Validity of Acoustic Measures Obtained Using Various Recording Methods Including Smartphones With and Without Headset Microphones.
| Autor: | Awan, Shaheen N., Bahr, Ruth, Watts, Stephanie, Boyer, Micah, Budinsky, Robert, Bensoussan, Yael |
|---|---|
| Předmět: |
COST control
VOWELS MOUTH SMARTPHONES DATA analysis SOUND NOISE RESEARCH funding VIBRATION (Mechanics) PHYSIOLOGICAL aspects of speech SOUND recordings ASSISTIVE listening systems ABILITY STATISTICS SPEECH evaluation ANALYSIS of variance HUMAN voice DATA analysis software CONFIDENCE intervals TRANSDUCERS |
| Zdroj: | Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research; Jun2024, Vol. 67 Issue 6, p1712-1730, 19p |
| Abstrakt: | Purpose: The goal of this study was to assess various recording methods, including combinations of high- versus low-cost microphones, recording interfaces, and smartphones in terms of their ability to produce commonly used time- and spectral-based voice measurements. Method: Twenty-four vowel samples representing a diversity of voice quality deviations and severities from a wide age range of male and female speakers were played via a head-and-thorax model and recorded using a high-cost, research standard GRAS 40AF (GRAS Sound & Vibration) microphone and amplification system. Additional recordings were made using various combinations of headset microphones (AKG C555 L [AKG Acoustics GmbH], Shure SM35-XLR [Shure Incorporated], AVID AE-36 [AVID Products, Inc.]) and audio interfaces (Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 [Focusrite Audio Engineering Ltd.] and PC, Focusrite and smartphone, smartphone via a TRRS adapter), as well as smartphones direct (Apple iPhone 13 Pro, Google Pixel 6) using their built-in microphones. The effect of background noise from four different room conditions was also evaluated. Vowel samples were analyzed for measures of fundamental frequency, perturbation, cepstral peak prominence, and spectral tilt (low vs. high spectral ratio). Results: Results show that a wide variety of recording methods, including smartphones with and without a low-cost headset microphone, can effectively track the wide range of acoustic characteristics in a diverse set of typical and disordered voice samples. Although significant differences in acoustic measures of voice may be observed, the presence of extremely strong correlations (rs> .90) with the recording standard implies a strong linear relationship between the results of different methods that may be used to predict and adjust any observed differences in measurement results. Conclusion: Because handheld smartphone distance and positioning may be highly variable when used in actual clinical recording situations, smartphone + a low-cost headset microphone is recommended as an affordable recording method that controls mouth-to-microphone distance and positioning and allows both hands to be available for manipulation of the smartphone device. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: | Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|