You are on page 1of 8

Acoustic properties of voice timbre types and their

influence on voice classification
Thomas F. Cleveland

Universityof SouthernCalifornia, Schoolof Medicine,Los Angeles,California 90033
and Universityof SouthernCalifornia, Schoolof Music, Los Angeles,California 90033
(Received 30 August 1976; revised 18 February 1977)

An investigationto determinethe significanceof formant frequencies,pitch, and source-spectrum slopeon
voice classificationis reported. Eight professionalsingerssang five common vowels on four common
pitches, and, in a forced-choicetest, vocal pedagoguesclassifiedthe vocalization as tenor, baritone, or
bass. Formant frequency and pitch differencesaccounted for most of the jury-evaluation results. To
evaluatemore accuratelythe significanceof formant frequencies,pitch, and voicing and source-spectral
slopeon voice classification,vowel synthesiswas employed.Measurementsof spokenvowel vocalizations
revealedhigher formant frequenciesin tenor timbre type and lower formant frequenciesin basstimbre
type. Long-time-average-spectra seemto afford a good estimateof voice classification.Formant-frequency
percentage differencesbetween bassesand tenors were similar to those found between males and females,
that the mouth and pharynx lengths,known to differentiatefemalesand males,probablyalso
differentiate tenors and basses.

PACS numbers: 43.70.Gr, 43.70.Dn, 43.75.Rs

INTRODUCTION ranged scheme on the pitches Ca, Fa, A•, and E 4. The
source spectra and formant frequencies of these vocal-
Voice timbre is often defined as that particular at-
izations were determined by analysis by synthesis on a
tribute of a given voice, which distinguishes that voice
terminal analogof the vocal tract. • The formant fre-
from another, when the vowel and the pitch are the
quencies of the two lower pitches were also determined
same. A myriad of different voice timbres may be said
by sonogram measurement.
to exist along a voice timbre continuum. Vocal peda-
gogues have empirically divided the continuum of voice A tape of spliced (common onset/decay), randomly
timbres into at least three main timbre divisions: bass, ordered, vowel voealizations were presented three con-
baritone, and tenor. Acoustically, individual timbres secutive times to a jury of vocal pedagogues, who
would correspond to characteristic acoustic signals of classified the sounds as bass, baritone, or tenor.
the laryngeal source and the vocal-tract resonances,
The listening test, which was played to the jury on
while voice timbre types, i.e., bass, baritone, and
a tape recorder (Revox # 77), was heard by the jury via
tenor, would be groups of individual timbres, which
headsets (Sennheiser HD 44). Because of the large num-
possess similar laryngeal source and vocal-tract reso-
ber of sample sounds (five vowelsx four pitehesx eight
nance characteristics.
subjects) the test was divided into two sessions of ap-
Because no cataloging of the acoustic characteristics proximately 25 rain each. An interval "break" of 30
of timbre types exists, the realization of such a catalog rain separated the two sessions. The jury was in-
will assist i.n the understanding of certain required strueted not to discuss the test during the "break."
acoustic properties of timbre types and more impor-
A number representative of the jury evaluation (JN)
tantly, speed the development of a theory of voice clas-
of each sound stimulus was computed from the formula
sification for both speakingandsinging voices. The pres-
ent work is intended to contribute to such a theory. JN = 2•T + 1N•r - 2N•,
The present investigation encompasses a series of where N?, Nsr, and Ns are the number of jury mem-
experiments involving voice timbre and voice classifica- bers judging the sound to be tenor, baritone, and bass,
tion in male singers. First, the study seeks to ascer- respectively.•'
tain the acoustic properties, which are influential in the
perceptually recognized timbre types of bass, baritone, B. Results
and tenor. Second, the study probes the importance of
timbre type in the determination of voice classification. 1. Formant frequencies
Third, the study presents rough calculations of "typi- Correlation of the mean jury number to the average
cal" timbre-type vocal-tract lengths computed from formant frequency of each subject may be seen in the
formant-frequency measurements. scattergram of Fig. 1. In this scattergram, the aver-
age formant frequency3 is an average of the four lowest
I. EXPERIMENT 1-REAL SOUNDS formantfrequencesofthecombined vowels[i], [e], [ 0],
A. Method [0], [u]of eachsingersubject,andthemeanjury number
is the mean of the jury numbers of all the vocalizations
In order to determine the spectral characteristics of by an individual singer subject. A correlation coefficient
timbre types, eight Swedish male professional singers of 0.90was calculated showing that a change in the mean
sangthevowels[i], [e], [o], [o], and[u] in a prear- jury number corresponded closely to a change in the aver-

1622 J. Acoust.Soc. Am., Vol. 61, No. 6, June1977 Copyright¸ 1977 by the AcousticalSocietyof America 1622
Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see Download to IP: On: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 01:26:09

69 kHz (bass and baritone) and 1. A cor- relation coefficient of 0. and CS.u] and it may be inferred that pitch was also an influential acoustical property in the jury's determination of voice timbre type. Download to IP: 129. correlation. u] TENOR SOURCE 14 C3 ß ßßßoeeee e 130 1300 1950 rr 10 Frequency Harmonic number z i 5 1o dB 10 ß ß BASS ' ' ' ' • 2 SOURCE o z E4 -lO 329 lg45 3290 HZ Frequency -6 FIG. The lowest group is comprised of HH and BE. Source spectra measurements showing (a) character- I I I 1. Summary of the jury's evaluation of the sung sounds els. No. Am. The scat- tergram also reflects the grouping of single subjects into three distinct categories.35. pitches were defined by their fundamental the second group is made up JA. the higherthe meanjury number. 32 3.o. The results of this correlation may be JURY NUMBER ASA FUNCTION seen in Fig.o. and the frequency and the mean jury number was the mean of the jury numbers of all vowels from a single pitch by agiven singer subject./& vcs ation from a source failing at .$oc. 1623 T. 3. and UB. Resulting measure- •z o ments from the study determined little consistent devi- • -16 - .191 On: Tue. The meandevi- of the singer subjects showing the higher the pitch.9 corresponds to a t statistic of 6.6 1. fidence. SS. i suggests that the a different response from the jury. E4. is significant at the 0. 1. slight o SEA ß x HH deviations from -12 dB per octave were found in two -32 . 23 Dec 2014 01:26:09 .6 istic source slope differences obtained from two tenors on the AVERAGE FORMAN T lowest pitch Ca and (b) the source slope difference found in a FREQUENCY(kHz) bass on the highest pitch E l .o. 3.F. x ß JA ß ß BE tenors and a bass. It may be assumed from the results that one 2. For this groups. The bass deviation appeared on the highest pitch the bass sang. Cleveland' Acoustic properties of voicetimbretypes 1623 MEAN JURY NUMBER SOURCE SPECTRA DEVIATIONS AS A FUNCTION OF AVERAGE FORMANT FREQUENCY Harmonic number 1 5 10 15 [i . Summary of the jury's evaluation of the sung sounds range (a) and extreme vocal effort in the basses' highest of the singer subjects showing the higher the average formant range (b)0 frequency¬Fl_4. Acoust. Cs. In order to determine if the different pitches elicited Further study of the data in Fig. sumed that the jury used a criterion which is related to tical significance of the correlation coefficient was the average formant frequency. Vol.a. b.7 1. The spectra may suggest a lack of vocal efficiency in the soundproduced in the tenor's lowest FIG. 61. 2.21. 2.e. it may be as- age formant frequency of the singer subject. Pitch of the acoustic properties on which the jury evaluation was dependent was formant frequencies. c3 F3 A3 E4 Graphs representing the mean source spectrum devia- PITCH (SEMITONES) tions from a -12 dB octave slope for the combined vow- FIG.79 kHz which with 6 df. Average frequency testedby transforming it to a t statistic. and the tenor deviation .001 level of con. June 1977 Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright. The scattergram shows that the jury OF PITCH vote changed with a concurrent change in pitch. the higher ations of the tenor and bass may be seen in letters a and the mean jury number. J. the mean jury num- jury placed the singer subjects into three different ber was correlated to the various pitches. are shownin Fig. 6. However. Because the groups are so explicitly delineated. third group is comprised of SEA. see http://acousticalsociety. Source a:: 16 As the timbre type may be dependent on the source spectrum.v /•. [i]. [u]. was computed for these data. [o].12 dB per octave for the • O UB ß 55 various singers on pitches F s and A•. The statis. (baritone and tenor). i I I I appeared on the lowest pitch sung by the tenors. the source spectra of the singer subjects in this investigation were studied. [i.e. respectively. drawn at 1.94.. The correlation boundaries between the groups might be appropriately coefficient of 0.

" synthesis evaluation tape of synthesized sounds. Download to IP: 129. the fourth-formant data lie along and aurally evaluated by the same group of vocal ped. as seen in Fig. representative of the various timbre types. the results of this experiment may be viewed singing the vowel [a]. It is shown above agogues. was made and exposed to the thetopextremeof his range. The formant frequen- /fundamentali \ frequencyI tra. D. between 2. 5. it may be as- sumed that the source spectrum contributes to the in. JURY NUMBER As there are many uncontrolled variables in real FIG. Acoust. 6. or tenor. 6 brate in a very special way. The synthe- lowI sine sis was accomplished utilizing the source-filter net- frequency [wave work shown in Fig. C3. Scattergram reflecting the data of all singer subjects sounds. The (monitor) Spectmgr• best-fit line was drawn through a scattergram of for- mant frequencies of a given formantfrom all singer sub- jects on all pitches. 0 (baritone). NUMBER TO FORMANT FREQUENCY C. More definite conclusions may "representative" timbre types. may perhaps.191 On: Tue. see http://acousticalsociety. who classified the sounds as bass. 4. by the singer subjects in the real sounds. and +36 (tenor) for the synthesis of somewhat tentatively. This vibrato gen- eration is consistent with human vibrato sounds.0- that the source spectrum differed only slightly between "dark" and "light" voices. Sundberg 3. The results of the jury evaluation were statistically however. The same procedure was fol- be drawn if the acoustic properties which seem impor- lowed for selecting the formant frequencies for [i].. 3(a). A scatter- gram example from which data points were derived is given in Fig. it may be hy. Am.21. No. and the vi- pothesized from this finding that a source-spectrum brato was ñ 2% of the fundamental. J. 5. but the results indicate that a special source spectrum does not appear to belong & . Soc. and in addition.5- dividual timbre of a given voice.35. and equally spaced jury numbers FIG.I E 1. which was similar to the evaluation tape of the real singer Such may be the rationale for the source-slope devia- tion of the bass singer subject on the pitch E4. The deviationcloseto the original jury of vocal pedagogues. Pitches were the same as those used Both pitches E 4 and C3 represent extremes in the range of both voice types. For the most part. as shownin Fig.0- stated that "the development of voice timbre in voice training would be a matter of learning a special articu- lation rather than havingthe vocal chords [sic] to vi- . Consequently. i kHz. the overall results of the source-spectrum measuredby univariant analysis of variances on the analysis suggest that the source spectrum of the thre•e voice timbre types is not consistently different from the -12 dB per octave source-spectrum slope frequently RELATIONSHIP OF JURY utilized in synthesis. • A slope of less than -12 dB per octave. tant in the generation of timbre types are synthesized and [u]. the best-fit line.. which is subject vocalizations. 3(b). baritone. Cleveland' Acoustic properties of voice timbre types 1624 VOWEL SYNTHESIS II. may be associated with extreme "vocal effort.. EXPERIMENT 2-SYNTHESIS SOURCE. June 1977 Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright. Formant frequencies were selected at -36 (bass). Formant frequencies and pitch were systematically varied while the source spectrum Generator : Generator _AJL•L_I I Low Pass Filter pulse -I and vibrato were kept constant. Discussion [•] ßc3 OA3 The results regarding the source spectrum seem to x F3 + E4 supportfindings of Sundberg.'o to the typical features of a given voice timbre category. Method Sine Wave A series of vowel sounds were synthesized which re- Generator SOURCE FILTER flected the acoustic properties found to be influential in (wbrato) timbre-type determination of real sounds. tenor's lowest pitch.o- The results of this investigation suggest that both the formant frequencies and pitch may be influential in timbre-type determination. • 0. pitches singers produce in singing.FILTER DIAGRAM A. [e].6 and 3.n I cies were derived from coordinates of a best-fit line through formant frequencies of individual formants and equally spaced jury numbers along a continuum. A diagram of the source-filter network used in gen- along the continuum were chosen by the investigator as erating the vowel synthesis. Results vocal efficiency. [o]. that best-fit line for clarity.F. Of course. Conclusions u. which may be typical of the lowest . In this scattergram. 1624 T.5 His investigationshowed 4. 23 Dec 2014 01:26:09 . Vol.'o . be explained as a consequence of a lack of B. 4.

and pitch are both signifi. practical import of timbre type in voice classification-- was e•:plored. and their differences fall on a tween center range and autoclassification. 0001 tion as a property more of theoretical interest rather (lin. study•ø--withautoclassification. formant type and pitch. 23 Dec 2014 01:26:09 . Cleveland'Acousticpropertiesof voicetimbre types 1625 TABLE I. To do so.. as in this case. the dependence of the jury type treatments to be linearly related with a statistical signifi. quadratic or cubic relationship? As can singing classification of the singers in this investigation. u]. Regardless of the difference between the real and syn- Furthermore.01 level of confidence for the linear (tin) contrast of means. formant type. class determination.11) 0. formant type. Univariant analysis of variance test results showing D. Thus. and[u]. No. normalized results were not compared to normalized FIG. do the means of the dif. gard the influence of pitch on timbre-type determina- Formant type 2 1621. it may be concluded that Pitch 3 3881. suggesting an almost perfect correlation be- tenor--are different. The results derive the formant frequencies for the synthesis may be were determinedfrom the analysis of variance orthogonalpoly- responsible for some of the difference.F.. This result indicates that the means The correlation coefficient computed for these data of the formant-type treatments--bass. Coleman4 foundpitch to be Univariant analysis of variance results significantly important in determining the degree of Source df MS F P(F) male or femalehess in a voice. orthogonal polynomial contrasts show formant. Discussion It is interesting to compare the results obtained from analysis of the real sounds and the synthesized sounds. nomial contrast test. and as such. an additional test of or. the importance of other properties important in voice- thogonalpolynomialcontrast9 was also accomplished.49 0. centrally located pitch in the range of the singers in this ferent treatment groups. while normalized FORMANT TYPE results in the real sounds were not feasible. June 1977 Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright. Download to IP: 129. 6. In addition. baritone. the average formant frequency. -32 sized sounds.001 level of confidence. we may re- Constant 1 . the ferred to as formant type. Am.29 87. 0001 timbre type is most practically influenced by formant Interaction 6 175. evaluation on pitch and formant frequencies is borne cance at the 0. utilization of formant frequencies or its counterpart.) (1) (0. 125) (0. The statistical F val.35. be seen in the table. as shown in Fig. 9582 and pedagogical point of view. (2) the crude method utilized to the perceptual evaluation of that formant type. z o Where in the real sounds the formant frequencies seemed to be a more important acoustic property than pitch..or the professional have a linear. 61. [a]. Figure 6 illustrates the linear relation- ship between mean jury number and formant type for the vowels[i. 6. Possible explanations for this difference may be as follows: (1) For analysis. as tested by the univari- ant analysis of variance. Figure Such a test determines how the means are related. 32 C. 0001 than practical import.) (1) (3243. The resultsof Since voice timbre type seems quantifiable through the this test are shown in Table I.21. EXPERIMENT 3-PRACTICAL IMPORT OF TIMBRE TYPE A. 003) 0. Acoust.37) (73. and was 0. thesized statistical results. For 7 shows the correlation of the center range--the most example. here re. 006 level of confidence. and the interaction of the two. out in the synthesis. a.97.. Vol. Since this straight line. Introduction and method representativevowels[i].org/content/terms. Results cant at the 0. Soc. pitch. However. the statistical F value is signifi- B. Within 24 44. from a practical (quad.191 On: Tue. 0069 frequencies. second purpose of this investigation--determining the cant at the 0. it was necessary to ascertain As can be seen in Table I. The dependence of aural evalua- tion on pitch is not unusual.96 0. 0001 level of confidence. Conclusions highly significant dependence of jury vote on the synthesis treat- ments. 1. JURY NUMBER AS A FUNCTION OF FORMANT TYPE (IPA SYNBOLS) Table I also shows the interaction of the two vari- ables. ues (F) for the variable formant frequencies. IPA symbols reflecting the linear relationship between the synthesizedformant type and the mean jury number from results...56 0. J. Range is such a property.45 3. the jury numbers ! I I from the synthesized results were "normalized" with Bass Baritone Tenor respect to pitch and formant type. The interaction is significant at the 0.36 Totals 36 III. it asks the question. 1625 T.75 36. see http://acousticalsociety. the reverse seems to be the case with the synthe.

The plot supports the conclusion--the possesses a baritone range.35. the pedagogue may be seeking the best match the absence of knowledge concerning range. 8. Discussion OF CENTER RANGE The results of these experiments seem to be valuable for singers and pedagogues alike for the findings may offer explanations to pedagogical observations hereto- TEN fore unexplained.0 cal-tract size and dimensions. has possibly recognized through years of observant voice teaching that timbre in the un- result suggests that the center range may be regarded trained voice is a good indicator of the future voice as indicative of the autoclassification of a professional class of the singer.F. the range will come. a simi- higher the center pitch of the range. the timbre and the range tend to average formant frequency would suggest that a singer's "match. Vol. Therefore. Acoust. a u[ Range is usually a product of vocal maturity and is normally fully extended only in trained singers. 7. Soc. baritone.. "if the quality is there. a high correlation between center range and as shown in Fig. frequency (the number utilized in this experiment to For the pedagogue who has witnessed a singer who quantify timbre). the formant frequencies and center range tend to "match." The same explanation may even apply for the autoclassification might also be derived from knowledge more mature singer. 23 Dec 2014 01:26:09 . As seen in the figure. LU (. ambiguous of the average formant frequency alone. The scattergram reflects the correlation of the cen- expectedthat a singerwouldreacha more physicall• termost pitch in the range of the individual singer subjects to the professional singing classification (autoclassification) of mature state than the stage at which his range would be bass.97." and since center range seems to be a good indicator of professional voice classification. as it would be FIG. however. but a tenor quality. Figure 8 between timbre and range. the finding seems to suggest that OFAVERAGE FORMANT FREQUENCY as a rule. singer. singer subjects. see http://acousticalsociety.9 35 cies in speech correlate to autoclassification. Such an impression may be which this does not hold--singer subject HH does not conform to the trend in the remaining data. timbre may be a bet- The result suggests that center range may be a good indicator ter early estimator of voice class in the beginning sing- of professional voice class. the AVERAGE FORHANT FREOUENCY high correlation coefficients seem to indicate that mea. becausein professional singers. for- mant frequencies or the average formant frequency of a singer subject might therefore be a good indicator of professional singing classification.21. Measured formant frequencies from sev- ß ßBE 3O eral vowels were correlated to the autoclassification of J " I I I I the singer subjects and the resulting correlation coef. The pedagogue who has made this ob- servation. the higher the aver- age formant frequency--though there is one case in lar explanation may hold. { kHz) surements of formant frequencies of speech vocaliza. Pedagogues have often made the ob- servation with reference to untrained singing voices.191 On: Tue. Cleveland:Acoustic propertiesof voice timbre types 1626 AUTOCLASSIFICATION ASA I•UNCTION C. •l If timbre is a result of CENTER RANGE vocal-tract size. Am. that timbre would exist at an earlier (pitchnumber} age than range in the beginning singer. J. 8. Further assistance in classifying voices might be gained if it could be determined that formant frequen. which depend on vo- 30 35 4. 61. The scattergram reflects the correlation of the aver- tions may be beneficial in voice-class determina. who possesses a wide. ß ßBE other hand. er than range." It seems possible to suggest an explanation from the evidence in BAR this study as to what a teacher means when he makes / A LS such a statement. more fully developed. The correlation coefficient is 0. In determining the voice class of this the singer and make a voice-class estimate possible in singer. In spite of CENTER RANGE AS A FUNCTION this result. 6. 9. age formant frequency to the center range of the individual tion. 1626 T. utilizing timbre as an em- is a scattergram of center range and average formant pirical cue to assign the appropriate voice class. ß JA O classification. this experiment has shown that voice timbre i i I is related to formant frequencies. empirically. 16 17 18 ficients are given in Fig. Download to IP: 129. encompassing more than that required for a sin- lation might do away with the need to know the range of gle voice class. A high corre. June 1977 Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright. Results Z ? cs A LS from an extensive study of speech sounds of the pro- fessional singers in this experiment reflect that formant o SEA Z x HH frequencies of speech sounds correlate highly to auto. No. FIG. On the BAS . and tenor.

F. baritone. 9. F•. as a consequenceof autoclassification (Table III). and tenor timbre. June 1977 Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright. However. evoked by the empirical observation that a given voice B. 1627 T. 10. No. e.191 On: Tue.t•. mate of the future voice class of a given singer. Especially close relationships are seen in divisions have been established. The results were obtained using the Since this study has shown characteristic formant. where F equals the formant frequency in question. most cases. 23 Dec 2014 01:26:09 . As this experiment shows that. the pedagoguemay be express. It is known that these differences respectively. and in the presence of an ambiguous. who possess a like timbre type as a result range of pitches. Studies of various investigators have shown that formant-frequency pat. a. Cleveland:Acousticproperties of voicetimbretypes 1627 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTSUMMARYof th• RELATIONSHIP of F•T FREQUENCIESin SPOKENVOWELSto SINGINGVOICECLASS 1. Comparison of the percentage differences are due to the relatively greater pharyngeal lengi. u]. voice timbre types (as determinedby the jury of vocal ing empirically the same point that timbre and range pedagogues) and the autoclassification(professional should "match. Results is a "mismatch" voice. formula frequency patterns for bass. i is terns of women and children are considerably higher the formant number. generally. Conclusion istic frequencies are presentedby vowel and represent an average of measured formant frequencies of all sing- It may be concluded that in the absence of an extended er subjects. EXPERIMENT 4-MORPHOLOGY quency difference measured in percent between males and females and between autoclassified basses and ten- A.. of[a] and[o]andF•. Acoust. (2) timbre type and voice classification. if the formant frequencies are high.. FIG. 6. of[i. see http://acousticalsociety. than those of males. Am.alsobe high.with.h and between jury classification (dashed line) and autoclas- more highly developed laryngeal cavities of adult males sification (solid line) with male/female (line-dot) of over thoseof femalesandchildren. 61.35.00 • 80 <[ z --• o z • z 20 // re] I:œ] •." singingclassification)of the singers in this studyare given in Table II and III. Vol.o] E•] Eu] FORMAN T FREQUENCIES . The character- As canbe seen J. morphology of the vocal tract must be related to voice. A scattergram of the correlation of the formant-fre- IV. respectively. A summaryof the correlation coefficientscornpuledfrom the singer-subjects' formant frequenciesin speechandthe professionalvoiceclass of the singersubjects. the Characteristic formant frequencies typical of the range may . The results suggestthat measuredformantfrequenciesof spokensoundsmay be indicative of the professional voice class of a singer. Introduction ors and jury-classified bass timbre and tenor timbre is shown in Fig. and t and b equal tenor and bass. Download to IP: 129. timbre may be a good esti. of jury classification (Table II) or a similar voice class extensive range of pitches. Fanifs studyts showsa remarkablecorrespondence in in these groups (male and female) no systematic sub.

F. baritone. and bass are shown in percent. Cleveland:Acousticpropertiesof voicetimbre types 1628 TABLE II. see http://acousticalsociety.191 On: Tue. or bass a (%) 19 7 6 3 with the difference between the averaged for- Baritone 522 942 2478 2823 mant frequencies given in percent. tively. Am. consistent with the empirical observations of various laryngologists. baritone. Discussion hypotheticalvocal-tract lengthsof Bass 348 749 2536 2784 both tenors and basses can be approximated. 6.7 7 3 F1 F2 F3 F4 Baritone 414 750 2569 2938 • (%) 13 6 0 1 Tenor 304 1969 2567 3105 Bass 366 708 2557 2899 A (%) 9 13 3 7 Baritone 278 1744 2482 2897 Jul A (%) . or bass timbre. The dif- ferences between the formant frequencies of C.2 8 10 4 Bass 356 1539 2041 2754 in the figure.5 i 8 3 are indicated by rPA symbols. No. The averaged formant frequencies tions show that overall vocal tract length for basses of singer subjects. while long faces and long. as a rule. BrodnitzTM observedthat. Tenor 609 994 2576 2909 ferences between tenors and basses. Average formant frequencies of timbre t3. Vol. Similar ob- F1 F2 F3 F4 servations have been made by LuchsingerandArnold•s Tenor 312 1996 2602 3116 and van Deinse et al. Tenor 330 682 2548 2957 Furthermore.1 -. Acoust. baritone. The average formant frequencies of singer subjects whose professional voice Tenor 623 1005 2620 2919 classification was tenor.1 14 13 5 Bass 350 1533 2075 2822 [al TABLE III.• (%) 3 20 8 6 Bass 278 1557 2312 2800 As a consequence of the various experiments pre- tel sented in this paper. narrow necks seem frequent in singers with deep the vowel[i] is Jul clearly a half-wavelength resonance of the back cavity. A (%) . respec- perceived by a jury of vocal pedagogues as be. Bass 530 934 2298 2741 [o] Average formant frequencies of voice classes Tenor 389 698 2757 3010 [i] • (%) .7 10 12 5 Tenor 339 683 2538 2944 Bass 300 1587 2214 2752 • (%) 4 -2 1 4 [el Baritone 326 700 2522 2843 • (%) -3 -6 5 5 Tenor 350 1942 2414 3061 Bass 336 742 2404 2700 • (%) 0 17 7 7 Baritone 350 1662 2247 2873 A (%) .pes high voices are found in persons with round faces and [il short necks. A (%) 7 -2 -2 --2 proximate what the differences in vocal-tract length Bass 365 729 2605 2969 mightbe. whensingingthe vowel[i]. 23 Dec 2014 01:26:09 . Since it is known A (%) 15 5 7 2 that male/female differences are due to relatively Baritone 530 944 2400 2849 greater pharyngeal length and more highly developed • (%) 5 5 i 13 Bass 503 900 2386 2527 laryngeal cavities of adult males over those of females. Download to IP: 129.21. ing tenor. The different vowels are indicated by IPA sym. Soc.35. Fanttt has shownthat F•.org/content/terms. it is likely that similar morphological distinctions exist [ol between tenors and basses. •6 A (%) 9 ? 4 5 Baritone 287 1864 2500 2973 V. It is significant to note that these findings are not in- bols. Calcula- J.6 . 1628 T.5 5 9 cavity to F3 in the vowel [i]. CONCLUSIONS . he has linked the dependence of the front A (%) -.. Utilizing Fant's table of Baritone 333 719 2420 2716 percentage dependence of given formant frequencies on a (%) --4 -4 --5 --2 various cavities. 61. Tenor 401 724 2706 2989 • (%) 3 2 6 3 Since these vocal-tract differences are likely to pre. it is of interest to ap. the largest percentage differences between [a] males and females are also the largest percentage dif. June 1977 Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright. Baritone 391 711 2554 2906 vail between tenors and basses. whose voice timbre was and tenors is approximately 19 and 15. the following summary of conclu- sions seem in order: Tenor 352 1942 2424 3041 A (%) 1 11 4 3 (1) Voice timbre type seems significantly dependent Baritone 348 1744 2339 2950 on formant frequencies. The vowels • (%) --1.5 cm.

cat. Acoust. it was employed. knowledged. A z 0 similar number has been used in other inv.35.3o u F2 F•. "Controlmethodsused in a study of vowels. Fujisaki. Soc. Coleman. andWinston. Brodnitz. e.F. L. 25. Vol. The encouragement of Professor Gunnar 14F. E. K. CA. Stevens. (1965).21. (Wadsworth.andW." quencies between males and females." J. J. Keizer. ?S. LuchsingerandG. MN. Bell. 255-266 basses and tenors. New York. 87 (1973). Female/Male types on a three-point scale." J. Status Rep. Cleveland'Acousticpropertiesof voice timbre types 1629 A COMPARISON OF TENOR/BASS AND FEMALE/HALE FORHANT FREQLENCY 1C. 71-90 (1973)." Folia Phoniatr.. 175-184 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS (1952). June 1977 Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright. 3Anextensive examination of severalrepresentative valuesof formant frequencies suggestedthat the "average formant fre- • 5 0 quency" as utilized in this experiment was as representative of the formant frequencies as any number that was explored. Soc.4 5 4R. so in the remaining experiments of this investigation. may be a distinguishing characteristic between tenors s'-Gravenhage. This linear number was preferred over the log value of the fundamental fre- (4) The greater pharyngeallengthand more highly quency. Sundberg. Vocalrehabilitation (AmericanAcademyof Ophthalmology and Otolaryngology.New timbre acoustic cues--specifically the average of the York. Appreciation is also expressed to the 16j."Thesourcespectrumin professional singing. "Problems singer subjects for their kind cooperation." Speech Transmission Laboratory-Q. Fant.1NB---WaS felt to reflectthe linear • A•toclass•f.-. Rochester. J. Scattergram reflecting similarities in formant fre- 6j. L. they were counted from bass to treble. see http://acousticalsociety. Voice. of this paper. which probably exists between voice timbre o. Am. and the stimulating atmosphere provided by the 1961). research and writing is gratefully ac. 25. Coleman. i3G. four lowest formant frequencies." J.Wolfe. D. (2) Voice classification may be estimated from voice SW. Am. Am. 13-22 (1973). of the singing voice.estigations. 8j. Prog. Sundberg. 1974). during the. FIG.4. No. Barney. Acoust. 22-30 (1966). Statistics(Holt. The result suggeststhat the same morphological dif." Folia Phoniatr. Status Rep. Rinehart. van Deinse. L. Fant. and basses and tenors in Folia Phoniatr. 428-434 (1974).on relationship. Frateur. Whiting. 1725-1735 (1961). DIFFERENCES "Reductionof speechspectraby analysisby synthesistech- nique. Results from this new uJ (_3 z formula did little to change the results from the previous for- uJ 15 mula except to lower all jury numbers by seven jury numbers with a standard deviation of + 1 jury number. Finn. Am. Rinehart. 23 Dec 2014 01:26:09 ."Comparison of the contributionof two vocal characteristics to the perception of maleness and femaleness • e a o u • ß a o u in the voice.AcousticTheoryof Speech Production (Mouton. FORMANT FREQUENCIES {Vowelsby IPA Symbols) 5j. 6.191 On: Tue. percent. A GeneralModelfor MultivariantAnalysis(Holt.. "Quantitativestudieson ferences between males and females may also prevail between the singing voice. •2E. løThecenterrangewasdetermined by findingthe rangeof a given singer subject on a piano with 81 keys and assigning the (3) Measured formant frequencies from speech most central pitch in that range the number of that key as sounds seem indicative of voice classification. Hays. and Winston. •. 2-3. for his scholarly guidance in the research and writing Prog. Sette.andA. members of the Department of SpeechCommunication. 26. F• ßa o u • ß. PetersonandH. Acoust. x---- I Jurycl•fication •'Theformula--iNT +NBr. 1970). 61." SpeechTransmission Laboratory-Q. developed laryngeal cavities of males over females llG. Arnold. Johan Sundberg F-pattern scalings. 4. 1956). and J. Download to IP: 129. Soc. Speech. 6. House. 10. Heinz. F ant.Language KTH. Stanley. 1960). Acoust. 33. iSR. "A noteon vocal tract size factors andnon-uniform The author is deeply indebted to Dr. 1629 T. H.. '•rhe sourcespectrum in professional singing. and basses also.g. Belmont.