The Effects of Masked and Delayed Auditory Feedback on Fundamental Frequency Modulation in Vocal Vibrato

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
{"title":"The Effects of Masked and Delayed Auditory Feedback on Fundamental Frequency Modulation in Vocal Vibrato","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jvoice.2022.01.029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Although relatively precise control over the extent and rate of fundamental frequency (<em>f</em><sub>o</sub><span>) modulation may be needed for optimal production of vibrato, the role of auditory feedback<span> in controlling vibrato is not well understood. Previous studies altered the gain and timing of auditory feedback in singers producing vibrato and showed inconsistent effects on the extent and rate of </span></span><em>f</em><sub>o</sub><span> modulation, which may have been related to small sample sizes or limited analyses. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to further investigate whether the gain or timing of auditory feedback impacts control of vibrato in a larger sample of speakers and with advanced statistical analyses.</span></p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Ten classically-trained singers produced sustained vowels with vibrato while their auditory feedback was masked with pink noise or multi-talker babble to reduce the gain of their auditory feedback and while their auditory feedback was delayed by about 200 or 300 milliseconds to alter the timing of their auditory feedback. Acoustical analyses measured changes in the extent and rate of <em>f</em><sub>o</sub> modulation in the masked and delayed trials relative to control trials. Bayesian modeling was used to analyze the effects of noise-masked, babble-masked, and delayed auditory feedback on the extent and rate of <em>f</em><sub>o</sub> modulation.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There was compelling evidence that noise masking increased the extent of <em>f</em><sub>o</sub> modulation, and babble masking increased the variability in the rate of <em>f</em><sub>o</sub> modulation (ie, jitter of <em>f</em><sub>o</sub> modulation). Masked auditory feedback did not affect the average rate of <em>f</em><sub>o</sub> modulation. Delayed auditory feedback did not affect the extent, rate, or jitter of <em>f</em><sub>o</sub> modulation.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The current study demonstrated that reducing the gain of the auditory feedback with noise masking increased the extent of <em>f</em><sub>o</sub> modulation but did not affect the average rate of <em>f</em><sub>o</sub> modulation in classically-trained singers producing vibrato. Reducing the gain of the auditory feedback with babble masking and altering the timing of auditory feedback with imposed delays did not affect the average extent or rate of <em>f</em><sub>o</sub> modulation. However, babble masking increased the jitter of <em>f</em><sub>o</sub> modulation rate, which suggests that modulated auditory feedback may affect the periodicity of <em>f</em><sub>o</sub> modulation from one modulation cycle to the next. These findings clarify the role of auditory feedback in controlling vibrato and may inform the current reflex-resonance models of vibrato.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49954,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Voice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Voice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0892199722000297","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Although relatively precise control over the extent and rate of fundamental frequency (fo) modulation may be needed for optimal production of vibrato, the role of auditory feedback in controlling vibrato is not well understood. Previous studies altered the gain and timing of auditory feedback in singers producing vibrato and showed inconsistent effects on the extent and rate of fo modulation, which may have been related to small sample sizes or limited analyses. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to further investigate whether the gain or timing of auditory feedback impacts control of vibrato in a larger sample of speakers and with advanced statistical analyses.

Method

Ten classically-trained singers produced sustained vowels with vibrato while their auditory feedback was masked with pink noise or multi-talker babble to reduce the gain of their auditory feedback and while their auditory feedback was delayed by about 200 or 300 milliseconds to alter the timing of their auditory feedback. Acoustical analyses measured changes in the extent and rate of fo modulation in the masked and delayed trials relative to control trials. Bayesian modeling was used to analyze the effects of noise-masked, babble-masked, and delayed auditory feedback on the extent and rate of fo modulation.

Results

There was compelling evidence that noise masking increased the extent of fo modulation, and babble masking increased the variability in the rate of fo modulation (ie, jitter of fo modulation). Masked auditory feedback did not affect the average rate of fo modulation. Delayed auditory feedback did not affect the extent, rate, or jitter of fo modulation.

Conclusions

The current study demonstrated that reducing the gain of the auditory feedback with noise masking increased the extent of fo modulation but did not affect the average rate of fo modulation in classically-trained singers producing vibrato. Reducing the gain of the auditory feedback with babble masking and altering the timing of auditory feedback with imposed delays did not affect the average extent or rate of fo modulation. However, babble masking increased the jitter of fo modulation rate, which suggests that modulated auditory feedback may affect the periodicity of fo modulation from one modulation cycle to the next. These findings clarify the role of auditory feedback in controlling vibrato and may inform the current reflex-resonance models of vibrato.

掩蔽和延迟听觉反馈对声乐基频调制的影响。
目的:尽管为了优化颤音的产生,可能需要对基频(fo)调制的范围和速率进行相对精确的控制,但听觉反馈在控制颤音中的作用尚不清楚。先前的研究改变了歌手产生颤音时听觉反馈的增益和时间,并显示出对fo调制程度和速率的不一致影响,这可能与样本量小或分析有限有关。因此,本研究的目的是通过高级统计分析,进一步研究听觉反馈的增益或时间是否会影响更大样本扬声器的颤音控制。方法:10名受过古典训练的歌手用颤音产生持续的元音,同时他们的听觉反馈被粉红噪声或多语者的胡言乱语掩盖,以降低听觉反馈的增益,而他们的听觉反应被延迟约200或300毫秒,以改变听觉反馈的时间。声学分析测量了与对照试验相比,掩蔽试验和延迟试验中fo调制程度和速率的变化。贝叶斯建模用于分析噪声掩蔽、牙牙学语掩蔽和延迟听觉反馈对fo调制程度和速率的影响。结果:有令人信服的证据表明,噪声掩蔽增加了fo调制的程度,而咿呀学语掩蔽增加了fo调制速率的可变性(即fo调制的抖动)。掩蔽听觉反馈不影响fo调制的平均速率。延迟听觉反馈不影响fo调制的程度、速率或抖动。结论:目前的研究表明,在传统训练的产生颤音的歌手中,用噪声掩蔽降低听觉反馈的增益可以增加fo调制的程度,但不会影响fo调制的平均速率。用牙牙学语掩蔽降低听觉反馈的增益,并用施加的延迟改变听觉反馈的定时,都不会影响fo调制的平均程度或速率。然而,牙牙学语掩蔽增加了fo调制速率的抖动,这表明调制的听觉反馈可能会影响fo调制从一个调制周期到下一个调制循环的周期性。这些发现阐明了听觉反馈在控制颤音中的作用,并可能为当前的颤音反射共振模型提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Voice
Journal of Voice 医学-耳鼻喉科学
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
13.60%
发文量
395
审稿时长
59 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Voice is widely regarded as the world''s premiere journal for voice medicine and research. This peer-reviewed publication is listed in Index Medicus and is indexed by the Institute for Scientific Information. The journal contains articles written by experts throughout the world on all topics in voice sciences, voice medicine and surgery, and speech-language pathologists'' management of voice-related problems. The journal includes clinical articles, clinical research, and laboratory research. Members of the Foundation receive the journal as a benefit of membership.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信