparison Between Griffiths, T. D. 2003. The Neural Processing of Complex
Language and Music. In I. Peretz and R. Zatorre (eds.) Sounds. In I. Peretz and R. Zatorre (eds.) The Cognitive
The Cognitive Neuroscience of Music. Oxford: Oxford Neuroscience of Music. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
University Press, 269–93. 168–77.
Binder, J. R., Desai, R. H., Graves, W. W. and Conant, L. Griffiths, T., Büchel, C., Frackowiack, R. S. J. and Pat-
L. 2009. Where Is the Semantic System? A Critical terson, R. D. 1998. Analysis of Temporal Structure in
Review and Meta-Analysis of 120 Functional Neuro- Sound in the Brain. Nature Neuroscience 1: 422–7.
imaging Studies. Cerebral Cortex 19(12): 2767–96. Halpern, A. 2003. Cerebral Substrates of Musical Imagery. In
Bressler, S. L. 2000. The Dynamic Manifestation of Cognitive I. Peretz and R. Zatorre (eds.) The Cognitive Neuroscience
Structures in the Cerebral Cortex. In A. Riegler, M. Peschl of Music. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 217–30.
and A. von Stein (eds.) Understanding Representation in the Hampe, B. and Grady, J. E (eds.) 2005. From Perception
Cognitive Sciences: Does Representation Need Reality?, to Meaning: Image Schemas in Cognitive Linguistics.
Part 4, New York: Springer US, 121–216. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co.
Brust, J. C. M. 2003. Music and the Neurologist: A His- Hannon, E. E., Snyder, J. S., Eerola, T. and Krumhansl, C.
torical Perspective. In I. Peretz and R. Zatorre (eds.) L. 2004. The Role of Melodic and Temporal Cues in
The Cognitive Neuroscience of Music. Oxford: Oxford Perceiving Musical Meter. Journal of Experimental
University Press, 181–91. Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 30(5):
Carter, C. S., Mintun, M., Nichols, T. and Cohen, J. D. 956–74.
1997. Anterior Cingulate Gyrus Dysfunction and Hodges, D. A., Hairston, W. D. and Burdette, J. H. 2005.
Selective Attention Deficits in Schizophrenia: [15O]H2O Aspects of Multisensory Perception. Annals of the New
PET Study During Single-Trial Stroop Task Perfor- York Academy of Sciences 1060: 175–85.
mance. The American Journal of Psychiatry 154: 1670–5. Huron, D. 2006. Sweet Anticipation: Music and the Psychol-
Cooper, N. P. and Guinan, Jr. J. J. 2003. Separate ogy of Expectation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Mechanical Processes Underlie Fast and Slow Effects of Jones, M. R. and Yee, W. 1997. Sensitivity to Time
Medial Olivocochlear Efferent Activity. The Journal of Change: The Role of Context and Skill. Journal of
Physiology 548: 307–12. Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Damasio, A. 2001. Some Notes on Brain, Imagination and Performance 23: 693–709.
Creativity. In K. H. Pfenninger and V. R. Sjubik (eds.) Jones, M. R., Moynihan, H., MacKenzie, N. and Puente, J.
The Origins of Creativity. New York: Oxford University 2002. Temporal Aspects of Stimulus-Driven Attending
Press, 59–68. in Dynamic Arrays. Psychological Science 13: 313–19.
Drake, C., Jones, M. R. and Baruch, C. 2000. The Devel- Jung-Beeman, M., Bowden, E. M., Haberman, J., Frymiare,
opment of Rhythmic Attending in Auditory Sequences: J. L., Arambel-Liu, S., Greenblatt, R., Reber, P. J. and
 Organised Sound, Mental Imageries and the Future of Music Technology 25

Kounios, J. 2004. Neural Activity When People Solve Peretz, I. 2003. Brain Specialisation for Music: New
Verbal Problems with Insight. PLoS Biol 2(4): e97. Evidence from Congenital Amusia. In I. Peretz and
doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0020097. R. Zatorre (eds.) The Cognitive Neuroscience of Music.
Jusczyk, P. W. and Krumhansl, C. L. 1993. Pitch and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 192–203.
Rhythmic Patterns Affecting Infants’ Sensitivity to Peretz, I. and Coltheart, M. 2003. Modularity of music
Musical Phrase Structure. Journal of Experimental processing. Nature Neuroscience 6(7): 688–91.
Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 19(3): Peretz, I. and Morais, J. 1989. Music and Modularity.
627–40. Contemporary Music Review 4: 277–91.
Klein, J. M. and Jones, M. R. 1996. Effects of Attentional Peretz, I. and Zatorre, R. 2003. The Cognitive Neuroscience
Set and Rhythmic Complexity on Attending. Perception of Music. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
& Psychophysics 58: 34–46. Pineda, J. A. 2008. Sensorimotor Cortex as a Critical
Koelsch, S. and Siebel, W. A. 2005. Towards a Neural Basis Component of an ‘Extended’ Mirror Neuron System:
of Music Perception. Trends in Cognitive Science 9(12): Does it Solve the Development, Correspondence, and
578–84. Control Problems in Mirroring? Behavioral and Brain
Landy, L. 2007. The Art of Sound Organisation. Cambridge, Functions 4(47), doi:10.1186/1744-9081-4-47.
MA: The MIT Press. Ratey, J. 2001. A User’s Guide to the Brain. London: Little,
Limb, C. J., Kemeny, S., Ortigoza, E. B., Rouhani, S. and Brown and Company.
Braun, A. R. 2006. Left Hemispheric Lateralization of Ross, E. D. and Mesulam, M. M. 1979. Dominant Lan-
Brain Activity during Passive Rhythm Perception in guage Functions of the Right Hemisphere? Prosody and
Musicians. The Anatomical Record. Part A, Discoveries Emotional Gesturing. Archives of Neurology 36: 144–8.
in Molecular, Cellular, and Evolutionary Biology 288(4): Schofield, B. R. and Cant, N. B. 1999. Descending Audi-
382–9. tory Pathways: Projections from the Inferior Colliculus
Miranda, E. R. 2006. Brain–Computer Music Interface for Contact Superior Olivary Cells that Project Bilaterally
Composition and Performance. International Journal on to the Cochlear Nuclei. Journal of Computational Neu-
Disability and Human Development 5(2): 119–25. rology 409(2): 210–23.
Miranda, E. R. and Matthias, J. 2009. Music Neuro- Shah, S. G., Klumpp, H., Angstadt, M., Nathan, P. J. and
technology for Sound Synthesis: Sound Synthesis with Phan, K. L. 2009. Amygdala and Insula Response to
Spiking Neuronal Networks. Leonardo 42(5): 439–42. Emotional Images in Patients with Generalized Social
Miranda, E. R. and Overy, K. 2009. Preface: The Neuro- Anxiety Disorder. Journal of Psychiatry and Neu-
science of Music. Contemporary Music Review 28(3): roscience 34(4): 296–302.
1–4. Shore, S. E., Godfrey, D. A., Helfert, R. H., Altschuler, R. A.
Miranda, E. R., Bull, L., Gueguen, F. and Uroukov, I. S. and Bledsoe, Jr. S. C. 1992. Connection between the
2009. Computer Music Meets Unconventional Com- Cochlea Nuclei in the Guinea Pig. Hearing Research 62:
puting: Towards Sound Synthesis with In Vitro Neu- 16–26.
ronal Networks. Computer Music Journal 33(1): 9–18. Sloboda, J. 2005. Exploring the Musical Mind. Oxford:
Nolte, J. and Angevine, Jr. J. B. 2007. The Human Brain in Oxford University Press.
Photographs and Diagrams. Philadelpha, PA: Elsevier. Smalley, D. 1997. Spectromorphology: Explaining Sound-
Palmer, C. and Krumhansl, C. L. 1987. Independent Shapes. Organised Sound 2(2): 107–26.
Temporal and Pitch Structures in Determination of Stewart, L., Overath, T., Warren, J. D., Foxton, J. M. and
Musical Phrases. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Griffiths, T. D. 2008. fMRI Evidence for a Cortical
Human Perception and Performance 13: 116–26. Hierarchy of Pitch Pattern Processing. PLoS ONE 3(1):
Parsons, L. M. 2003. Exploring the Functional Neuro- e1470. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001470.
anatomy of Music Performance, Perception and Com- Stroh, C. 1983. A Brief Primer on Vision and Human
prehension. In I. Peretz and R. Zatorre (eds.) The Perception. Arts Education 36(4): 44–5.
Cognitive Neuroscience of Music. Oxford: Oxford Uni- Stroop, J. R. 1935. Studies of Interference in Serial Verbal
versity Press, 247–68. Reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology 18: 643–62.
Parsons, L. M. 2005. Exploring the Functional Neuro- Temperley, D. 2001. The Cognition of Basic Musical
anatomy of Music Performance, Perception and Structures. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Comprehension. Annals of the New York Academy of Willems, R. M., Ozyürek, A. and Hagoort, P. 2009. Dif-
Sciences 930: 211–31. ferential Roles for Left Inferior Frontal and Superior
Patterson, R. D., Upperkamp, S., Johnsrude, I. S. and Temporal Cortex in Multimodal Integration of Action
Griffiths, T. 2002. The Processing of Temporal Pitch and Language. NeuroImage 47(4): 1992–2004.
and Melody Information in Auditory Cortex. Neuron Worden, F. G. 1971. Hearing and the Neural Detection of
36: 767–76. Acoustic Patterns. Behavioural Neuroscience 16: 20–30.
Paulus, M. P., Rogalsky, C., Simmons, A., Feinstein, J. S. Yee, W., Holleran, S. and Jones, M. 1994. Sensitivity to
and Stein, M. B. 2003. Increased Activation in the Right Event Timing in Regular and Irregular Sequences:
Insula during Risk-taking Decision Making is Related Influences of Musical Skill. Perception & Psychophysics
to Harm Avoidance and Neuroticism. NeuroImage 56: 461–71.
19(4): 1439–48. Zatorre, R. and Peretz, I. (eds.) 2001. The Biological
Peretz, I. 1990. Processing of Local and Global Musical Foundations of Music. Annals of the New York Acad-
Information by Unilateral Brain-damaged Patients. emy of Sciences, Vol. 930. New York: The New York
Brain 113: 1185–205. Academy of Sciences.

View publication stats