Advertisement

An Oral Pressure Conversion Ratio as a Predictor of Vocal Efficiency

  • Ingo R. Titze
    Correspondence
    Address correspondence and reprint requests to Ingo R. Titze, National Center for Voice and Speech, The University of Utah, 136 South Main Street, Suite 320, Salt Lake City, UT 84101-3306.
    Affiliations
    National Center for Voice and Speech, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah

    Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
    Search for articles by this author
  • Lynn Maxfield
    Affiliations
    National Center for Voice and Speech, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
    Search for articles by this author
  • Anil Palaparthi
    Affiliations
    National Center for Voice and Speech, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
    Search for articles by this author

      Summary

      Voice production is an inefficient process in terms of energy expended versus acoustic energy produced. A traditional efficiency measure, glottal efficiency, relates acoustic power radiated from the mouth to aerodynamic power produced in the trachea. This efficiency ranges between 0.0001% and 1.0%. It involves lung pressure and hence would appear to be a useful effort measure for a given acoustic output. Difficulty in the combined measurement of lung pressure and tracheal airflow, however, has impeded clinical application of glottal efficiency. This article uses the large data base from Schutte (1980) and a few new measurements to validate a pressure conversion ratio (PCR) as a substitute for glottal efficiency. PCR has the potential for wide application because of low cost and ease of use in clinics and vocal studios.

      Key Words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of Voice
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Titze I.R.
        Principles of Voice Production.
        National Center for Voice and Speech, Salt Lake City, UT2000: 247 ([Chapter 9])
        • Bouhuys A.
        • Mead J.
        • Proctor D.F.
        • Stevens K.N.
        Pressure-flow events during singing.
        Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1968; 155: 165-176
        • Schutte H.
        The Efficiency of Voice Production.
        State University Hospital, Gronigen1980
        • Grillo E.U.
        • Verdolini K.
        Evidence for distinguishing pressed, normal, resonant, and breathy voice qualities by laryngeal resistance and vocal efficiency in vocally trained subjects.
        J Voice. 2008; 22: 546-552
        • Smitheran J.R.
        • Hixon T.J.
        A clinical method for estimating laryngeal airway resistance during vowel production.
        J Speech Hear Disord. 1981; 46: 138-146
        • Rothenberg M.
        Interpolating subglottal pressure from oral pressure.
        J Speech Hear Disord. 1982; 47: 219-223
        • Hertegard S.
        • Gauffin J.
        • Lindestad P.-A.
        A comparison of subglottal and intraoral pressure measurements during phonation.
        J Voice. 1995; 9: 149-155
        • Kitajima K.
        • Fujita F.
        Estimation of subglottal pressure with intraoral pressure.
        Acta Otolaryngol. 1990; 109: 473-478
        • Lofqvist A.
        • Carlborg B.
        • Kitzing P.
        Initial validation of an indirect measure of subglottal pressure during vowels.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 1982; 72: 633-635
        • Jiang J.J.
        • O’Mara T.
        • Conley D.
        • Hanson D.
        Phonation threshold pressure measurements during phonation by airflow interruption.
        Laryngoscope. 1999; 109: 425-432
        • Berry D.A.
        • Verdolini K.
        • Montequin D.W.
        • Hess M.M.
        • Chan R.W.
        • Titze I.R.
        A quantitative output-cost ratio in voice production.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2001; 44: 29-37
        • Titze I.R.
        The Myo-Elastic Aerodynamic Theory of Phonation.
        National Center for Voice and Speech, Salt Lake City, UT2006: 303-311
        • Jiang J.J.
        • Titze I.R.
        Measurement of vocal fold intraglottal pressure and impact stress.
        J Voice. 1994; 8: 132-144
        • Hess M.M.
        • Verdolini K.
        • Bierhals W.
        • Mansmann U.
        • Gross M.
        Endolaryngeal contact pressures.
        J Voice. 1998; 12: 50-67
        • Verdolini K.
        • Hess M.M.
        • Titze I.R.
        • Bierhals W.
        • Gross M.
        Investigation of vocal fold impact stress in human subjects.
        J Voice. 1999; 13: 184-202
        • Titze I.R.
        Theoretical analysis of maximum flow declination rate versus maximum area declination rate in phonation.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2006; 49: 439-447
        • Titze I.R.
        • Laukkanen A.-M.
        Can vocal economy in phonation be increased with an artificially lengthened vocal tract? a computer modeling study.
        Logoped Phoniatr Vocol. 2007; 32: 147-156
        • Holmberg E.B.
        • Hillman R.E.
        • Perkell J.S.
        Glottal airflow and transglottal air pressure measurements for male and female speakers in soft, normal, and loud voice.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 1988; 84: 511-529
        • Stathopoulos E.T.
        • Sapienza C.
        Respiratory and laryngeal function of women and men during vocal intensity variation.
        J Speech Hear Res. 1993; 36: 64-75
        • Gauffin J.
        • Sundberg J.
        Spectral correlates of glottal voice source waveform characteristics.
        J Speech Hear Res. 1989; 32: 556-565
        • Granqvist S.
        • Hertegard S.
        • Larsson H.
        • Sundberg J.
        Simultaneous analysis of vocal fold vibration and transglottal airflow: exploring a new experimental setup.
        J Voice. 2003; 17: 319-330
        • Isshiki N.
        Clinical significance of a vocal efficiency index.
        in: Titze I.R. Scherer R.S. Vocal Fold Physiology: Biomechanics, Acoustics, and Phonatory Control. The Denver Center for the Performing Arts, Denver, CO1983: 230-238
        • Rothenberg M.
        New inverse-filtering technique for deriving the glottal airflow waveform during voicing.
        J Acoust Soc Am. 1973; 53: 1632-1645
        • Titze I.R.
        Phonation threshold pressure measurement with a semi-occluded vocal tract.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2009; 52: 1062-1072
        • Odum H.T.
        • Pinkerton R.C.
        Time's speed regulator: the optimum efficiency for maximum output in physical and biological systems.
        Am Sci. 1955; 43: 331-343
        • Heman-Ackah Y.D.
        • Heuer R.J.
        • Michael D.D.
        • et al.
        Cepstral peak prominence: a more reliable measure of dysphonia.
        Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2003; 112: 324-333