International Journal of Phonosurgery & Laryngology

Register      Login

VOLUME 12 , ISSUE 1 ( January-June, 2022 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

A Comparative Study among Trained Hindustani Classical Singers, Untrained Singers and Non-singers through Cepstral Analysis

Sujata Mulia, Indranil Chatterjee, Sujoy K Makar, Vijaya Sinha

Keywords : Cepstrum, Hindustani classical singers, PRAAT, Singing

Citation Information : Mulia S, Chatterjee I, Makar SK, Sinha V. A Comparative Study among Trained Hindustani Classical Singers, Untrained Singers and Non-singers through Cepstral Analysis. Int J Phonosurg Laryngol 2022; 12 (1):5-11.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10023-1234

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 30-07-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Aim: The present study had the aim to obtain the cepstral measure [Cepstral peak (CP), Cepstral peak prominence (CPP), Cepstral peak prominence smoothed (CPPS)] of trained singers, untrained singers, and non-singers for the sustained vowel /a/, oral passage reading, and singing of the national anthem. Materials and methods: A total of 180 normal-speaking adults within the age range of 20–45 years were considered for the study, and they were divided into three groups: trained Hindustani classical singers (30 males and 30 females), untrained singers (30 males and 30 females), non-singers (30 males and 30 females). The subjects were screened for speech, language, and hearing defects or any other abnormalities. They were asked to undergo three tasks: sustained vowel /a/, oral passage reading, and singing task. Recordings were done, and then acoustic (cepstral) analyses were done through PRAAT software. Statistical analyses were done for the analyzed data. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), version 16.0 was used. Results: Significant differences were obtained at p < 0.05 between the genders (male and female) for different tasks and different cepstral parameters. Trained singers were found to have greater means than untrained singers and non-singers. Female participants were found to have a greater mean than the male participants. Significant differences were obtained for CPPS measures in sustained vowel tasks. For oral passage reading, trained singers and non-singers have significant differences for CP measure, no significant difference between trained singers, untrained singers, and non-singers were observed for CPP, and significant differences between non-singers and untrained singers, trained singers and untrained singers were found for CPPS measure. Conclusion: From the present study, it can be concluded that the Hindustani classical trained singers have better harmonic organization and periodicity in their voices when compared with untrained singers and non-singers. Clinical significance: This study provides an insight into the acoustical measure through cepstral analysis of Hindustani classical trained singers when compared to untrained singers and non-singers, which will provide a base for the disordered singing population.

PDF Share
  1. Michel JF, Wendahl R. Correlates of voice production. Handbook of speech pathology and audiology, 1971:465–479.
  2. Sataloff RT. Professional voice: the Science and Art of Clinical Care. (3rd Ed.). San Diego: Plural Publishing 2005.
  3. Silver J. The human voice: exploring vocal paralanguage. Nonverbal workshop, University of California [prod.] 1993.
  4. Andrews ML (Ed.). Voice intervention for children and adolescents. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing 2002.
  5. Bunch M. Dynamics of the singing voice. Wien, New York: Springer 1982.
  6. Durga SAK. Voice Culture-with special reference to South Indian music. J Ind Musicol Soc 1978;9(1):5.
  7. Proctor DF. Breathing, speech and song. NY: Springer Verlag 1980.
  8. Titze IR. Acoustic interpretation of the voice range profile (phonetogram). J Speech Hear Res 1992;35(1):21–34. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.3501.21
  9. Åkerlund L, Gramming P. Average loudness level, mean fundamental frequency, and subglottal pressure: comparison between female singers and nonsingers. J voice 1994;8(3):263–270. DOI: 10.1016/s0892-1997(05)80298-x
  10. Awan SN. Analysis of Dysphonia in Speech and Voice (ADSV): an application guide. 2011 Montvale, NJ: KayPentax.
  11. Hillenbrand J, Houde RA. Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality: dysphonic voices and continuous speech. J Speech Hear Res 1996;39(2):311–321. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.3902.311
  12. Maryn Y, Weenink D. Objective dysphonia measures in the program PRAAT: smoothed cepstral peak prominence and acoustic voice quality index. J Voice 2015;29(1):35–43. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.06.015
  13. Sundberg J. Acoustic and physiological aspects of vocal vibrato. In P. Dejonckere, M. Hirano, & J. Sundberg (eds.), Vibrato. CA: Singular Publishing Group 1995.
  14. Balasubramanium RK, Shastry A, Singh M, et al. Cepstral characteristics of voice in Indian female classical Carnatic singers. J Voice 2015;29(6):693–695. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2015.01.002
  15. Brown WS, Rothman HB, Sapienza CM. Perceptual and acoustic study of professionally trained versus untrained voices. J Voice 2000;14(3):301–309. DOI: 10.1016/s0892-1997(00)80076-4
  16. Kumar R, Shahana A, Majeed SA, et al. Do singers modulate their harmonics differentially during phonation and singing? J Otolaryngol 2015;5(3):66.
  17. Reddy BMS, Pebbili KG, Soonam VV. Smoothened cepstral peak prominence in choral singers, trained singers and non–singers. AIISH 2014;33:18–23.
  18. Weiss R, Brown WS, Morris J. Singer's formant in Sopranos: fact or fiction?. J Voice 2001;15(4):457–468. DOI: 10.1016/s0892-1997(01)00046-7
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.