Building A Bridge Between Aesthetics And Acoustics With New Technology: A Proposed Framework For Recording Emotional Response To Sung Performance Quality
Available accessResearch articleFirst published online June, 2005
Building A Bridge Between Aesthetics And Acoustics With New Technology: A Proposed Framework For Recording Emotional Response To Sung Performance Quality
The paper describes a framework for the incorporation of an interactive-multimedia computer application into a four-year multimethod research project that investigates the psychoacoustic interpretation of vocal performance quality. Initial research, based on the analysis of semi-structured interviews with people from a wide range of backgrounds, followed by an extensive questionnaire survey, indicates different perceptual features as salient for individual listeners of singing performances. A synthesis of these reportedly significant perceptual features is now in the process of being critically evaluated by individual expert listeners using a novel experimental procedure that embraces the application of new multimedia technology. The new technology is designed to act as a real-time monitoring system along a `like/dislike' continuum of perceived quality, whilst also collecting real-time pressure data that is outside the listener's conscious awareness. The paper will discuss the overall research methodology, and the implementation and application of this technology, as well as possible implications for the teaching of singing.
References
1.
Baken, R.J. (1996). Clinical measurement of speech and voice. San Diego, California: Singular Publishing Group, Inc.
2.
Berliner, J.E., Durlach, N.I., & Braida, L.D. (1978). Intensity perception. IX. Effect of a fixed standard on resolution in identification. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, 64(2), 687-689.
3.
Callaghan, J. (2000). Singing and voice science. San Diego, California: Singular Publishing Group.
4.
Capperella, D.A. (1989). Reliability of the continuous response digital interface for data collection in the study of auditory perception. Southeastern Journal of MusicEducation, 1, 19-32.
5.
Cook, P.R. (2001). Music, cognition, and computerized sound: an introduction to psychoacoustics. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
6.
Deutsch, D. (2003). Ear and brain: how we make sense of sounds. New York: Copernicus Books.
7.
Durrant, C. (2003). Choral conducting: philosophy and practice. New York: Routledge.
8.
Durrant, C., & Himonides, E. (1998). What makes people sing together? Socio-psychological and cross-cultural perspectives on the choral phenomenon. International Journal of Music Education, 32, 61-71.
9.
European Commission (2005). Biometrics at the frontiers: assessing the impact on society: for the European Parliament Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) (No. EUR 21585 EN). Brussels: European Commission, Joint Research Centre (DG JRC), Institute for Prospective Technological Studies.
10.
Gabrielsson, A. (2003). Music performance research at the millennium. Psychology of Music, 31(3), 221-272.
11.
Gafni, N., Moshinsky, A., & Kapitulnik, J. (2003). A standardized open-ended questionnaire as a substitute for a personal interview in dental admissions . Journal of Dental Education, 67(3), 348-353.
12.
Granqvist, S. (2003). Computer methods for voice analysis. Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology, Speech, Music and Hearing.
13.
Himonides, E. (1997). What makes people sing together? Socio-psychological and cross-cultural perspectives on the singing phenomenon. Unpublished MA dissertation, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
14.
Himonides, E. (2003). Towards a new praxis of context-sensitive human-computer interaction: a study on the evaluation of current HCI principles in interactive multimedia learning. (Unpublished report [Star First-Class] for accreditation with the British Computing Society). London: Middlesex University.
15.
Himonides, E. (2005). The use of interactive-multimedia technology for the recording of emotional response to vocal performance quality: implications for the teaching of singing. Proceedings of the Fourth International Research in Music Education ConferenceExeter, UK: University of Exeter.
16.
Howard, D.M., & Angus, J. (2001). Acoustics and psychoacoustics (music technology) (2nd edn). Oxford: Focal Press.
17.
Howard, D.M., Welch, G.F., Brereton, J., Himonides, E., De Costa, M., Williams, J., & Howard, A.W. (2004). WinSingad: a real-time display for the singing studio. Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology, 29(3), 135 - 144.
18.
Johnson, C.M. (1992). Use of the continuous response digital interface in the evaluation of live musical performance. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 20, 261-271.
19.
Jorgensen, E. (2004). Editorial. Philosophy of MusicEducation Review, 12(1), 1-3.
20.
Juslin, P.N. (2001). Communicating emotion in music performance: a review and a theoretical framework. In P. N. Juslin & J. N. Sloboda (Eds), Music and emotion: theory and research (pp. 309-337). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21.
Juslin, P. N., & Sloboda, J. (Eds) (2001). Music and emotion: theory and research (series in affective science). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22.
Lukasik, E. (2003). AMATI: A multimedia database of violin sounds . Paper presented at the Stockholm Music Acoustics Conference 2003, Stockholm, Sweden.
23.
Madsen, C.K., Geringer, J.M., & Heller, J. (1991). Comparison of good versus bad intonation of accompanied and unaccompanied vocal and string performances using a continuous response digital interface(CRDI). Canadian Music Educator: Special Research Edition, 33, 123-130.
24.
Malloch, S.N. (1999). Mothers and infants and communicative musicality . Musicae Scientiae, Special Issue, 29-57.
25.
Miller, R. (2000). Training soprano voices. New York: Oxford University Press.
26.
Nair, G. (1999). Voice-tradition and technology: a state-of-the-art studio. San Diego, California: Singular Publishing Group, Inc.
27.
Nordenberg, M., & Sundberg, J. (2003). Effect on LTAS of vocal loudness variation. TMH-QPSR, KTH, 45, 93-100.
28.
Ockelford, A. (2005). Repetition in music: theoretical and metatheoretical perspectives. London: Ashgate.
29.
Peretz, I., Gagnon, L., Hébert, S., & Macoir, J. (2004). Singing in the brain: insights from cognitive neuropsychology. Music Perception, 21(3), 373-390.
30.
Potter, J. (2000). The Cambridge companion to singing. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
31.
Roberts, D. (Ed.) (2004). The classical good CD & DVD guide 2005. Teddington, Middlesex : Gramophone Publications Limited.
32.
Robson, C. (2002). Real world research: a resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers (2nd edn). Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishers.
33.
Scherer, K.R., & Zentner, M.R. (2001). Emotional effects of music: production rules. In P. N. Juslin & J. N. Sloboda (Eds), Music and emotion: theory and research (pp. 361-392). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
34.
Sederholm, E., McAllister, A., Sundberg, J., & Dalkvist, J. (1993). Perceptual analysis of child hoarseness using continuous scales. Scandinavian Journal of Logopedics and Phoniatrics, 18, 73-82.
35.
Sloboda, J.N., & O'Neil, S.A. (2001). Emotions in everyday listening to music. In P. N. Juslin & J. N. Sloboda (Eds), Music and emotion: theory and research (pp. 361-392). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
36.
Sundberg, J. (1987). The science of the singing voice. Dekalb, Illinois: Northern Illinois University Press .
37.
Sundberg, J. (2000). Emotive transforms. Phonetica , 57, 95-112.
38.
Thurman, L., Welch, G.F., Theimer, A., & Klitzke, C. (2004). Addressing vocal register discrepancies: an alternative, science-based theory of register phenomena. Paper presented at the Second International Physiology and Acoustics of Singing Conference (PAS04), Denver, Colorado.
39.
Titze, I.R. (2000). Principles of voice production (2nd edn). Iowa City: National Center for Voice and Speech.
40.
Titze, I.R., & Story, B.H. (2002). Voice quality: What is most characteristic about “you” . Echoes, 12(4), 3-4.
41.
Welch, G.F. (2005). Singing as communication. In D. Miell, R. A. R. MacDonald & D. J. Hargreaves (Eds), Musical communication (pp. 239-259). New York: Oxford University Press.
42.
Welch, G., Himonides, E., Howard, D.M., & Brereton, J. (2004). VOXed: technology as a meaningful teaching aid in the singing studio. Paper presented at the CIM04 Conference on Interdisciplinary Musicology, Graz, Austria.
43.
Welch, G.F., & Sundberg, J. (2002). Solo voice. In R. Parncutt & G. McPherson (Eds), The science and psychology of music performance: creative strategies for teaching and learning (pp. 253-268). New York: Oxford University Press.
