JSLHR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.41 1031-1041 October 1998.
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jiang, J.
Right arrow Articles by Hanson, D. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jiang, J.
Right arrow Articles by Hanson, D. G.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Effect of Tape Recording on Perturbation Measures

Jack Jiang 1
Emily Lin 1

David G. Hanson 1

1 Northwestern University Medical School Chicago, IL

jjiang{at}nwu.edu

Tape recorders have been shown to affect measures of voice perturbation. Few studies, however, have been conducted to quantitatively justify the use or exclusion of certain types of recorders in voice perturbation studies. This study used sinusoidal and triangular waves and synthesized vowels to compare perturbation measures extracted from directly digitized signals with those recorded and played back through various tape recorders, including 3 models of digital audio tape recorders, 2 models of analog audio cassette tape recorders, and 2 models of video tape recorders. Signal contamination for frequency perturbation values was found to be consistently minimal with digital recorders (percent jitter=0.01%–0.02%), mildly increased with video recorders (0.05%–0.10%), moderately increased with a high-quality analog audio cassette tape recorder (0.15%), and most prominent with a low-quality analog audio cassette tape recorder (0.24%). Recorder effect on amplitude perturbation measures was lowest in digital recorders (percent shimmer = 0.09%–0.20%), mildly to moderately increased in video recorders and a high-quality analog audio cassette tape recorder (0.25%–0.45%), and most prominent in a low-quality analog audio cassette tape recorder (0.98%). The effect of cassette tape material, length of spooled tape, and duration of analysis were also tested and are discussed.

KEY WORDS: jitter, shimmer, recorder, analog, digital

Submitted on January 7, 1998
Accepted on January 8, 1998


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Behav Res MethodsHome page
A. P. VOGEL and P. MARUFF
Comparison of voice acquisition methodologies in speech research
Behav Res Methods, November 1, 2008; 40(4): 982 - 987.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 1998 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.