Factors affecting the quality of sound recording for speech and voice analysis

References

• Austin, M. D., Leeper, H. A. (1975). Basal pitch and frequency level variation in male and female children: a preliminary investigation. Journal of Communication Disorders, 8, 309–316.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boersma, P. (2001). Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International, 5, 341–345.
   Google Scholar
• Brenner, M., Cash, J. R. (1991). Speech analysis as an index of alcohol intoxication—the Exxon Valdez accident. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 62, 893–898.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cannizzaro, M. S., Reilly, N., Mundt, J. C., Snyder, P. J. (2005). Remote capture of human voice acoustical data by telephone: A methods study. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 19, 649–658.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carson, C. P., Ingrisano, D. R., Eggleston, K. D. (2003). The effect of noise on computer-aided measures of voice: a comparison of CSpeechSP and the Multi-Dimensional Voice Program software using the CSL 4300B Module and Multi-Speech for Windows. Journal of Voice, 17, 12–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cassidy, S., Harrington, J. (2001). Multi-level annotation in the EMU speech database management system. Speech Communication, 33, 61–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chrin, C., Gay, S. L., Jones, M. H., Martin, J. C., Kocan, K. F. (2002). Performance of soft phones and advances in associated technology. Bell Labs Technical Journal, 7, 135–139.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dejonckere, P. H., Bradley, P., Clemente, P., Cornut, G., Crevier-Buchman, L., Friedrich, G., Van De Heyning, P. H., Remacle, M., Woisard, V. (2001). A basic protocol for functional assessment of voice pathology, especially for investigating the efficacy of (phonosurgical) treatments and evaluating new assessment techniques. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, 258, 77–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deliyski, D. D., Evans, M. K., Shaw, H. S. (2005). Influence of data acquisition environment on accuracy of acoustic voice quality measurements. Journal of Voice, 19, 176–186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deliyski, D. D., Shaw, H. S., Evans, M. K. (2005a). Adverse effects of environmental noise on acoustic voice quality measurements. Journal of Voice, 19, 15–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deliyski, D. D., Shaw, H. S., Evans, M. K. (2005b). Influence of sampling rate on accuracy and reliability of acoustic voice analysis. Logopedics, Phoniatrics, Vocology, 30, 55–62.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Deliyski, D. D., Shaw, H. S., Evans, M. K., Vesselinov, R. (2006). Regression tree approach to studying factors influencing acoustic voice analysis. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 58, 274–288.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eargle, J. (2004). The microphone book: From mono to stereo to surround: A guide to microphone design and application (2nd ed.). St Louis, MO: Focal Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gonzalez, J., Cervera, T., Llau, M. J. (2003). Acoustic analysis of pathological voices compressed with MPEG system. Journal of Voice, 17, 126–139.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halberstam, B. (2004). Acoustic and perceptual parameters relating to connected speech are more reliable measures of hoarseness than parameters relating to sustained vowels. Journal for Otorhinolaryngology and its Related Specialties, 66, 70–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hicks, D. M. (1990, September). Functional Voice Assessment: What to Measure and Why. Paper presented at the NIDCD Conference on Assessment of Speech and Voice Production: Research and Clinical Applications, Bethesda, MD.
   Google Scholar
• Hillenbrand, J. (1987). A methodological study of perturbation and additive noise in synthetically generated voice signals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 30, 448–461.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howard, D. M. (2002). The real and the non-real in speech measurements. Medical Engineering and Physics, 24, 493–500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huckvale, M. (2008). Speech filing system. London: University College London.
   Google Scholar
• Ingrisano, D. R. S., Perry, C. K., Jepson, K. R. (1998). Environmental noise: A threat to automatic voice analysis. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 7, 91–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang, J. J., Lin, E., Hanson, D. G. (1998). Effect of tape recording on perturbation measures. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 1031–1041.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, K. (2003). Acoustic and auditory phonetics (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Karnell, M. P. (1991). Laryngeal perturbation analysis: minimum length of analysis window. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 544–548.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kent, R. D., Read, C. (2002). Acoustic analysis of speech (2nd ed.) Albany, NY: Singular Thomson Learning.
   Google Scholar
• McHenry, M. (2000). Acoustic characteristics of voice after severe traumatic brain injury. Laryngoscope, 110, 1157–1161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milenkovic, P. (2001). Time-frequency analysis for 32-bit windows. University of Wisconsin-Madison, WI.
   Google Scholar
• Mundt, J. C., Snyder, P. J., Cannizzaro, M. S., Chappie, K., Geralts, D. S. (2007). Voice acoustic measures of depression severity and treatment response collected via interactive voice response (IVR) technology. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 20, 50–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nyquist, H. (1928). Certain topics in telegraph transmission theory. Transactions in Audio, Industrial and Electrical Engineering.
   Google Scholar
• Nyquist, H. (2002). Certain topics in telegraph transmission theory. Proceedings of The IEEE, 90, 280–305.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parsa, V., Jamieson, D. G., Pretty, B. R. (2001). Effects of microphone type on acoustic measures of voice. Journal of Voice, 15, 331–343.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perry, C. K., Ingrisano, D. R., Scott, S. R. (1996). Accuracy of jitter estimates using different filter settings on Visi-Pitch: A preliminary report. Journal of Voice, 10, 337–341.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scherer, R. C., Vail, V. J., Guo, C. G. (1995). Required number of tokens to determine representative voice perturbation values. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 1260–1269.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sjölander, K., Beskow, J. (2006). Wavesurfer. Stockhom: Karolinska Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Stemple, J. C., Stanley, J., Lee, L. (1995). Objective measures of voice production in normal subjects following prolonged voice use. Journal of Voice, 9, 127–133.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Titze, I. R. (1994). The G. Paul Moore Lecture. Toward standards in acoustic analysis of voice. Journal of Voice, 8, 1–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Titze, I. R., Winholtz, W. S. (1993). Effect of microphone type and placement on voice perturbation measurements. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 1177–1190.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Titze, I. R., Horii, Y., Scherer, R. C. (1987). Some technical considerations in voice perturbation measurements. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 30, 252–260.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vogel, A. P., Maruff, P. (2008). Comparison of voice acquisition methodologies in speech research. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 982–987.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitmore, J., Fisher, S. E. (1996). Speech during sustained operations. Speech Communication, 20, 55–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winholtz, W. S., Titze, I. R. (1998). Suitability of minidisc (MD) recordings for voice perturbation analysis. Journal of Voice, 12, 138–142.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zraick, R. I., Skaggs, S. D., Montague, J. C. (2000). The effect of task on determination of habitual pitch. Journal of Voice, 14, 484–489.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar