PHYSIOLOGICAL-CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SUPPORTED SINGING VOICE - A PRELIMINARY-STUDY

Citation
B. Griffin et al., PHYSIOLOGICAL-CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SUPPORTED SINGING VOICE - A PRELIMINARY-STUDY, Journal of voice, 9(1), 1995, pp. 45-56
Citations number
NO
Categorie Soggetti
Otorhinolaryngology
Journal title
ISSN journal
08921997
Volume
9
Issue
1
Year of publication
1995
Pages
45 - 56
Database
ISI
SICI code
0892-1997(1995)9:1<45:POTSSV>2.0.ZU;2-R
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to develop a definition of the supported singing voice based on physiological characteristics by comparing the subjects' concepts of a supported voice with objective measurements o f their supported and unsupported voice. This preliminary report prese nts findings based on data from eight classically trained singers. Sub jects answered questions about their concepts of the characteristics o f the supported singing voice and how it is produced. Samples of the s upported and unsupported singing voice produced at low, medium, and hi gh pitches at a comfortable loudness level were collected for acoustic , spectral, airflow, electroglottographic, air volume, and stroboscopi c analyses. Significant differences between the supported and unsuppor ted voice were found for sound pressure level (SPL), peak airflow, sub glottal pressure (P(s)), glottal open time, and frequency of the fourt h formant (F4). Mean flow and F2 frequency differences were sex and pi tch related. Males adjusted laryngeal configuration to produce support ed voice, whereas glottas configuration differences were greater in fe males. Breathing patterns were variable and not significantly differen t between supported and unsupported voice. Subjects in this study beli eve that the supported singing voice is resonant, clear, and easy to m anage and is produced by correct breath management. Results of data an alysis show that the supported singing voice has different spectral ch aracteristics from and higher SPL, peak airflow, and P(s) than the uns upported voice. Singers adjust laryngeal and/or glottal configuration to account for these changes, but no significant differences in breath ing activity were found.