Voice Range Profile Research Articles

Comparison between clinician‐assisted and computer‐assisted methods for obtaining the voice range profile

A study was made comparing two methods for obtaining the voice range profile, a clinical tool used to establish a subject’s range of intensity and fundamental frequency. One method used a clinician with a pitch pipe to elicit and motivate the subject. The other method used an instructional videotape and a computer. The computer was completely automated, providing visual feedback of the voice range profile, and evaluating each phonation objectively using the criterion of fundamental frequency stability, intensity stability, and duration. The computerized method used a cepstrum algorithm to estimate fundamental frequency, and the intensity was measured by calculating the variance of the signal. The results presented here compare the two methods and discuss the benefits and drawbacks of each approach. Benefits of the computerized method include real time visual feedback of phonatory effort, objective acceptability criterion, and no requirement to phonate at pitches in any particular order. A drawback to the computerized method is its sensitivity to subharmonics. [Work supported by NIH Grant No. DC000‐387.]

Voice disorders

This prospective cross-sectional study examines the effects of voice training on vocal capabilities in vocally healthy age and gender differentiated groups measured by voice range profile (VRP) and speech range profile (SRP).Frequency and intensity measurements of the VRP and SRP using standard singing and speaking voice protocols were derived from 161 trained choir singers (21 males, 59 females, and 81 prepubescent children) and from 188 nonsingers (38 males, 89 females, and 61 children).When compared with nonsingers, both genders of trained adult and child singers exhibited increased mean pitch range, highest frequency, and VRP area in high frequencies (P < 0.05). Female singers and child singers also showed significantly increased mean maximum voice intensity, intensity range, and total VRP area. The logistic regression analysis showed that VRP pitch range, highest frequency, maximum voice intensity, and maximum-minimum intensity range, and SRP slope of speaking curve were the key predictors of voice training. Age, gender, and voice training differentiated norms of VRP and SRP parameters are presented.Significant positive effect of voice training on vocal capabilities, mostly singing voice, was confirmed. The presented norms for trained singers, with key parameters differentiated by gender and age, are suggested for clinical practice of otolaryngologists and speech-language pathologists.

Acoustic Interpretation of the Voice Range Profile (Phonetogram)

The voice range profile (VRP) is a display of vocal intensity range versus fundamental frequency (F0). Past measurements have shown that the intensity range is reduced at the extremes of the F0 range, that there is a gradual upward tilt of the high- and low-intensity boundaries with increasing F0, and that a ripple exists at the boundaries. The intensity ripple, which results from tuning of source harmonics to the formants, is more noticeable at the upper boundary than the lower boundary because higher harmonics are not energized as effectively near phonation threshold as at maximum lung pressure. The gradual tilt of the intensity boundaries results from more effective transmission and radiation of acoustic energy at higher fundamental frequencies. This depends on the spectral distribution of the source power, however, At low F0, a smaller spectral slope (more harmonic energy) produces greater intensity. At high F0, on the other hand, a shift of energy toward the fundamental results in greater intensity. This dependence of intensity on spectral distribution of source power seems to explain the reduced intensity range at higher F0. An unrelated problem of reduced intensity range at low F0 stems from the inherent difficulty of keeping F0 from rising when subglottal pressure is increased.

Voice Range Profile Measurements of Speaking, Shouting, and Singing Voices. Historical Development and Clinical Use.

This paper reviews the development of different kinds of voice range profile measurements from the past to the present stage.The combined measurements of the speakig, shouting, and singing voice range profiles are presented and the methold explained which was developed in Hannover.After analysis of more than 300 persons with normal voices and over 700 patients with voice disorders the relationship between the three voice profiles have been evaluated and described. The voice range profiles may be documented and superimposed for comparison before and after therapy.In functional voice disorders there is often some discrepancy between the singing, shouting, and speaking voice profiles.Despite a normal singing voice profile, the speaking voice area is restricted and displaced.In organic voice disorders the singing voice profile is found more or less reduced particularly in the head register, or all modalities of the voice production are effected.Voice range profile measurements have been proved useful in clinical practice. The method should become more attention for its use in diagnostics and for therapy monitoring in all kinds of voice disorders, exspecially for expert opinion.

Frontal eye field lesions, visual neglect and oculomotor strategies in the rat

The impact that vowels have on the variation across voice range profiles (VRPs) is studied along with three factors: fundamental frequency, singer’s gender, and laryngeal vibratory mechanism used to sing.VRPs of 21 advanced singers were established by recording, in separate takes, vocal productions using laryngeal vibratory mechanisms M1 and M2 for /a/, /i/, and /o/. Recordings were focused on the range C3–C5, where most singers can sing in either M1 or M2. It allows to compare the singer’s dynamics in M1 versus M2 while holding other variables constant.The vowel has an influence on the upper limit of singers’ VRPs when they use M1 but not when they use M2, independently of the singer’s gender and the fundamental frequency.The laryngeal vibratory mechanisms allow one to explain the nonconsensual results observed in the literature about the influence of vowels on the VRP. A simulation shows that the different influence of vowels on the VRP partially results from the different open quotient values that can be observed in M1 and in M2.