Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 21, 2025
Foreign Accent and Forensic Speaker Identification in Voice Lineups: The Influence of Acoustic Features Based on Prosody
Published on: September 27, 2024
Comparison of Acoustic Voice Features Derived From Mobile Devices and Studio Microphone Recordings
Vitória S Fahed1, Emer P Doheny1, Monica Busse2
1School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland; Insight Centre for Data Analytics, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Objectives/Hypothesis:
Improvements in mobile device technology offer new opportunities for remote monitoring of voice for home and clinical assessment. However, there is a need to establish equivalence between features derived from signals recorded from mobile devices and gold standard microphone-preamplifiers. In this study acoustic voice features from android smartphone, tablet, and microphone-preamplifier recordings were compared.
Methods:
Data were recorded from 37 volunteers (20 female) with no history of speech disorder and six volunteers with Huntington's disease (HD) during sustained vowel (SV) phonation, reading passage (RP), and five syllable repetition (SR) tasks. The following features were estimated: fundamental frequency median and standard deviation (F0 and SD F0), harmonics-to-noise ratio (HNR), local jitter, relative average perturbation of jitter (RAP), five-point period perturbation quotient (PPQ5), difference of differences of amplitude and periods (DDA and DDP), shimmer, and amplitude perturbation quotients (APQ3, APQ5, and APQ11).
Results:
Bland-Altman analysis revealed good agreement between microphone and mobile devices for fundamental frequency, jitter, RAP, PPQ5, and DDP during all tasks and a bias for HNR, shimmer and its variants (APQ3, APQ5, APQ11, and DDA). Significant differences were observed between devices for HNR, shimmer, and its variants for all tasks. High correlation was observed between devices for all features, except SD F0 for RP. Similar results were observed in the HD group for SV and SR task. Biological sex had a significant effect on F0 and HNR during all tests, and for jitter, RAP, PPQ5, DDP, and shimmer for RP and SR. No significant effect of age was observed.
Conclusions:
Mobile devices provided good agreement with state of the art, high-quality microphones during structured speech tasks for features derived from frequency components of the audio recordings. Caution should be taken when estimating HNR, shimmer and its variants from recordings made with mobile devices.
Related Concept Videos
01:21Perceiving Loudness, Pitch, and Location
Place theory, or place coding, suggests that different pitches are heard because various sound waves activate specific locations along the cochlea's basilar membrane. The brain determines the pitch of a sound by...
01:28Physical Assessment of the Respiratory Tract IV: Auscultation
Breath Sounds
Breath sounds are categorized into vesicular, bronchovesicular, and bronchial.
00:53Sound Intensity Level
The human ear can perceive an extensive range of sound intensity, necessitating the use of the logarithmic scale to define a physical quantity—the intensity level. It is a ratio of two intensities and...
00:58Sound Intensity
01:17Pulse amplitude and quality
A weak or absent pulse may indicate reduced cardiac output or poor left ventricular contraction, which can be signs of cardiovascular dysfunction or...
01:21Larynx
Anatomy of the Larynx
The larynx consists of various components, including cartilage, muscles, and vocal cords. Its structure includes three large unpaired cartilages—the thyroid, cricoid, and epiglottis—and three smaller paired cartilages—the arytenoids,...