Choir singers need to hear their own voice in an adequate self-to-other ratio (SOR) over the rest of the choir. Knowing singers’ preferences for SOR could facilitate the design of stages and of choral formations. In an experiment to study the preferred SOR, subjects sang sustained vowels together with synthesized choir sounds, whose loudness tracked that of their own voice. They could control the SOR simply by changing their distance to the microphone. At the most comfortable location, the SOR was measured. Experimental factors included unison and four-part tasks, three vowels and two levels of phonation frequency. The same experiment was run four times, using sopranos, altos, tenors, and basses, with stimulus tones adapted for each category. The preferred self-to-other ratios were found to be similar to SORs measured previously in actual performance, if a little higher. Preferences were quite narrow, typically ±2 dB for each singer, but very different from singer to singer, with intrasubject means ranging from −1 to +15 dB. There was no significant difference between the unison and the four-part tasks, although this might have been caused by systematic differences in the stimulus sounds. Some effects of phonation frequency and vowel were significant, but interdependent and difficult to interpret. The results and their relevance to live choir singing are discussed.

1.
Coleman
,
R.
(
1994
). “
Dynamic intensity variations of individual choral singers
,”
J. Voice
8
(
3
),
196
201
.
2.
Daugherty, J. F. (1996). “Spacing, formation and choral sound: preferences and perceptions of auditors and choristers,” Ph.D. thesis, Florida State University at Tallahassee, School of Music.
3.
Elman
,
J. L.
(
1981
). “
Effects of frequency-shifted feedback on the pitch of vocal productions
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
70
,
45
50
.
4.
Fant, G. (1960). Acoustic Theory of Speech Production (Mouton, The Hague).
5.
Garber
,
S. R.
,
Siegel
,
G. M.
, and
Pick
,
H. L.
(
1981
). “
Regulation of vocal intensity in the presence of feedback filtering and amplification.
J. Speech Hear. Res.
24
(
1
),
104
108
.
6.
Howell, P. (1985). “Auditory feedback of the voice in singing,” in Musical Structure and Cognition, edited by P. Howell, I. Cross, and R. West (Academic, London), pp. 259–286.
7.
Letowski
,
T.
, and
Caravella
,
J. M.
(
1994
). “
Sound levels produced at and in the occluded ear of the talker
,”
Arch. Acoust.
19
(
2
),
139
146
.
8.
Naylor, G. M. (1987). “Musical and Acoustical Influences upon the Achievement of Ensemble,” Ph.D. thesis, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK.
9.
Ternström
,
S.
(
1993
). “
Long-time average spectrum characteristics of different choirs in different rooms
,”
Voice (United Kingdom)
2
,
55
77
.
10.
Ternström
,
S.
(
1994
). “
Hearing myself with the others-sound levels in choral performance measured with separation of the own voice from the rest of the choir
,”
J. Voice
8
(
4
),
293
302
.
11.
Ternström, S. (1995). “Self-to-Other ratios measured in choral performance,” in Proceedings of 15th International Congress on Acoustics, ICA 95, Trondheim, Norway, June 1995, Vol. II, pp. 681–684.
12.
Ternström, S., and Friberg, A. (1989). “Analysis and simulation of small variations in the fundamental frequency of sustained vowels,” Speech Transmission Laboratory Quarterly Progress and Status Report 3/1989, pp. 1–14.
13.
Ternström
,
S.
, and
Sundberg
,
J.
(
1988
). “
Intonation precision of choir singers
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
84
,
59
69
.
14.
Ternström
,
S.
, and
Sundberg
,
J.
(
1989
). “
Formant frequencies of choir singers
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
86
,
517
522
.
15.
Tonndorf, J. (1972). “
Bone Conduction,” in Foundations of Modern Auditory Theory, edited by J. V. Tobias (Academic, New York), Vol. 2, pp. 197–237
.
16.
von Békésy
,
G.
(
1949
). “
The structure of the middle ear and the hearing of one’s own voice by bone conduction
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
21
,
217
232
.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.