Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Vocal register V2 (Vocal register is in line with speaking fundamental…

- - - - In terms of acoustic perspective, Colton and Hollien (1973)(from Large) summarised that the glottal shape will be change 'if the pitch and loudness of the tone is varied', and this was agreed with Nadoleczny (1923). Colton and Hollien also concluded that the glottal area could be reduced 8 times if a subject produced from modal register to falsetto register, and resulting in low amplitude by falsetto mechanism (see Fig. 11. Colton and Hollien, op cit, p116). Furthermore, the falsetto register reported less energy than that of modal register (Large, 1963). They also reported that fundamental frequency tended to increase from chest register to head register.
        
        In physiological correlation of vocal registers, the length of vocal fold had relationship with the fundamental frequency (F0) in the falsetto register (see Fig. 16, Colton and Hollien, 1973, p 124). Using chest register to sing notes from falsetto register, caused shorter vocal fold; In the modal register, the length was increased at first, but it illustrated a sharp decrease after reached one particular note; In the falsetto register, the length of vocal fold elongated as the higher F0. According to the finding, teachers should not let children sing notes in falsetto region by their chest register; using modal register to sing notes from falsetto region could cause voice break after one particular note; and the best way to sing the falsetto region is used their falsetto register. Wurgler (1990) even thought that teachers should teach the head register before other two register. Another physiological correlation is that the vocal fold was thicker when the notes were higher (see Fig. 19, Colton and Hollien, 1973, p127). The limitation was that these findings based on a few subjects (n=8). In the current paragraph, the falsetto register is the head register.
        
        In Large's research (1970), five adult female sang A major from a3 to a4, with stopping two seconds in e4. According to Fig. 5 (p 389), all subjects' flow rate of middle register was significantly higher than that of chest register, and the difference was higher than the variation with subjects. One short transition existed between chest and middle register.
        
        Overall,
      - The head range is good sound and typically show higher capability than the chest range. However, as Patricia said in 2006, Wolf (1983) reported that many poor singing were caused by children tried to drag the chest voice upward. She suggested that teachers should accept the soft quality of the head range, and doing exercises started at the head voice, or singing the head range in a lower register.
- - - - Wurgler reported that students who could sing the tested songs showed two or more registers. 'Chest tone and head tone qualities were recognizable, as was a large area of overlapping quality' (Wurgler, 1990, p 63). For the decending patterns, it was reported that the middel and chest registers were easily to sing for these subjects. In terms of ascending scales, the inaccurate responses did not be used. Furthermore, children were easily ran out of breath, and they often adjusted the vocal production after stopped. The 'do-sol-do' pattern and 'cuckoo' were reported as successful devices in finding the head register. For the methods, Wurgler commented that 'the pitch pattern echo process provided more information about register and register transitions, but that the song literature section was necessary and 'more realistic'' (Wurgler, 1990). Compared with singing ascending scales, singing songs showed slightly easiler to measure, and it is an appropriate measurement to test children's vocal register. Wurgler reported that the chosen test song should be reviewed or taught before the testing. The limitation of the method is that, according to ealier literature (Wassum, 1979) (from Wurgler, 1990), children tend to sing tested songs in a low starting note and using 'heavy or light chest production' (Wurgler, 1990), resulting into not all children could find head register by singing songs (Wurgler, 1990). The pilot study strongly suggested (55.8% of subjects) an overlapping area between chest register and head register, and the middle register was removed from the main study. This against both two registers and three registers.
      - The main study of Wurgler (1990) chose 285 students from one Lincoln Primary school. Students in the school received 30 minutes musical instruction twice a week by an experienced music teachers. Two familar songs were rehearsed in different keys before the test. In the test, children sang two songs three times, in high voice, middle voice and low voice respectively, fixed starting pitches were given by the investigator. Pitch pattern sections tested in the pilot study used in the main study, using syllable 'ah', and 'cuckoo' was prepared as an extra task if students did not show their head register.
        
        Wurgler reported that eb3 to f4 was the major break for adults from the chest register to middle register. :<3: Figure 7 p 51, and Miller, 1986, Figure 2 :<3: Wurgler's suggestion was supported by Marchesi (from Wurgler, 1990) who though that the highest notes in the chest register for female adult was between e4 and ⌗f4. Wurgler (1990) reported that the lowest limits of the middle voice were from d4 to f4. Combined these findings, the overlapping area between chest register and middle register were from d4 to f4. However, it is difficult to say that Primary school children have a same principle of vocal register, as their higher speaking fundamental frequency than that of adults. The author assumes that children's notes of transition are slightly higher than adults'. suggested that eb3 to f4 was the major break for adults from the chest register to middle register. :<3: Figure 7 p 51, and Miller, 1986, Figure 2 :<3:
        
        Wurgler reported three models of register (see Figure 8, p 77). The reason was different definitions of registers, such as chest voice, and pure chest voice. The primary registers was the most common, which showed that ab3 to g4 was the chest voice, g4 to g5 was the head voice, and d4 to a4 was the area of transition. The second model was that ab3 to bb3 was pure chest register, bb3 to c5 was middle register or mixed production, while c5 to f5 was pure head tone. In Wurgler's study, 92.6% of the subjects sang in the mixture register, and unable or unwilling to sing in the head register. In the mixed production, Wurgler reported that the rate of chest mixture was bigger than that of head mixture, and the chest mixture was most often up to g4 for grade one to five students, and it decreased to e4 in grade six, which showed age influence on vocal register. However, children from kindergarten to grade 4 almost have no significant difference, whilst it decreased obviously started in grade 5, and continued in grade 6. This might be influenced by puberty. Look the mixture transition more closely, Table 4 (p 82) in Wurgler's research showed the rate of each single notes as the boundaries of mixture chest tone for grade one to six. According to the table, almost no students' highest chest notes were lower than c⌗4 until grade 6; a small part of children's boundaries were from d4 to f4 for grade one to five, but it was the most common boundaries of chest mixture for grade six children. Grade one to five children's most common boundaries were from f⌗4 to g4, and only few grade 2 and 4 children could sing to a4. According to this table, we could divide the mixture transition into three groups, which are c4-c⌗4, d4-f4, and f⌗4 - a4. Fortunately, this was totally matched with Rutkowski's Singing Voice Development Measure (SVDM) (see figure)In terms of gender, 56.8% of boys' chest high boundary mainly was in d4 to f4, while 54.9% of girls could sang f⌗4 - a4. Generally, girls' boundary of mixture chest notes was slightly higher than that of boys.
        
        As mention above, pure head tone was from c5 to f5, Wurgler reported that only 34.7% of the students sang in the pure head register. More girls than boys sang extremely high notes. The latter register predominantly controlled by the cricothyroid muscles. 67.4% of participants sang in mixture head register. Similarly with the mixture chest register (see Figure 8, p 86), c⌗4 - f4 was the most common lower boundaries of mixture head register for grade one to grade six, whilst c4 and f⌗4 - a4 showed similar level for grade one to four, and c4 was second common lower boundaries for mixture head notes for grade five to six, which illustrated that the mixture register decreased with age mature. Overall, the mixture chest register and mixture head register were overlapping and showed similar rules for boundaries, and this supported Rutkowski's SVDM under Primary school background.
        
        As mention above, pure head tone was from c5 to f5, Wurgler reported that only 34.7% of the students sang in the pure head register. More girls than boys sang extremely high notes. The latter register predominantly controlled by the cricothyroid muscles. 67.4% of participants sang in mixture head register. Similarly with the mixture chest register (see Figure 8, p 86), c⌗4 - f4 was the most common lower boundaries of mixture head register for grade one to grade six, whilst c4 and f⌗4 - a4 showed similar level for grade one to four, and c4 was second common lower boundaries for mixture head notes for grade five to six, which illustrated that the mixture register decreased with age mature. Overall, the mixture chest register and mixture head register were overlapping and showed similar rules for boundaries, and this supported Rutkowski's SVDM under Primary school background.
        
        The SVDM originally summarised from prior literatures (such as Harkey, 1979; Joyner, 1971; Young, 1971; Gordon, 1971; Smith, 1963; Young, 1971), developed classifications from 5 to 10, as overlapping areas added. Rutkowski tested by Rutkowski in a long period originally in kindergarten (Rutkowski, 1983, 1984, 1986, 1990, 1991; Rutkowski and Miller, 1990, 1993) to Primary school children (Rutkowski, 1994, 1995). These studies reported that SVDM was efficient for young children. However, studies of Rutkowski (eg.1990) failed to find the age difference between grade one to grade six by SVDM. Rutkowski thought that it was reasonable that most children's vocal register was in the mixture register, and a significant difference could not be found until maturation. In the original pilot study, Rowkowski used a familiar song in minor mode without giving starting pitch, but latter adjusted to a 'ready-sing' in the main study. Rowkowski analysed that the 'ready-sing' could help raters to evaluate the voices, and original goal was not tested the ability maintain tonality. In the latter study, familiar songs with both major and minor tones were tested on 170 Primary school children (Levinowitz et al, 1998), and Levinowitz et al reported that major notes were sung better than minor notes for children, and they assumed as length of the minor song was longer than that of the major song. Combined these findings, the author assumes that both minor note and major note are appropriate to test, and did not make significant difference on the scales. The materials of SVDM continued to update to 'See the bird' which was 3-pitch patterns (Rutkowski, 1996,2013, 2015, 2016). The process was that teachers sang 3 notes and the child echoes, and the teacher sang the next 3 and the child echoes, etc. Children echoed on both text and 'bum', and Rutkowski reported that children got higher score using 'bum' than text. Furthermore, scores of patterns were slightly higher than that of songs, but the differences were small (Rutkowski, 1986). Compared with singing familiar songs, the 'See the bird' patterns did not require pre-teach in the classroom, and easier to evaluate for raters. Overall, it seems to that varies methods were appropriated, and further researches are required.
        
        The SVDM scores was widely used to evaluate children's vocal development. Mang (2006) used SVDM as one of measurement to test children's singing competency. 120 children aged 7 to 9 years randomly selected from three middle to lower classes schools. 60 children were Cantonese monolinguals and 60 were English and Cantonese bilinguals participants in the study. Each child sang 'Happy Birthday' in English, and no starting pitch was given to 'avoid the effects of vocal modelling' (p 166). Two judges showed a high Pearson correlation (.821). Mang reported that the mean of scores of SVDM of aged 9 children (4.38) had significantly higher than that of aged 7 (4.18); the mean of girls' score (4.56) was significantly higher than that of boys (4); furthermore, Cantonese monolinguals's scores (4.46) were significantly higher than that of English bilinguals (4.1).