Comparison of Acoustic Parameters According to the Section of Analysis in Sustained Vowel Phonation

모음연장 음성 샘플의 분석 구간에 따른 음향학적 파라미터 비교

  • 신유정 (호원대학교 언어치료학과)
  • Received : 2017.06.14
  • Accepted : 2017.07.07
  • Published : 2017.07.31


This study aimed to investigate the acoustic differences that occur in diverse sections of sustained vowel phonation, which is often used in an objective speech analysis of voice disorder patients. The subjects included 17 voice disorder patients (vocal nodules) and 12 normal individuals without any voice disorder. The participants' sustained vowel phonation of /a/ was divided into onset, middle, and offset, and the jitter, shimmer, and NHR in each section were analyzed using the MDVP(Multi-Dimensional Voice Program). The Friedman test and post hoc analysis were used. In the vocal nodules group, the jitter, shimmer and NHR were significantly higher in the off section of sustained vowel phonation than in the middle section, and there were no significant differences between the beginning and middle sections. In contrast, in the group of normal individuals, there were no significant differences between any of the sections. The values of the acoustic parameters according to the section of analysis in the sustained vowel phonation are different and the vocal in the end section is significantly more unstable than that in the middle section. The results of this study will be useful for selecting the sections to be analyzed in sustained vowel phonation and interpreting the results of the analysis.


MDVP parameters;sampling section;sustained vowel phonation;voice analysis;voice disorder


Supported by : 호원대학교


  1. Piccirillo JF, Painter C, Haiduk A, Fuller D, Fredrickson J., Assessment of two objective voice function indices. Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology, vol. 107, pp. 396-400, 1998. DOI:
  2. Bhuta, T., Patrick, L., Garnett, J. D., Perceptual evaluation of voice quality and its correlation with acoustic measurements. Journal of voice, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 299-304, 2004. DOI:
  3. Choi Seong Hee, Speech-Language Pathologists' Voice Assessment and Voice Therapy Practices: A Survey for Standard Clinical Guideline and Evidence-Based Practice. Communication Sciences & Disorders, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 473-85, 2013. DOI:
  4. Titze, I. R., Workshop on Acoustic Voice Analysis: Summary Statement. National Center for Voice and Speech: Iowa City, IA., 1995.
  5. Parsa, V., Jamieson, D. G., Acoustic discrimination of pathological voice: sustained vowels versus continuous speech. Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 327-339, 2001. DOI:
  6. Zhang, Y., Jiang, J. J., Acoustic Analyses of Sustained and Running Voices From Patients With Laryngeal Pathologies, Journal of Voice, vol. 22 no. 1, pp. 1-9, 2008. DOI:
  7. KayPentex, Multi-Dementional Voice Program(MDVP) Software Introduction Manual, Lincoln Park. NJ. USA. 2008.
  8. Go Do Heung et al., Experimental Phonetics for Speech-Language Pathologists. Seoul: Hakjisa. 2015.
  9. Olszewski, A. E., Shen, L., Jiang, J. J., Objective Methods of Sample Selection in Acoustic Analysis of Voice. Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology, vol. 120, no. 3, 155-161, 2011. DOI:
  10. Choi S. H., Lee J., Sprecher A. J., Jiang J. J., The effect of segment selection on acoustic analysis, Journal of Voice, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 1-7, 2012. DOI:
  11. de Krom, Consistency and Reliability of Voice Quality Ratings for Different Types of Speech Fragments. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, vol. 37, no. 5, pp. 985, 1994. DOI:
  12. de Krom, Some Spectral Correlates of Pathological Breathy and Rough Voice Quality for Different Types of Vowel Fragments. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 794, 1995. DOI:
  13. Martin, D., Fitch, J., & Wolfe, V., Pathologic voice type and the acoustic prediction of severity. Journal of speech and hearing research, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 765-771, 1995. DOI:
  14. Wolfe, V., Fitch, J., & Cornell, R., Acoustic prediction of severity in commonly occurring voice problems. Journal of speech and hearing research, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 273-279, 1995. DOI:
  15. Sorensen, D., Horii, Y., Frequency characteristics of male and female speakers in the pulse register. Journal of Communication Disorders, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 65-73, 1984. DOI:
  16. Max, L., Mueller, P. B., Speaking fo and cepstral periodicity analysis of conversational speech in a 105-year-old woman: Variability of aging effects. Journal of Voice, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 245-251, 1996. DOI:
  17. Regner M. F., Tao C., Jiang J. J., Zhuang P. Onset and Offset Phonation Threshold Flow in Excised Canine Larynges. Laryngoscope, vol. 118, no. 7, pp. 1313-1317, 2008. DOI:
  18. Seong-Tae Kim, Chul min Ahn, Soon Yuhl Nam, The Study for Voice Onset Types in Benign Vocal Fold Lesions. The Journal of the Korean Society of Logopedics and Phoniatrics, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 131-135, 2009.
  19. Ahn Hwoe Young. Analysis of voice, Seoul: Jinsu. 1992.
  20. Yu Jeong Shin, Ki Hwan Hong, Cepstral Analysis of Voice in Patients With Thyroidectomy. Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology, vol. 9, No, 2, 2016. DOI:
  21. Heman-Ackah, Y. D., Heuer, R. J., Michael, D. D., Ostrowski, R., Horman, M., Baroody, M. M., Sataloff, R. T. Cepstral peak prominence: a more reliable measure of dysphonia. Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology, vol. 112, no. 4, pp. 324-333, 2003. DOI:
  22. Choi Seong Hee, Choi Chul Hee. The Stability and Variability based on Vowels in Voice Quality Analysis. Journal of Korean Society of Speech Sciences, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 79-86, 2015. DOI: