Summary
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to investigate how classically trained singers use their
auditory feedback to control fundamental frequency (fo) during production of vocal vibrato. Two main questions were addressed: (1) Do singers
produce reflexive fo responses to sudden perturbation of the fo of their auditory feedback during production of vibrato indicative of feedback control?
(2) Do singers produce adaptive fo responses to repeated perturbation of the fo of their auditory feedback during production of vibrato indicative of feedback and
feedforward control? In addition, one methodological question was addressed to determine
if adaptive fo responses were more precisely assessed with or without an auditory cue for fo during the repeated fo perturbation paradigm.
Method
Ten classically trained singers produced sustained vowels with vibrato while the fo and harmonics of their auditory feedback were suddenly perturbed by 100 cents to assess reflexive control or repeatedly perturbed by 100 cents to assess adaptive control. Half of the participants completed the repeated perturbation experiment
with an auditory cue for fo, and the other half completed the experiment without an auditory cue for fo. Acoustical analyses measured changes in mean fo in response to the auditory feedback perturbations.
Results
On average, participants produced compensatory responses to both sudden and repeated
perturbation of the fo of their auditory feedback. The magnitude of the responses to repeated perturbations
was larger than the responses to sudden perturbations. Responses were also larger
in the cued, repeated fo perturbation experiment than in the uncued, repeated fo perturbation experiment.
Conclusions
These findings indicate that classically-trained singers use both feedforward and
feedback mechanisms to control their average fo during production of vibrato. When compared to prior studies of singers producing
a steady voice, the reflexive fo responses were larger in the current study, which may indicate that the feedback
control system is engaged more during production of vibrato.
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 accessOne-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 VoiceAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Early pitch-shift response is active in both steady and dynamic voice pitch control.J Acoust Soc Am. 2002; 112: 1058-1063
- Nonconscious control of fundamental voice frequency.J Acoust Soc Am. 2008; 123: 273-278https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2817357
- Auditory-motor mapping for pitch control in singers and nonsingers.Exp Brain Res. 2008; 190: 279-287https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-008-1473-y
- Neural substrates governing audiovocal integration for vocal pitch regulation in singing.Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2005; 1060 ('doi:'1060/1/404 [pii]10.1196/annals.1360.058): 404-408
- Experience-dependent neural substrates involved in vocal pitch regulation during singing.Neuroimage. 2008; 40 ('doi:'S1053-8119(08)00059-1 [pii] 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.01.026): 1871-1887
- Neural networks involved in voluntary and involuntary vocal pitch regulation in experienced singers.Neuropsychologia. 2010; 48: 607-618
- Voice F0 responses to manipulations in pitch feedback.J Acoust Soc Am. 1998; 103: 3153-3161
- Sensory processing: Advances in understanding structure and function of pitch-shifted auditory feedback in voice control.AIMS Neuroscience. 2016; 3: 22-39
- Control of voice fundamental frequency in speaking versus singing.J Acoust Soc Am. 2003; 113: 1587-1593
- A neural network model of speech acquisition and motor equivalent speech production.Biol Cybern. 1994; 72 (Published 1994/01/01): 43-53
- Neural modeling and imaging of the cortical interactions underlying syllable production.Brain Lang. 2006; 96: 280-301
- Speech production as state feedback control.Front Hum Neurosci. 2011; 5: 82https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2011.00082
- The FACTS model of speech motor control: fusing state estimation and task-based control.BioRxiv. 2019; 543728
- Measurements of the vibrato rate of ten singers.J Acoust Soc Am. 1994; 96: 1979-1984
- Some acoustic characteristics of vocal vibrato.J Res Sing. 1980; 4: 18-25
- The vibrato.University of Iowa Studies in the Psychology of Music. 1. University Press, Iowa City, IA1932
- Acoustic and psychoacoustic aspects of vocal vibrato.in: Dejonckere PH Hirano M Sundberg J Vibrato. Singular Publishing Group, Inc., San Diego, CA1995: 35-62
- The pitch of vibrato tones.J Acoust Soc Am. 1980; 67: 246-252
- A reflex resonance model of vocal vibrato.J Acoust Soc Am. 2002; 111: 2272-2282
- The role of auditory feedback in sustaining vocal vibrato.J Acoust Soc Am. 2003; 114: 1575-1581
- Interactions between auditory and somatosensory feedback for voice F 0 control.Exp Brain Res. 2008; 187: 613-621
- Laryngeal electromyographic responses to perturbations in voice pitch auditory feedback.J Acoust Soc Am. 2011; 129: 3946-3954
- Organic voice tremor: a tremor of phonation.Neurology. 1963; 13: 520-525
- Phonatory characteristics of vocal fold tremor.J Phon. 1986; 14: 509-515
- Physiologic and acoustic patterns of essential vocal tremor.J Voice. 2013; 27: 422-432
- Guidelines for Manual Pure-Tone Threshold Audiometry.2005 (Rockville, MD)
- The influence of receiver size on magnitude of acoustic and perceived measures of occlusion.Am J Audiol. 2011; 20: 61-68
- Perceptual calibration of F0 production: evidence from feedback perturbation.J Acoust Soc Am. 2000; 108: 1246-1251
- Sensorimotor adaptation of voice fundamental frequency in Parkinson's disease.PLoS One. 2018; 13e0191839
- Evidence for auditory-motor impairment in individuals with hyperfunctional voice disorders.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017; 60: 1545-1550
- R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing [Computer Program]. Version 3.6.1.Vienna, Austria2019
- afex: Analysis of Factorial Experiments [Computer Program].2019
- Attentional demands modulate sensorimotor learning induced by persistent exposure to changes in auditory feedback.J Neurophysiol. 2016; 115: 826-832
- Attentional demands influence vocal compensations to pitch errors heard in auditory feedback.PLoS One. 2014; 9e109968
- It's about time: minimizing hardware and software latencies in speech research with real-time auditory feedback.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2020; 68: 2522-2534
Article info
Publication history
Published online: January 15, 2021
Accepted:
December 21,
2020
Footnotes
Declarations of Interest: None.
Identification
Copyright
© 2021 The Voice Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
