A Normative Study of the Adult Voice
Christina Schaefer1 • Shelby Reynolds1 • Anna-Kathryn Henderson1 • Ashwini Joshi1 • Kim Steinhauer2
Richard Horne2 • Mary McDonald Klimek2 • Joseph Stemple1 • Lisa Thomas3
University of Kentucky • 2Vocal Innovations Inc. • 3Marshall University
1
Abstract
Methods
Results
Acoustic analyses of voice have been questioned due to
equipment concerns, high intra- and inter-subject variability,
inconsistent sound collection techniques, and variability
in program algorithms. The purpose of this study was to
establish normative data for the adult population using
a newly developed acoustic measurement system (Voice
Evaluation Suite, Vocal Innovations). 60 participants,
ages 18 to 65, were enrolled. Acoustic measures were
taken during sustained phonation, connected speech, and
maximum performance tasks.
Participants
•Group A (18-39 years): Female N=15, Male N=14
•Group B (40- 59 years): Female N=13, Male N=7
•Mean values and standard deviations for the various
measures of fundamental frequency, average intensity, jitter,
shimmer, harmonic- to-noise ratio, maximum phonation
time, s/z ratio and diadochokinetic rate are given below for
the 4 groups.
Background
•Acoustic measurement of the voice signal provides an
indirect measure of laryngeal functioning and offers a
degree of objective information regarding voice production
and pathology.
•The widespread and consistent use of acoustic
measurement has been limited by:
– cost of specialized equipment and software
– lack of equipment portability
– acoustic measurement has not been readily
accessible to all clients.
•Recent technological advances have permitted the
development of more cost-effective, portable acoustic
systems appropriate for clinical use.
•As these systems emerge, there exists a need to examine the
systems for reliability and to
•establish normative data for the products.
Inclusion Criteria
•English as primary language for communication
• Passed a pure-tone hearing screening prior to participation.
•No history of voice disorder per self report and
•No current voice disorder per score of less than 1 on each
subscale of the GRBAS.1
•Non-singers
•Non-smokers for the past 5 years.
Measures
Measures
F0
average
F0
average
(Hz)
(Hz)
F0
minimum
F0
minimum
(Hz)
(Hz)
F0
maximum
F0
maximum
(Hz)
(Hz)
F0
Range
F0
Range
(semitones)
(semitones)
Jitter
(%)
Procedures
Equipment
•Shure Beta 53 omnidirectional headset mounted
microphone
•The Voice Evaluation SuiteTM (VES), by Vocal
InnovationsTM
•TASCAM US-122 16 bit 48 kHz digitizer with a 20 Hz to
20 kHz +/- 1 dB frequency response.
Subjects were seated in a sound-treated room and fitted with
the microphone at a 3 cm mouth to microphone distance
Measures
•Sustained phonation on the vowel /a/ (3 trials),
•Engaged in a 10+ second sample of conversational speech
•Maximum performance measures of:
– phonation time on /a/, duration of /s/ and /z/, dynamic
frequency range, dynamic intensity range, laryngeal
diadochokinesis rate
•Productions were automatically recorded and analyzed
and a profile of each participant’s acoustic data was
automatically produced and saved.
•Data were combined and analyzed to obtain normative
information (mean and S.D.)for each age group and
gender for each of the measures noted above.
Jitter
(%)
Shimmer
(dB)
Shimmer
(dB)
Avg
SPL
(dB)
Avg
SPL
(dB)
HNR
(dB)
HNR
(dB)
MPT
(sec)
MPT
(sec)
S/Z
ratio
S/Z
ratio
DDKR
DDKR
(rate/sec)
(rate/sec)
Female
A
Mean
Female
A
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
214.393
26.760
214.393
26.760
189.027
25.497
189.027
25.497
642.267
212.515
642.267
212.515
20.333
6.705
20.333
6.705
0.82
0.82
1.593
1.593
81.373
81.373
9.913
9.913
19.627
19.627
1.095
1.095
4.94
4.94
0.275
0.275
0.681
0.681
7.819
7.819
2.846
2.846
6.474
6.474
0.446
0.446
1.164
1.164
Female
B
Mean
Female
B
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
175.608
17.916
175.608
17.916
139.162
15.189
139.162
15.189
657.077
247.933
657.077
247.933
25.462
8.211
25.462
8.211
0.985
0.296
0.985
0.296
1.6
0.546
1.6
0.546
79.615
7.431
79.615
7.431
12.538
3.042
12.538
3.042
19.777
7.712
19.777
7.712
1.098
0.260
1.098
0.260
4.831
1.348
4.831
1.348
Measures
Measures
F0
average
F0
average
(Hz)
(Hz)
F0
minimum
F0
minimum
(Hz)
(Hz)
F0
maximum
F0
maximum
(Hz)
(Hz)
F0
Range
F0
Range
(semitones)
(semitones)
Jitter
(%)
Jitter
(%)
Shimmer
Shimmer
(dB)
(dB)
Avg
SPL
(dB)
Avg
SPL
(dB)
HNR
(dB)
HNR
(dB)
MPT
(sec)
MPT
(sec)
S/Z
ratio
S/Z
ratio
DDKR
DDKR
(rate/sec)
(rate/sec)
Male
A
Mean
Male
A
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
106.414
13.289
106.414
13.289
95.686
13.513
95.686
13.513
427.386
265.756
427.386
265.756
22.857
11.574
22.857
11.574
1.414
0.322
1.414
0.322
2.143
0.629
2.143
0.629
77.043
8.838
77.043
8.838
13.886
2.895
13.886
2.895
21.66429
6.791
21.66429
6.791
0.847
0.259
0.847
0.259
4.521
1.078
4.521
1.078
Male
B
Mean
Male
B
S.D.
Mean
S.D.
110.821
15.065
110.821
15.065
92.1
13.930
92.1
13.930
461.086
189.033
461.086
189.033
26.857
7.058
26.857
7.058
1.043
0.659
1.043
0.659
1.671
0.901
1.671
0.901
79.25
8.596
79.25
8.596
15.364
3.889
15.364
3.889
24.8
5.797
24.8
5.797
0.994
0.316
0.994
0.316
4.114
1.448
4.114
1.448
Conclusions
•Information from the study offers normative data on a
new system of acoustic analysis: The Voice Evaluation
SuiteTM (VES), by Vocal InnovationsTM. This data is part
of a multi- institutional study and adds to the pool of
normative data being collected.
•Information gained during the study will :
– Serve as a guiding tool for the engineers and programmers to fine-tune the software.
– Offer clinicians reference values for male and female voices of various age groups and assist in the clinical assessment of voice production using this system.
The consideration of normative information from this study
against established norms in the literature will speak to the
suitability of these emerging systems for more widespread
clinical use.
References
1. Hirano M. Clinical Examination of Voice. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 1981.