This advanced module provides comprehensive training on musical related tasks. There are seven training groups in this module which target at different levels. 。 Group 1: Music Note Discrimination Training In this group you gain practice in discriminating between different music notes. The training may help your ability to hear differences in the pitch of sounds, a good starting point in developing your language recognition and music perception skills. By listening carefully to the music notes during training and testing, you are given a better sense of the different pitches provided by your cochlear implant. How the Training Works All levels present discrimination tasks. In each task, three sounds (music notes) are played, and their corresponding response buttons highlighted. Two of the sounds are the same music notes, while the other sound has a different pitch. Click on the response button you think has the different pitch. As you move up through the levels of difficulty, the tone comparisons (the semitone differences between music notes) become more closely spaced and therefore more difficult to discriminate between. Please perform one testing before the training to determine which level you should be trained. At level 1, the tone comparisons are widely spaced. By level 5, the tone comparisons are the most narrowly spaced. Some tone comparisons may be very difficult, so don't be disappointed if you cannot discriminate all the tones. Figure below shows the response choices. Training Level Summary Number of trials: 25 per run Number of stimuli: 52 music notes Training method: Discrimination Response choices: 3 • Level 1 (tone separation): 7-12 semitones • Level 2 (tone separation): 4-6 semitones • Level 3 (tone separation): 2-3 semitones • Level 4 (tone separation): 1 semitone Group 2: Melodic Contour Identification Training While a cochlear implant provides many patients with excellent speech understanding in quiet, music perception and appreciation remains a challenge for most cochlear implant users. Recent studies have shown that a closed- set melodic contour identification (MCI) task could be used to quantify cochlear implant users’ ability to recognize musical melodies [Galvin, J.J. III, Fu, Q-J., and Nogaki, G. (2007). “Melodic Contour Identification in Cochlear Implants,” Ear and Hearing 28(3), 302-319]. This training group provides MIDI-based Melodic Contour Identification Training for CI patients to aid them in improving their recognization of melodies, thereby improving their music appreciation. For the MCI task, test stimuli were melodic contours composed of 5 notes of equal duration whose frequencies corresponded to musical intervals. The interval between successive notes in each contour was varied between 1 and 5 semitones; the “root note” of the contours was also varied. Nine distinct musical patterns were generated for each interval and root note condition. This is a screen shot of the display window. How the Training Works Melodic contour identification performance was tested by using nine five-note melodic patterns. The nine patterns represented simple pitch contours (e.g., “Rising,” “Flat,” “Falling”) and changes in pitch contour (e.g., “Flat-Rising,” “Falling-Rising,” “Rising-Flat,” “Falling-Flat,” “Rising-Falling,” “Flat-Falling”). Figure below shows the melodic patterns and response screen used in the MCI test and training. Training Level Summary Number of trials: 25 per run Number of stimuli: over 1000 MCI patterns Training method: Identification and Acoustic/Visual Feedback Response choices: 9 • Level 1 (note separation): 5-6 semitones • Level 2 (note separation): 3-4 semitones • Level 3 (note separation): 2 semitones • Level 4 (note separation): 1 semitone Group 3: Melodic Sequence Identification This group uses both Open Set Recognition Training Protocols and Speech Synthesis based on Concatenation for assessing/training the listener's ability to identify melodic sequence. The training group is an advanced version of melodic contour identification. The original melodic contour identification only have nine different patterns while the melodic sequence identification allows much more melodic patterns, which is much more difficult than the original melodic contour identification. The interface for this training group is displayed below. Training Level Summary Number of trials: 25 per run Number of stimuli: 8 with millions of combinations Training method: Recognition and Acoustic/Visual Feedback Response choices: 8 • Level 1 (note separation): +3, -3 or 0 semitones difference between the succesive notes • Level 2 (note separation): +2, -2 or 0 semitones difference between the succesive notes • Level 3 (note separation): +1, -1 or 0 semitones difference between the succesive notes • Level 4 (note separation): random semitone difference between the succesive notes Group 4: Music Chord Identifcation In this group you gain practice in discriminating between different music chords (combinations of three concurrent notes). The training may help your ability to hear differences in the timbre of chords, a good starting point in further developing your music perception skills. By listening carefully to the music chords during training and testing, you are given a better sense of the combined notes provided by your cochlear implant. Depending on the level of difficulty, the interface for this group is different. In the preview mode, you are allowed to preview all the chords used in the program. Training Level Summary Number of trials: 25 per run Number of stimuli: 24 Training method: Discrimination, Identification and Acoustic/Visual Feedback Response choices: 3 (Level 1), 2 (Level 2), and 6 (Level 3) • Level 1 (Discrimination): To detect the difference between any Chords • Level 2 (Identification): To identify whether the Chord is Major or Minor. • Level 3 (Identification): To identify which chord is playing from the six choices Group 5: Music Contour Segregation This training group help cochlear implant users segregate competing voices and/or musical instruments. Polyphonic music often involves multiple instruments that interleave and overlap in time, and listeners may use temporal offsets between instruments to track different melodic components. When played simultaneously by multiple sound sources, it is more difficult to track the melodic components. In the present study, the masker and target were presented simultaneously; the onset, duration, and offset for each note of the target and masker were the same. The response interface is same as melodic contour identification. Training Level Summary Number of trials: 25 per run Number of stimuli: over 1000 Training method: Identification and Acoustic/Visual Feedback Response choices: 9 • A4 Masker: Flat Contour with A4 Piano as Masker • A5 Masker: Flat Contour with A5 Piano as Masker • A6 Masker: Flat Contour with A6 Piano as Masker • A7 Masker: Flat Contour with A7 Piano as Masker • No Masker: No Masker, Same as Melodic Contour Identification Group 6: Music Instrument Identificagtion This training group help cochlear implant users improve the identification of different music instruments.The first training level is to identify the instrument from six different instruments. A five-note sequence will be played. The subjects determine the instrument based on the sequence played. The response interface is shown as follows. Training level 2 to 4 is to recognize the sequence of instruments with single note. It is much difficult than the level 1. The response interface for these level is shown as follows: Training Level Summary Number of trials: 25 per run Number of stimuli: Dozens Training method: Identification and Acoustic/Visual Feedback Response choices: 6 and 4 • Instrument Instrument identification (from 6 different instruments) • 2 Tokens The sequence of 2 instruments • 3 Tokens The sequence of 3 instruments • 5 Tokens The sequence of 5 instruments Group 7: Familiar Melody Identification This training group help cochlear implant users improve the identification of familiar melodies either with rhythmic cues or without rhythmic cues. Familiar melody identification was also measured for 12 familiar melodies used by Kong et al. (2004, 2005), with and without rhythm cues. Three-harmonic complexes were generated for each note, using the same methods as for melodic contours. The F0 range covered by all melodies was 415 to 1047 Hz. The response interface is shown as follows: Training Level Summary Number of trials: 24 per run Number of stimuli: 12 Training method: Identification and Acoustic/Visual Feedback Response choices: 12 With rhythmic cues 12 familiar melodies with rhythmic cues Without rhythmic cues 12 familiar melodies without rhythmic cues