Literature DB >> 16325373

Comparison of the produced and perceived voice range profiles in untrained and trained classical singers.

Eric J Hunter1, Jan G Svec, Ingo R Titze.   

Abstract

Frequency and intensity ranges (in true decibel sound pressure level, 20 microPa at 1 m) of voice production in trained and untrained vocalists were compared with the perceived dynamic range (phons) and units of loudness (sones) of the ear. Results were reported in terms of standard voice range profiles (VRPs), perceived VRPs (as predicted by accepted measures of auditory sensitivities), and a new metric labeled as an overall perceptual level construct. Trained classical singers made use of the most sensitive part of the hearing range (around 3-4 kHz) through the use of the singer's formant. When mapped onto the contours of equal loudness (depicting nonuniform spectral and dynamic sensitivities of the auditory system), the formant is perceived at an even higher sound level, as measured in phons, than a flat or A-weighted spectrum would indicate. The contributions of effects like the singer's formant and the sensitivities of the auditory system helped the trained singers produce 20% to 40% more units of loudness, as measured in sones, than the untrained singers. Trained male vocalists had a maximum overall perceptual level construct that was 40% higher than the untrained male vocalists. Although the A-weighted spectrum (commonly used in VRP measurement) is a reasonable first-order approximation of auditory sensitivities, it misrepresents the most salient part of the sensitivities (where the singer's formant is found) by nearly 10 dB.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16325373      PMCID: PMC4782147          DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2005.08.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Voice        ISSN: 0892-1997            Impact factor:   2.009


  6 in total

1.  Sound exposure among the Finnish National Opera personnel.

Authors:  Heli M Laitinen; Esko M Toppila; Pekka S Olkinuora; Kaarina Kuisma
Journal:  Appl Occup Environ Hyg       Date:  2003-03

2.  OVERLAP OF HEARING AND VOICING RANGES IN SINGING.

Authors:  Eric J Hunter; Ingo R Titze
Journal:  J Sing       Date:  2005-04

3.  Spectrum factors relevant to phonetogram measurement.

Authors:  P Gramming; J Sundberg
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Acoustic comparison of voice use in solo and choir singing.

Authors:  T D Rossing; J Sundberg; S Ternström
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1986-06       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Differences in phonetogram features between male and female subjects with and without vocal training.

Authors:  A M Sulter; H K Schutte; D G Miller
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 2.009

6.  Recommendation by the Union of European Phoniatricians (UEP): standardizing voice area measurement/phonetography.

Authors:  H K Schutte; W Seidner
Journal:  Folia Phoniatr (Basel)       Date:  1983
  6 in total
  5 in total

Review 1.  A Review of Hyaluronic Acid and Hyaluronic Acid-based Hydrogels for Vocal Fold Tissue Engineering.

Authors:  Tanaya Walimbe; Alyssa Panitch; Preeti M Sivasankar
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2017-03-02       Impact factor: 2.009

2.  Speech produced in noise: Relationship between listening difficulty and acoustic and durational parameters.

Authors:  Simone Graetzer; Pasquale Bottalico; Eric J Hunter
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Acquired and congenital disorders of sung performance: A review.

Authors:  Magdalena Berkowska; Simone Dalla Bella
Journal:  Adv Cogn Psychol       Date:  2009-11-12

4.  A cervid vocal fold model suggests greater glottal efficiency in calling at high frequencies.

Authors:  Ingo R Titze; Tobias Riede
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2010-08-19       Impact factor: 4.475

5.  Disorders of pitch production in tone deafness.

Authors:  Simone Dalla Bella; Magdalena Berkowska; Jakub Sowiński
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-07-14
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.