Running head: RESPIRATORY MEASURES
1
RESPIRATORY MEASURES OF MUSICAL THEATER SINGERS, CLASSICAL SINGERS,
AND NON-SINGERS
by
Payton Burnette
A Senior Honors Project Presented to the
Honors College
East Carolina University
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for
Graduation with Honors
by
Payton Burnette
Greenville, NC
May 2015
Approved by:
Dr. Kathleen Cox, CCC-SLP, PhD
Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, College of Allied Health
RESPIRATORY MEASURES
2
Respiratory Measures of Musical Theater Singers, Classical Singers, and Non-singers
Summary
Based on the current state of research, it is clear that singers have remarkably different
vocal abilities than non-singers (Siupsinskiene and Lycke, 2011; Peppard, Bless and Milenkovic,
1987). Additionally, studies by Barlow and LoVetri (2010) and Hoit, Jenks, Watson, and
Cleveland (1995) show that singers of different styles vary significantly from each other on
respiratory and phonatory measures. In order to add to knowledge of the singing population, this
study used the Phonatory Aerodynamic System to compare three subject groups (musical theater
singers, classical singers, and non-singers) on measures associated with five specific tasks; vital
capacity, maximum sustained phonation, comfortable sustained phonation, variation in sound
pressure level, and voicing efficiency. Kruskal Wallis non-parametric analysis revealed that the
groups differed significantly on maximum phonation time and peak expiratory airflow.
Implications for further research are discussed.
Introduction
It is now commonly agreed that singers have remarkably different vocal abilities than the
non-singers (Siupsinskiene and Lycke, 2011; Peppard, Bless, and Milenkovic, 1988). In
quantitative studies specifically, singers have continually performed differently than their nonsinger counterparts. Siupsinskiene and Lycke (2011) reported that singers show increased ability
on all tested areas compared to normative data, particularly in pitch range and slope of speaking
measurements in men and highest frequency, intensity range, and slope of speaking
measurements in women. Peppard, Bless, and Milenkovic (1988) found that singers have greater
RESPIRATORY MEASURES
3
maximum phonation times than non-singers, even when presenting with vocal nodules. Carroll,
Sataloff, Heuer, Spiegel, Radionoff, and Cohn 1996), reported that singers have shorter
maximum phonation times than non-singers, but increased phonation quotients. The singers in
the study also showed over 100% averages for forced expiratory volume and forced vital
capacity measures, contributing to the idea that singers can utilize their lung volumes differently
than non-singers. Also, singers have a tendency to initiate phrases at higher lung volumes and
use larger ranges of percent vital capacity than non-singers according to Tang et al. (2008) and
Hoit et al. (1996). As a result of this research, we can conclude that singers perform differently
on phonatory and respiratory tasks than non-singers, but there is still much to learn about the
consistency and patterns in which these differences occur.
Normative data for respiratory and vocal measures in singers is relatively sparse in the
literature. A singer may have a high repeatability of lung volume, rib cage excursions, and
abdominal excursions when repeating the same singing tasks but how those three contributors
interact varies from singer to singer (Thomasson and Sundberg, 1999). Singers also vary in how
they utilize isometric and isotonic vocal fold contractions, which can in turn affect how much
variability they show in percent vital capacity used during singing tasks (Tang et al. 2008). The
respiratory system continually changes in response to vocal training and to intervals of time
without training, causing the quantitative measures of a singer to change over relatively short
periods of time (Mendes et al., 2006). The high amount of variation within the singing
population may prove to make establishing normative data difficult.
One way to evaluate some of the quantifiable variations among singers is to separate
singers based on style. Barlow and LoVetri (2010) discovered that singers trained for musical
theater showed higher closed quotients and higher amplitudes across all harmonics (up to six) on
RESPIRATORY MEASURES
4
average vowel spectra than classically trained singers. They also found that classically trained
singers show a steeper spectral slope for long term average spectra. Hoit et al. (1996) revealed
that country singers showed very similar respiratory behaviors in both their speaking and singing
tasks. Country singers initiated phrases at a much lower percent vital capacity than their classical
singer counterparts and only used a small range of percent vital capacity throughout their tasks.
The classical singers in the Hoit study (1996) were said to have significantly more noticeable
chest wall manipulations and inhalatory/exhalatory transitions than the country singers. While all
these findings suggest that differences between singers of different styles exist, it is necessary to
build upon such research to provide a clearer understanding of what different styles of vocal
training contribute to a client’s performance on breathing, speaking, and singing tasks.
Justification of Need for the Present Research
The data presented indicates that while we know that singers perform differently than
non-singers, little can be concluded about whether distinct respiratory or phonatory patterns
exists within the singing population and further, whether those patterns can be found for all
singers or only for singers of a specific style. The goal of this study is to improve the speechlanguage pathologists understanding of the singer population by a) validating previous data on
the respiratory differences between singers and non-singers b) determining whether or not
significant respiratory differences exist between musical theater singers, classical singers and
non-singers when performing respiratory and phonatory tasks. We hypothesize that singers will
have significantly different measures from the non-singers, particularly in expiratory volume
(based on Carroll et al., 1996), phonation time (based on Peppard, Bless, and Milenkovic, 1988),
and pitch range (Siupsinskiene and Lycke, 2011). We also hypothesize that the musical theater
RESPIRATORY MEASURES
5
singers and classical singers will significantly differ on measures, specifically those associated
with the voice efficiency task (Carroll et al., 1996).
Methods
Subjects
Fifteen subjects were used in this study, recruited by word of mouth, previous relationships, and
IRB approved advertisements presented to a studio class in the School of Music. Testing was
done with five participants that were classical singers, five that were musical theater singers, and
the five remaining non-singers acted as controls.
Inclusionary and Exclusionary Criteria
Participants all met the inclusion criteria of being female, ages 18-39 and were non-singers (had
never received formal voice lessons), classical singers (had received at least 3 semesters of
classical collegiate voice lessons), or musical theater singers (had received at least 3 semesters of
musical theater collegiate voice lessons.). Subjects were screened and none were pregnant,
smokers, or had any history of vocal or respiratory problems.
Tasks
Each subject was asked to come to the Voice and Swallowing Research Laboratory to go through
the testing procedure. Upon arrival, the principal investigator obtained consent and asked each
participant to perform five protocols, three times each using the KayPentax Phonatory
Aerodynamic System (PAS). The instructions for the tasks were pulled from those used in the
Zraick, Smith-Olinde, and Shotts (2012) study and those given by the help screens of the PAS
device. The instructions were as follows:
RESPIRATORY MEASURES
-
6
Vital Capacity: Subjects inhaled maximally, then breathed out maximally
into the mask of the PAS not exceeding a rate of 5L per second
-
Maximum Sustained Phonation: Subjects inhaled maximally then
sustained an “ah” sound into the mask of the PAS at a comfortable
frequency and level for as long as possible
-
Comfortable Sustained Phonation: Subjects inhaled maximally then
sustained an “ah” sound at a comfortable frequency and level for at least 5
seconds
-
Variation in Sound Pressure Level: Subjects inhaled maximally then
produced the syllable strong /pa:pa:pa/ three times, the first time at
normal volume, the second at half normal volume, and the third at twice
normal volume
-
Voicing Efficiency: Subjects inhaled maximally then produced the
syllable string /pa:pa:pa:pa:pa:pa:pa/ with equal emphasis on all syllables
and no breaks in between
Analysis
After average data was recorded for each participant, Kruskal Wallis tests were administered
between the three groups on selected measures from the five tasks.. Additionally, descriptive
statistics and graphical comparisons were performed on selected measures to search for clinically
significant trends.
Results
RESPIRATORY MEASURES
7
Kruskal Wallis non-parametric analysis revealed that:

Non-singers had significantly higher peak expiratory airflow measures in the maximum
phonation task than both musical theater singers and classical singers. (p-value =.029)

Musical theater singers had significantly higher maximum phonation times than classical
singers and non-singers. (p-value= .029)

Classical singers had almost significantly higher measures for mean expiratory airflow
than musical theater singers during the maximum phonation task. (p-value=.114)
Graphical comparisons showed that:

Non-singers had lower mean peak pressures during the voicing efficiency task than both
singing groups.

Singers were more likely to utilize their upper boundaries of their vital capacities during
phonation tasks than in vital capacity tasks.
Discussion
Non-singers had higher peak expiratory airflow measures during the maximum sustained
phonation task than both singing groups (p-value= .029). When looking graphically, it can be
observed that one subject in the non-singer group had a very high peak airflow which may have
skewed the results. Higher peak airflow indicates an uneven release of air, which could be
contributed to a lack of control, which in turn could be due to lack of training as is confirmed by
the Carroll study (1996).
RESPIRATORY MEASURES
8
While musical theater singers showed significantly higher maximum phonation times
than non-singers, classical singers did not have higher measurements than non-singers as we had
hypothesized. This could be related to the pressure of performance. Musicians tend to value
creating an aesthetically pleasing sound and many suffer from performance anxiety that could
cause a decrease in the quality of their task performance (Yoshie, Shigemasu, Kudo, & Ohtsuki,
2009). There were also differences in how the subjects performed the maximum sustained
phonation task task. When instructed, each of the subjects was asked to sustain an ”ah” sound for
as long as possible with comfortable pitch and loudness. In order to complete the task, each
individual chose the frequency and intensity they felt would give them the longest phonation
time. The different degrees to which a subject utilized their laryngeal muscles for speech and
singing could affect maximum phonation times. A study by Schmidt, Klingholz, and Martin
RESPIRATORY MEASURES
9
91988) has shown that it is slightly more difficult to sustain low frequency high intensity sounds
because it requires more muscular control. Data could be reflecting measurements that resulted
from the pitch and intensity choices of individual subjects rather than the respiratory capacities
of the groups.
While not statistically significant, it is noted that classical singers showed very close to
significantly higher mean expiratory airflow measurements than the musical theater singers (pvalue= .114). This steadily higher expulsion of air by the classical singers can be connected to
their lower maximum phonation times. The inverse relationship of maximum phonation time and
mean expiratory airflow explains why classical singers showed different maximum phonation
RESPIRATORY MEASURES
10
times but similar vital capacities to the musical theater group.
Non-singers showed what looks to be lower mean peak pressures for the voicing
efficiency tasks. This could be due to increased tension during phonation in the singing groups.
When comparing the two singing groups, we see that the musical theater group has slightly
higher mean peak pressures than the classical singers. This could be a result of articulation
training that occurs in acting. Singers are taught to articulate but when training the theater, the
musical theater college student goes through multiple courses in articulation and dialects that a
classical singing student does not. Those skills gained by the musical theater singers could have
carried over and affected their voicing efficiency tasks but there is not enough empirical data to
RESPIRATORY MEASURES
11
say for sure. Overall, voicing efficiency measures of all the groups were more similar than we
expected with regards to Carroll’s (1996) findings and the perceived differences in musical
theater and classical singing. Repeating the protocol with a larger sample size would give more
information.
Three of 5 musical theater singers, 4 of 5 classical singers and 1 of 5 non-singers used
over 80% of their vital capacity when completing the maximum sustained phonation task. While
the amount of expiratory volume for the vital capacity protocol did not differ between groups as
we had hypothesized based on Carrol (1996) study, the singers did show an increased ability to
utilize higher percentages of their vital capacities than non-singers, however it only occurred
during the phonation task. From this, we conclude that the singer’s ability to use their vital
RESPIRATORY MEASURES
12
capacity differs from the ability of a non-singer, but maybe not to the same degree on every kind
of task.
While there were some notable differences in pitch range between the groups, there was
not task designed for the PAS that looked specifically at pitch range. Therefore, all the pitch
range measurements taken were byproducts of the subject’s completion of a different task. That
in mind, we did not feel we could make any conclusions about the pitch ranges of our subjects
given the source of our data.
Conclusion
Our study confirmed some previous studies regarding maximum phonation times but did
not show significant difference between the three test groups in the areas of expiratory volume or
voicing efficiency. In the future this study should include more participants and instructions
RESPIRATORY MEASURES
13
should be given more specifically to control for task variation between subjects. Our study points
toward the same conclusion of Medes, Brown, Rothman, and Sapienza (2004) who suggested
that the affects of singing training are mostly limited to the singing voice and do not generalize
to speech. The PAS does not contain any singing tasks and therefore may not be sensitive to
identify patterns or differences between the three groups.
RESPIRATORY MEASURES
14
References
Barlow, C., & LoVetri, J. (2010). Closed quotient and spectral measures of female adolescent singers in
different singing styles. Journal of Voice, 24(3), 314-318.
Hoit, J. D., Jenks, C. L., Watson, P. J., & Cleveland, T. F. (1996). Respiratory function during speaking
and singing in professional country singers. Journal of Voice, 10(1), 39-49.
Mendes, A. P., Brown, W. S., Sapienza, C., & Rothman, H. B. (2005). Effects of vocal training on
respiratory kinematics during singing tasks. Folia phoniatrica et logopaedica: official organ of
the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics (IALP), 58(5), 363-377.
Peppard, R. C., Bless, D. M., & Milenkovic, P. (1988). Comparison of young adult singers and
nonsingers with vocal nodules. Journal of Voice, 2(3), 250-260.
Siupsinskiene, N., & Lycke, H. (2011). Effects of vocal training on singing and speaking voice
characteristics in vocally healthy adults and children based on choral and nonchoral data. Journal
of voice, 25(4), e177-e189.
Schmidt, P., Klingholz, F., & Martin, F. (1988). Influence of pitch, voice sound pressure, and vowel
quality on the maximum phonation time. Journal of Voice, 2(3), 245-249.
Yoshie, M., Shigemasu, K., Kudo, K., & Ohtsuki, T. (2009). Effects of state anxiety on music
performance: relationship between the Revised Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 subscales
and piano performance. Musicae Scientiae, 13(1), 55-84.
Zraick, R. I., Smith-Olinde, L., & Shotts, L. L. (2012). Adult normative data for the KayPENTAX
phonatory aerodynamic system model 6600. Journal of Voice, 26(2), 164-176.