Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparación entre los resultados del fonetograma manual y el fonetograma automático / Comparison of the results obtained through manual and automatic phonetogram
Montojo, J; Garmendia, G; Cobeta, I.
Affiliation
  • Montojo, J; Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias. Madrid. España
  • Garmendia, G; Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias. Madrid. España
  • Cobeta, I; Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias. Madrid. España
Acta otorrinolaringol. esp ; 57(7): 313-318, ago.-sept. 2006. ilus, tab
Article in Es | IBECS | ID: ibc-049208
Responsible library: ES1.1
Localization: ES1.1 - BNCS
RESUMEN

Introducción:

El fonetograma (F) es la representación gráfica del potencial fonatorio de un individuo. El F obtenido empleando un sonómetro y un analizador de frecuencias se denomina “fonetograma manual” (FM), y el obtenido mediante programas informáticos se denomina “fonetograma automático” (FA). Material y

métodos:

Se ha realizado en 12 cantantes líricos un FM standard y un FA con el programa Dr. Speech Science 3.0, midiendo la correlación entre ambos sistemas.

Resultados:

Se objetivó una diferencia entre los dos sistemas para 14 de las 15 medidas fonetométricas con una p<0,0005, y con una p<0,05 para la restante, siendo los resultados numéricos del FA habitualmente mayores que los del FM, mostrando una correlación entre los resultados de ambos métodos.

Conclusiones:

El FA obtenido con el programa Dr. Speech Science 3.0 es un sistema más rápido y sencillo que el empleado para el FM, mostrando sin embargo diferencias por exceso respecto al FM en todos los parámetros fonetométricos habituales
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

The phonetogram (F) is the graphic representation of a person phonatory potential. The F carried out with a sonometer and a frequency analyser is what is called "manual phonetogram" (MPh), and the one obtained by means of a computer is called the "automatic phonetogram" (APh). MATERIAL AND

METHODS:

We have carried out in 12 lyrical singers a standard MPh and an APh with the program Dr. Speech Science 3.0.

RESULTS:

It was showed a significant difference with a p < 0.0005 in 14 of the 15 measures compared, and a p < 0.05 for the other one, being in general the results of the automatic test different from those of the manual in excess, with a correlation between the results obtained through both methods.

CONCLUSIONS:

The APh obtained with the program Dr. Speech Science 3.0 is a faster and easier way to obtain the phonetogram than the one used to obtain the MPh, showing however big differences in excess compared with the ones of the MPh in all the usual phonetometric parameters
Subject(s)
Search on Google
Collection: National databases / Spain Database: IBECS Main subject: Sound Spectrography / Voice / Voice Quality Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Language: Spanish Journal: Acta otorrinolaringol. esp Year: 2006 Document type: Article Institution/Affiliation country: Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias/España
Search on Google
Collection: National databases / Spain Database: IBECS Main subject: Sound Spectrography / Voice / Voice Quality Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Language: Spanish Journal: Acta otorrinolaringol. esp Year: 2006 Document type: Article Institution/Affiliation country: Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias/España
...