The Preference For Strong or Weak Singer's Formant PDF

INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the
text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and
dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of
computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment
can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and
there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright
material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning

the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to
right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in
one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced

xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9" black and white photographic
prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for
an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
Bell & Howell Information and Learning

300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA
800-521-0600
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n e r. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .
THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF MUSIC
THE PREFERENCE FOR STRONG OR WEAK SINGER’S FORMANT
RESONANCE IN CHORAL TONE QUALITY
By
JOSEPH KEVIN FORD
A Dissertation submitted to the

School o f Music
in partial fulfillment o f the
requirements for the degree o f
Doctor o f Philosophy
Degree Awarded:
Summer Semester, 1999
Copyright © Joseph Kevin Ford

All Rights Reserved
UMI Number: 9942237
C o p y r ig h t 1999 b y
F o r d , J o s e p h K e v in
All rights reserved.
UMI Microform 9942237

Copyright 1999, by UMI Company. All rights reserved.
This microform edition is protected against unauthorized

copying under Title 17, United States Code.
UMI
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, MI 48103
The members o f the committee approve the dissertation o f Joseph Kevin Ford
defended on June 15, 1999.
JacJk'A. Taylor
Pirofessor Directing Dissertation
itteeMember
Charles E. Brewer
Outside Committee Member
Rodney Eichetjberger
Committee Member
Andre J. Thomas
Committee Member
Approved:
Jon R.(Piereol, Dean, School o f Music
ACKNOW LEDGEM ENTS
I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Jack A. Taylor who served as my
major professor. His guidance and support along with his time and patience
throughout this process is greatly appreciated. I would also like to thank my
committee members, Dr. Judy K. Bowers, Dr. Charles E. Brewer, Professor Rodney
Eichenberger, and Dr. Andre J. Thomas. They have each contributed immeasurably to
both this document and to my education at this institution.
I would also like to acknowledge and thank Betty Brown, Florida State
University Academic Computing and Network Services for all o f her statistical and
programming advice.
I would like to thank my family and friends for their support and
encouragement. Most importantly, I would like to express my immense gratitude to
my wife Allyson, not only for her editing comments but also for the love,
encouragement, patience, and help that she has given me during this time in our lives.
iii
TABLE OF C O NTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................................... vii
LIST OF T A B L E S........................................................................................................... ix
A BSTRA CT....................................................................................................................*
Chapter B?ge
1. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................1
Historical American Perspective....................................................................... 1
Purpose................................................................................................................. 5
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE.......................................................................... 6
Elements of Tone Q uality................................................................................ 6
Choral Directors Preference for Tone Q u ality.............................................. 8

Choral Conducting and Methods T e x ts .............................................. 8
Choral Tone Articles by Conductors.................................................. 14
Studies on Choral Conductor's Preference for Resonance in Tone.. 17
Vocal Pedagogues Preference for Resonance in Solo and Choral T o n e ......22

Texts That Do Not Address Choral Tone Specifically..................... 22
Texts That Address Choral Tone Specifically.................................. 29
Voice Sciences Contribution to Resonance in Vocal T o n e ...........................32

Voice Science T e x ts..............................................................................32
Voice Science Studies Related to Resonance in Vocal T o n e 39
Studies of Choral Tone Q uality....................................................................... 51

Blend and Balance Studies................................................................. 51
Vibrato Studies......................................................................................55
Intonation S tudies................................................................................ 58
Resonance S tudies................................................................................ 61
iv
Reproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Sum m ary.............................................................................................................67
N e e d .................................................................................................................... 67
3. M ETH O D .......................................................................................................... 69
D efinitions.......................................................................................................... 69
Lim itations............................................................................................................69
Stimulus R ecording........................................................................................... 70
M usic......................................................................................................71
Recording Process....................................................................................72
Recordings For The Main S tu d y ......................................................... 75
Tallis - I f Ye Love M e ................................................................ 77
Gastoldi - Adoramus t e ............................................................ 78
Brahms - Waldesnacht du wunderkiihle................................ 82
Bruckner - Locus is le ............................................................... 82
Pilot Studies......................................................................................................... 86
Pilot study o n e ....................................................................................... 86
Pilot study tw o ....................................................................................... 87
Main S tu d y ........................................................................................................... 88
4. RESU LTS........................................................................................................... 91
Order E ffect........................................................................................................ 91
Demographic D a ta ............................................................................................. 92
Subjects: Music Majors with Choral T raining.................................... 93
Subjects: Music Majors with Instrumental Training b u t.................. 94
no Choral Training
Subjects: Non-Music Majors with no Choral o r ............................... 95
Instrumental Training
Research Question O n e ...................................................................................... 95
Research Question T w o ...................................................................................... 101
Intensity o f Preference........................................................................................ 107
5. DISCUSSION.................................................................................................... 108
Interpretation of the R esults............................................................................. 108

V
Research questions.................................................................................. 108
Problems with the S tu d y ................................................................................... 110

Order e ffe ct............................................................................................ 110
Other aspects o f the stu d y .................................................................... I l l
Implications for M u sic.........................................................................................112
Recommendations for Future R esearch.............................................................113

Measurement to o ls ................................................................................ 113
Future research implied by this stu d y ................................................. 114
APPENDIX A International Phonetic Alphabet c h a rt.................................... 117
APPENDIX B Four Music Exam ples............................................................... 118
APPENDIX C Choral Tone Q uestionnaire.........................................................120
APPENDIX D Average Spectrum Data for Tallis Exam ples......................... 123
APPENDIX E Average Spectrum Data for Gastoldi Exam ples.................... 144
APPENDIX F Average Spectrum Data for Brahms Exam ples......................165
APPENDIX G Average Spectrum Data for Bruckner Exam ples................... 186
APPENDIX H Subject Free Response C om m ents............................................207
REFERENCES.................................................................................................................210
BIOGRAPHICAL SK ETC H .......................................................................................... 227
vi
L IST O F F IG U R E S
Figure Page
1. Tallis - resonant version - average of right and left channels............................. 79

with spectrum expanded
2. Tallis - non-resonant version - average o f right and left channels...................... 79

3. Tallis - average spectrum ........................................................................................ 80
4. Gastoldi - resonant version - average o f right and left channels......................... 80

5. Gastoldi - non-resonant version - average o f right and left channels..................81

6. Gastoldi - average spectrum ................................................................................... 81
7. Brahms - resonant version -average o f right and left channels...........................83

8. Brahms - non-resonant version - average o f right and left channels...................83

9. Brahms - average spectrum ..................................................................................... 84
10. Bruckner - resonant version - average o f right and left channels......................... 84

11. Bruckner - non-resonant version - average o f right and left channels................ 85

12. Bruckner - average spectrum ................................................................................... 85
vii
13. Frequency of resonant versus non-resonant responses..........................................99
to Renaissance excerpts
14. Frequency of resonant versus non-resonant responses..........................................99

to Romantic excerpts
15. Mean scores o f non-resonant responses by three training groups........................ 105
viii
L IST O F T A B L E S
Table Page
1. Total RMS Power for Each Music Example and D ifferences...........................76

Between Versions
2. T-Test Results for Order E ffect............................................................................ 92
3. Non-resonant Versus Resonant Responses Across All Subjects.......................96
4. Frequency o f Non-resonant Responses................................................................ 97
5. Frequency o f Resonant Responses........................................................................98
6. T-Test Results for All Subjects’ Preference for a Non-resonant or a .................100

Resonant Choral Tone Quality
7. One-Way ANOVA for Training Versus Resonance Preferences........................101
8. Scheffe Test for Multiple Comparisons o f Three Training G roups....................102

for Non-resonant Preferences
9. Scheffe Test for Multiple Comparisons o f Three Training G roups....................103

for Resonant Preferences
10. Descriptive Statistics for Three Training Groups Across N on-resonant 104
Versus Resonant Preferences
11. Intensity of Preference Data by Subjects.................................................................107
ix
ABSTRACT
The purpose o f this study was to determine if (a) college undergraduate choral
or vocal music majors with choral training (choral training), (b) college undergraduate
music majors with instrumental training but no choral training (instrumental training),
and (c) college undergraduates with no music training (no music training) prefer a
choral tone quality that has a fully resonate singer’s formant to a choral tone quality
that is produced with the same voices using a much weaker singer’s formant
resonance.
Eight graduate voice students recorded four excerpts o f four part choral music
in an anacohic chamber. Each o f the excerpts was recorded twice. One recording was
made with the singers singing with a full soloistic placement which resulted in a tone
with a strong upper resonance in the singer’s formant range (2 kHz - 4 kHz). The
second recording was made with a greatly reduced singer’s formant resonance. These
recordings were analyzed and used to make a stimulus recording for the study.
The subjects for the preference study were all undergraduate college students
(iV = 139) from a major University in the Southeastern United States. O f the 139
subjects. 49 were vocal or choral music majors that had extensive training in choral
music, 47 were instrumental music majors who had very little or no training in choral
Reproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
music, and 43 were undergraduate students who had no training in either choral or
instrumental music. The subjects were randomly assigned to one o f two listening
groups. One group listened to six pairings each o f two o f the choral music excerpts
for a total o f twelve trials. For each excerpt, the order o f presentation o f the non-
resonant version versus the resonant version was presented three times in one order
and three times in the reverse order. Each o f the six trials was randomized with the six
trials from the second choral music excerpt. The same procedure was followed for the
second two choral music excerpts.
Upon listening to the trials, the subjects were asked to note the excerpt that was
performed with the tone quality that they liked the best. A significant difference (p <
.000) was observed at the .05 alpha level indicating that there was a difference
between the non-resonant and the resonant responses. Examination o f the mean scores
revealed that all o f the subjects preferred a non-resonant tone quality (M = 7.95) over a
resonant tone quality (A/= 4.05). When the three training groups were used as factors,
a significant difference o f (p < .000) was observed between the choral training group
and the instrumental training group. There was also a significant difference (p = .001)
between the choral training group and the no music training group. The difference
between the instrumental training group and the no music training group was not
significant (p = .998). This seems to indicate that not only do most subjects prefer a
non-resonant choral tone to a resonant one but also choral training seems to increase
that preference. It must be noted that this study is limited to the responses o f college
undergraduate students and is also limited to the four choral music excerpts recorded
for this study.
xi
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
The concept o f tone quality in a choral ensemble encompasses a large variety
of topics. These can include topics related to vocal technique which may include
breathing, posture, relaxation, absence o f vocal tension, resonance, intonation, range,
dynamics, and diction. Darrow, in his book Four Decades o f Choral Training. lists
the following concepts as attributes o f tone quality: color, timbre, resonance, volume,
density, high overtone formant, low overtone formant, blend, vibrato, physical effort,
and interpretative potential (Darrow, 1975, p. 12). An examination of the growth in
choral music in the United States over the past century reveals an active development
and evolution of the tone quality o f the choral instrument.
Historical American Perspective o f Choral Tone Quality
Choral music in America finds itself at the end o f a century that has witnessed
considerable development and evolution concerning tone quality. Before the 1920s
there were very few cities with choral organizations reported to be of high quality.
However, with the a cappella choir movement o f the 1920s. choral music in America
experienced an awakening. According to Howard Swan, out o f this activity, six
discernible schools of choral music performance evolved (Swan. 1973. p. 4). These
choral schools centered around the following people: (a) John Finley Williamson o f
the Westminster Choir College, (b) Father William J. Finn, director o f the Paulist
Choristers from Chicago, (c) F. Melius Christiansen o f the St. O laf College Choir, (d)
Fred Waring, director of the Fred Waring Glee Club, (e) the voice scientists Joseph J.
Klein, Douglas Stanley, and John C. Wilcox, and (0 Robert Shaw, former director of
the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra and Chorus (Swan, 1973, p. 9). O f those six choral
schools, the two that were considered polar opposites concerning choral tone quality
were those founded by John Finley Williamson and F. Melius Christiansen .
F. Melius Christiansen was the founder o f the St. Olaf College Choir at St.
Olaf College in Northfield Minnesota. Christiansen felt that each voice in the choir
should give up its unique tone in order to match an ideal tone. He tested the voices,
ears, and even the personalities o f potential singers in order to build a choir o f singers
that would conform their voices to that o f the ideal tone for his choir (Bergmann.
1944, pp. 144-145). Harold Swan stated that in Christiansen's choir each singer was
responsible for subordinating "his own ideas concerning tone production, rhythmic
stress, and pronunciation to the blended and unified sound made by the total
ensemble” (Swan, 1973, p. 9). The resulting choral tone was soft and free o f almost
all vibrato and allowed no one voice to predominate the texture. This met
Christiansen's needs for his a cappella choir's tone quality.
The opposite ideal choral tone was cultivated at the Westminster Choir
College, which eventually found its home in Princeton New Jersey. After initially
holding Christiansen's ideal as his model, its founder John Finley Williamson broke
with this sound and developed his own ideal tone quality. Williamson, who believed
that "choral voices must be vocal voices” (Buehler, 1989, p. 44), stressed individuality
and individual vocal growth in each voice. The choral tone quality that resulted from
Williamson’s experiments was one that was much louder in sound and possessed a
full-bodied vibrato. Williamson’s Westminster choir needed this additional loud
dynamic level due to the fact that they were now asked to sing with, and be heard over
an orchestra (Robinson, 1981, p. 6). Swan stated that Williamson’s ideal tone was
"big, dark, intense and colorful” (Swan, 1973, p. 15).
O f the remaining schools o f American choral singing, Father William J. Finn
relied most heavily on vocalization to set the tone quality o f his choirs. Finn founded
the Paulist Choristers of Chicago in 1904 and later moved to New York to work with
choruses there (Finn, 1939, preface). One o f his most unique ideas regarding choral
tone quality was in modeling voices to orchestral instruments. He would associate
voices to different instruments and admit members to his choir based on a prescribed
ratio o f these vocal instruments. For example, he categorized his first sopranos as
flutes or strings and combined them evenly in his first soprano section. He would
vocalize these “flute” sopranos on the vowel-consonant combination "foo” and the
“string” sopranos on “mee” in order to fUrther develop this unique timbre. These
types o f color combinations were continued throughout the sections o f his choir
(Swan, 1973, pp.15-16).
Fred Waring emphasized the importance o f clear diction with his ensemble.
His ensemble began regular broadcasts on radio during 1933 and continued this
presence until the late 1950’s (Kiefer, 1999). Waring, due to his desire to
communicate clearly with his audience, developed a system o f unifying the diction of
his chorus. That system, known as tone syllables, utilized phonetic transcriptions of
the words that, when read in place o f the English words, caused the singers to produce
the pure vowels and consonants at a unified time. Waring hired a young student
choral director from Pamona College in California to work with his glee club. This
young choral director’s name was Robert Lawson Shaw and he went on to become
one o f the leading figures in American choral music.
Shaw learned the importance o f diction to the overall choral sound from
Waring. He combined this with the passion for music that he learned from preparing
choruses for Arturo Toscanini in New York, the precision that he learned from
working with George Szell in Cleveland and the theoretical discipline that he learned
from Julius Herford (Baxter, 1996, p. 11). Furthermore, he combined these with an
attention to detail and a rhythmic vitality that resulted in a choral tone with energy,
depth, and flexibility.
The final influential group in regard to American choral singing was the school
that Harold Swan labeled the ''Voice Scientists.” These voice scientists, including
among others Joseph J. Klein, Douglas Stanley, John C. Wilcox, Arnold Rose, and D.
Van Nostrand, espoused a mechanistic approach to singing that sought to develop the
range, volume, and projection quality or resonance o f the soloistic voice (Swan, 1973.
P- 29).
Although virtually no written support for a ‘‘straight tone” approach to choral
tone has occurred since 1945 (Darrow, 1975. p. 17), choral professionals in America
still struggle with the basic tenants represented in these six choral schools. Most
choral conductors today can trace their tonal concepts back to one or more o f these
influences. This evidence of preferred choral tone quality by choral directors in the
United States has been fairly clear. However, the choral tone quality preferences o f
musicians and non-musicians have not been as thuioughiy researched.
Purpose
The purpose o f this study is to determine if college undergraduate choral or
vocal music majors with choral music experience, instrumental music majors with
very little or no choral music experience, and non-music majors prefer a choral tone
quality that has a fully resonate singer’s formant tone to a choral tone quality that is
produced with the same voices using a much weaker singer's formant resonance. The
research questions are as follows:
1. Do college students prefer a choral tone quality that possesses a fully resonate
tone complete with a pronounced singer’s formant to a choral tone quality that
is produced with the same voices using a much weaker singer’s formant
resonance?
2. Is there a difference in the preference o f (a) college music majors with
experience in choral music, (b) college music majors with an instrumental
background and no choral experience, or (c) college students with no
experience in instrumental or choral music for a choral tone quality that
possesses a fully resonate tone complete with a pronounced singer’s formant to
a choral tone quality that is produced with the same voices using a much
weaker singer's formant resonance?
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Elements o f Tone Quality
The historical schools o f American choral singing have led to a variety of
approaches to choral tone quality. To further discuss these differences in tone quality
we must first define the elements that make up choral tone quality. Gerald F. Darrow.
in his book Four Decades o f Choral Training, analyzed the publications that appeared
between 1930 and 1970 that dealt with choral vocal training (Darrow. 1975. 12). In
his study he found that authors referred to tone quality using the following terms: 128
authors referred to tone quality. 81 authors referred to tone color. 55 authors referred
to resonance, and 17 authors referred to timbre. From those references he also
compiled the following list o f the attributes o f tone quality: (a) color, (b) timbre, (c)
resonance, (d) volume, (e) density, (f) high overtone formant, (g) low overtone
formant, (h) blend, (i) vibrato, (j) physical effort, and (k) interpretative potential
(p. 12).
O f the above mentioned attributes o f tone quality, those o f color, timbre,
resonance, high overtone formant, low overtone formant, and even interpretive
potential, volume and density are very interrelated. The last two attributes are related
to the former through the fact that as intensity increases in vocal sound, the energy in
the high formant increases and the sound becomes denser. Those attributes therefore
will be considered together under the heading of resonance. The following sequence
will be used to direct the investigation into the related literature: (a) choral conducting
and methods books that address tone quality, and interviews with and investigations o f
professional, collegiate, and high school choral conductors, (b) voice pedagogy books
that address choral tone quality, (c) blend studies, (d) balance studies, (e) vibrato
studies, (f) intonation studies, and (g) resonance studies dealing with both the solo
voice and the choral voice. Furthermore, when necessary, the literature will be
discussed in terms o f anecdotal studies or writings and scientific investigations.
Finally, the area o f choral and vocal tone quality is large but there are few specific
studies cited that are directly related to the present study.
Early in this century, acoustical studies by Bartholomew revealed that a peak
o f resonance occurred in the male singing voice in the range o f 2800 to 2900 Hz
(Bartholomew. 1934). This area represents the ring or resonance in the male singing
voice (Bartholomew, 1942 pp. 145-147). Vennard labeled this spectrum peak the
2800 because in the studies done both by him and the researchers before him, 2800 Hz
seemed to be in the center o f the range o f frequencies that produced the ring or
resonance peak (Vennard, 1967. p. 89). This peak o f energy was later named the
singers formant and has been defined by Sundberg as: " ...a prominent spectrum
envelope peak appearing in the vicinity o f 3 kHz in all vowel spectra sung by male
singers and also by altos'’ (Sundberg, 1988b p. 14). This singers’ formant has been the
subject of considerable research since Bartholomew’s early work (Magill, 1978:
Nawka, 1997; Seidner, 1985; Sundberg, 1970b; Sundberg, 1972a; Sundberg, 1972b;
Wang, 1985). Other voice teachers have addressed resonance in vocal solo tone
quality as well (Appelman, 1986; Christy, 1961; Miller, 1986).
Choral Director’s Preference for Resonance in Choral Tone
Choral Conducting And Methods Texts
Many o f the hundreds o f choral conducting and choral methods texts deal with
the training o f the singing voice in the choral situation, and most o f these deal with the
topic of choral tone quality in a relatively general way (Hjortsvang, 1941; Kohut.
1990; Manson, 1961; McElheran. 1966; Neidig, 1967; Terry, 1991).
Many o f these texts reflect a strong tendency toward the tonal ideals o f one or
more particular schools o f American choral conducting (See the discussion on the six
historical schools of American choral music in chapter one.). Two works that
incorporate many of the ideals o f the St. O laf tradition are Eisenkramer's Techniques
in Voice Blending (Eisenkramer, 1949). and Max Krone's The Chorus and it's
Conductor (Krone, 1945). Some of the texts that reflect the influence o f the
Westminster Choir College or the Voice Scientists are Choral Conducting by Davison
(Davison, 1940), Glee Club and Chorus by Christy (Christy, 1940), Evoking Sound by
Jordan (Jordan. 1996). and Natural Singing and Expressive Conducting by Peterson
(Peterson. 1966). Still other texts can trace their influences at least in part to the ideals
of Father Finn. In this case, we have the fortune o f having two texts written by Finn.
Those are the Art o f the Choral Conductor (Finn. 1939), and The Conductor Raises
His Baton (Finn. 1944). However, many o f the concepts listed in Cain's Choral
Music and i t ’s Practice (Cain. 1942) can be traced back to concepts o f Finn with the
exception o f using the vocalizations to achieve a homogeneous sound instead o f a
sound based on a variety o f instrumental timbres. Furthermore, Sunderman’s two
texts stress the diction components that were important to Fred Waring (Sunderman,
1952; Sunderman, 1970).
In other conducting texts, the authors’ concepts o f tone quality demonstrate
influences by more than one school. In The Rehearsal Guide fo r the Choral Director,
Boyd discusses four different tone qualities desirable in a chorus: straight tone, smooth
tone, rich, and driven tone (Boyd, 1977). While Stanton supports many of the ideals
of Robert Shaw, he also supports the voice matching concepts found in the St. Olaf
tradition (Stanton, 1971). Decker and Kirk discuss tone quality for the choir in a
context o f sensitivity to the mood o f the text, diction, and the historical perspective
(Decker, 1995). Ehret also supported the idea o f a choral tone quality that is flexible
and reflects the mood o f the text (Ehret, 1959).
Several authors support a tonal concept that varies with the historical time
period o f the musical composition. Gordon, in his text "Choral Directors Complete
Handbook,” holds to this belief. He feels that the tone quality used in a Baroque work
should be clear, vibrato-free, agile, and relatively thin. He also feels that choral music
of the Classical period should be lyric, buoyant, and light with minimal vibrato.
Choral music o f the Romantic period, in his opinion, should have relatively more
weight and a richer tone with more vibrato. The final stylistic category that Gordon
covers is Impressionism. With this music, he recommends a controlled sound that can
maintain consistent crescendi and decrescendi (Gordon. 1977).
HefFeman feels that choral music o f the Renaissance should be sung with a
tone that is clear but not necessarily vibrato-free. In Baroque music, he supports a
tone that is more expressive than that used in the Renaissance but still not as
expressive as Romantic music (Heffeman, 1982). In the text, Pragmatic Choral
Procedures, Hammar also supports the idea that tone quality is linked to historical
performance practice. He believes that Renaissance music should be performed with a
transparent sound, and with very little vibrato. Baroque music requires a “clean” and
“lean” sound. For music of the Rococo, clarity of vocal line should be a goal and
music of the Classical period should contain precise and clear vocal lines. Music from
the Romantic period should contain lush lines and contemporary music should be
performed with clear lines. Hammar feels that “choral tone should reflect the physical
nature o f each era's m usic...” (Hammar, 1984, pp. 57-58).
In a more current work, Hylton supported the performance practice approach
to choral tone as well. In addition to this historical approach, Hylton went further to
discuss general tone quality. He stated that "...the tone quality o f an ensemble should
vary according to the type of repertoire being studied; however, certain basic ideas on
the development o f solid individual vocal technique are applicable in most situations”
(Hylton, 1995. pp. 5-6). One o f these basic ideas is the concept o f vocal resonance. In
his text he gives exercises that are designed to build and unify the resonance in singers
(pp. 15, 29). Robinson, another recent author, discusses choral tone quality in a
historical context in his book The Choral Experience (Robinson, 1992).
Other authors have discussed a difference between solo and choral singing.
Finn, in addition to explaining his “color scheme” and discussing the child’s voice.
10
also mentioned that there was a difference between choral and solo singing (Finn,
1939). Decker and Kirk also mention this difference (Decker, 1995), as did Davison
(Davison, 1940). Although these authors mentioned a difference between singing solo
and in a chorus, they did not mention the specific difference. Krone identified vibrato
as the difference between solo and choral singing. In his opinion "a certain amount of
vibrato is undoubtedly desirable in a solo voice to give it individual color, but the
owner of such a voice is o f little value in an ensemble unless he is willing to subdue
him self’ (Krone, 1945, p. 80). The conductor Stanton goes so far as to say that some
solo voices do not make good choral singers although he later continues the thought
and adds that a "completely trained voice” is successful in both areas (Stanton, 1971,
pp. 77-79).
Many conductors and conducting teachers incorporate information from voice
science into their techniques and tonal preferences. Howerton embraced these ideas in
his text Technique and Style in Choral Singing when he instructed the reader to seek a
vocal tone that is placed "in the mask.” This "singing in the mask or masque” became
a common instruction for a vocal pedagogue to give a singer in an attempt to increase
the focus and singer’s formant resonance in the tone. Howerton also stated that “often
the lack of resonance is due to insufficient physical exertion” (Howerton, 1958, p. 14).
Peterson stated that "The vocal tone must always have a feeling o f height,
depth, and forwardness.” The author views the open throat as the primary origin o f
resonance. He described three types o f resonances and suggested vowel/consonant
combinations to develop each type. For resonance in the throat, he suggested singing
on an ah vowel (International Phonetic Alphabet symbol [a]). A chart that includes
11
the International Phonetic Associations [IPA] symbols used in this study is included in
Appendix A. Head resonance should be developed using the word “moon.'1And mask
resonance or singer’s formant resonance could be developed using the
vowel/consonant combination nyah (or IPA symbols [nija]). As the abilities o f the
singers progress, Peterson suggested combining the exercises (Peterson, 1966, p. 43).
In a 1967 article for the Choral Directors Guide, Nicholas recommended humming
and raising the upper lip as a means o f developing high resonance (Nicholas, 1967, pp.
39-54).
Kortkamp suggested a full open throat technique that uses a hum to increase
the upper resonance or “high overtones." He also suggested vocalizing beginning on
the voiced consonant [rj] and then moving directly to a vowel. This vocal exercise is
intended to increase the nasal resonance and the high overtones. The recommendation
was also made that the singers imagine focusing the tone behind the forehead. Other
vocal exercises that the author offered are on the words “win, when, and Wayne"
(Kortkamp, 1969).
Roe advocated extensive use o f the hum and the consonant n (as in ring, IPA
symbol [q]) in combination with various vowels in developing high resonance in the
voice. He also recommended singing on the ee [i] and ay [e] vowels or adding a
“smile” to develop the high resonance (Roe, 1983). In Choral Techniques, Lamb
discussed tone quality in terms o f increased resonance and placement o f tone (Lamb.
1979). Roach discussed resonance in vocal tone quality in his text Complete
Secondary Choral Music Guide. Under the heading “improving vocal resonance” the
author stated that "the director should work for a choral tone that has a singing
12
resonance and a deep, rich warm sound.” He added that “some voices have this
quality in part o f their singing range, but constant voice training will help develop this
quality throughout the singing range. Choirs need to focus the tone forward behind
the nose. Some refer to this tone placement area as the mask...” (Roach, 1989).
Ehmann and Haasemann presented a collection o f exercises designed to
develop the forward resonance in the choir rehearsal. A notable feature o f their
suggestions is that many of the exercises use sounds of which the singers are familiar.
For example, the authors suggest developing resonance through yawning, imitating
bleating sheep, snorting pigs, buzzing bees, and grumbling flies (Ehmann. 1981, p. 11).
In Ehmann's separate book on choral conducting he offers additional suggestions for
developing high forward resonance. He suggests asking the singers to imagine that
the tone originates behind the eyes and proceeds through the eyes. He also suggests
that the tone could be imagined soaring above the head or spinning behind the nose.
He adds that consonants [n] or [q] to vowels for vocalizing in order to develop upper
resonance and nasal resonance.
More recently, Garretson’s Conducting Choral Music contains a lengthy
discussion on methods o f developing high-forward resonance. In this section,
Garretson took a more physiological approach to developing resonance. He suggested
that the singers should develop a high arch to the soft palate by invoking the sensation
of a yawn. He also suggested raising the muscles above the lip in order to add more
high resonance. The reader also is encouraged to warm the singers' voices up with a
descending scale while having them maintain the feeling o f a yawn, raise the upper lip
13
muscles, and keep their teeth separated by the width of two fingers (Garretson, 1998,
pp. 79-86).
in Collins’ 1999 edition o f Teaching Choral M usk, he presented methods of
increasing resonance in the adult singing voice as well as in voices o f children. After
an initial physiological discussion he recommended that "all vowels ring above and
behind the hard palate.” He went on to say that high pitches require nasal or head
resonance, lower pitches should resonate in the pharynx area, and middle pitches
should combine the two areas o f resonance (Collins, 1999, pp. 217-218).
Choral Tone Articles By Conductors
Mayer wrote an article examining the importance of intonation to the concept
o f blend in a chorus. Mayer states that "...blend in a section or the whole choir is
achieved through careful attention to three factors: timbre, dynamics and pitch.... 'off
color' sound and improper tone production are not compatible with good blend”
(Mayer. 1964).
In Diercks' "The Individual in the Choral Situation," the author states his
belief that singers will sing with a better tone in a mixed formation (quartets of
soprano, alto, tenor, and bass). He stated that "we find nearly all listeners note a richer
tone emanating from the group so arranged” (Diercks. 1962).
Draper published the following statement about his choral tonal preferences in
a 1972 article for the Choral Journal:
I insist that good singing in the choral group is exactly the same as
good solo singing. The techniques are parallel. In the solo voice the
teacher and singer alike are striving for a good vocal or singing line.
14
resonance, perfect balance between the breath and tone, a feeling o f
buoyancy, relaxed and free tone alleviating all throat tension, etc. The
same is true with the singer and teacher in a choral group (Draper,
1972).
After initially stating that he does nothing to develop the tone quality o f his
choirs, Jones continued stating that he uses nasal exercises to develop the “overtone.”
He gave several ideas for exercises designed to develop this resonance that he referred
to as singing with “an open head.” He continued stating that “when we sing with an
open head, - only then do we have access to the full and wonderful potential of the
human voice - in one sense, a whole new world o f overtone color” (Jones, 1957, p.
17). The opposite ideal is expressed by Arnold Jones who stated that you should
develop the choral tone on the warm hum because it was most near to the fundamental
pitch without the “high, strident overtones o f a poorly produced tone” (Jones, 1977,
pp.64-65).
In her article “A Voice Teacher Looks at the Choral Scene,” Lee suggested
having the students “sing through the yawn position” (Lee, 1977, p. 6). This is a very
common phrase in vocal pedagogy that is usually accompanied with the warning to
sing with the larynx in the position o f the beginning o f a yawn. The position that the
larynx takes toward the end o f the yawn can be too low for proper singing. Further,
this type o f larynx position is consistent with Sundberg's findings regarding the low
position o f the larynx resulting in the production o f the singer's formant.
Lyall recommended a choral tone quality with "ringing resonance" and
suggested that this was necessary for maintaining pitch. He went further
15
recommended keeping an “open throat” while singing. Even more specifically related
to singer’s formant resonance is his s'tatement “ . . . a beautiful singing tone must have,
besides fullness and roundness, ‘top,’ and/or focus. This quality is often described as
forward placement. It adds brightness, sparkle, and a bell-like quality to the tone...”
(Lyall, 1970).
In “Putting Horses Before Carts: Voices and Choral Music,” Thurman stated
that “the most basic concern o f choral conductors would be to help singers leam
formations o f the resonance spaces which would release optimal, desired tone
qualities, and to help them avoid formations which would interfere with same”
(Thurman, 1983, p.8). The author continues with discussions on the larynx positions
and the soft palate position in regard to resonance in the voice.
In the article “Tone Quality: a pragmatic approach for high school choirs,”
Colness recommended having the singers keep an open throat. He stated that this
would produce “beneficial changes” in the singers voice quality (Colness. 1967).
Considering research by Sundberg (covered later in this document), we know that the
open throat is produced by an enlarged and lowered larynx, which produces the
acoustical feature in the voice known as the singer’s formant (Sundberg, 1972a).
Another article that mentioned this space or “open throat” was “Balancing
Space and Energy in Choral Voices” by Daniel. The author advocated using mental
imagery to obtain this balance between space and energy (Daniel. 1993). This would
also increase the resonance in the singer's formant range according to the principles
put forward by Sundberg (Sundberg, 1977).
16
Davis suggested five methods o f improving the attack in the tone. He defined
the attack as the “focus, ring or sounding board” in the tone that "strengthens the
overtones or head resonance” (Davis. 1979). Smith and Sataloff built their discussion
o f choral technique to promote healthy singing around the material in the Ehmann and
Haasemann text. "Voice Building for Choirs.” The authors added a section on
conducting gestures that promote healthy singing (Smith, 1997).
Studies on Choral Conductor’s Preference for Resonance in Tone
Many authors have undertaken studies o f prominent American choral directors.
Most o f these studies do not directly address singer's formant resonance in choral
tone. However, many do address choral tone quality in general and they bear
mentioning in brief for that reason. Several studies have concentrated on the work of
Fred Waring (Mountford. 1992; Waring, 1945a; Waring, 1945b; Waring, 1951;
Waring. 1997). These studies not only chronicled the life and work o f Waring but also
explained his system o f tone syllables and his recording techniques. John Finley
Williamson has also been the subject o f several studies (Robinson. 1981; Robinson,
1988b; Schisler. 1976; Wehr, 1971). These studies outline Williamson's tonal ideas
and his contribution to Westminster Choir College and American choral music.
Several other works take as their subject philosophy and tonal concepts o f F. Melius
Christiasen (Bergmann. 1944; Johnson. 1973; Nelson, 1943; Shaw. 1997). The
concepts o f Waring, Williamson, and Christiansen were discussed in chapter one.
Swan, in his chapter in Choral Conducting: A Symposium contributed the
clearest statement on the six major influences on or schools of choral music in
.America (Swan. 1973). In 1987. Fowler edited a collection of Harold Swan's
17
speeches and essays on choral music and choral conducting (Fowler, 1987). These
contain not only Swan’s observations about the choral art in America, but also his own
concepts and ideas regarding choral performance and tone. Scarbrough contributed a
dissertation in 1996 on Roger Wagner, yet another leading American choral conductor
(Scarbrough, 1996).
The tonal concepts of Robert Lawson Shaw has been the subject o f several
studies (Baxter, 1996; Knutson, 1987; Schisler, 1986; Shaw, 1986; Swan, 1986).
Other studies have dealt with the influences that Shaw’s choruses have had on the
choral art in America (Miller, 1992; Morrow, 1993). Finally, other studies have
covered the influences on Robert Shaw as he developed (Mountford. 1992; Pierce,
1988), and other choral professionals that Shaw influenced directly (Griffin, 1988;
Latta. 1986). All o f these studies on Shaw document his tonal concepts of, among
others, rhythmic vitality and precision, clear diction, and coloration based on historical
performance practice.
In 1952, Helvey conducted a study into the methods used to develop choral
tone by several selected choral directors. The responses from his surveys revealed the
following points about resonance in the choral tone:
(1) The chief resonators are the mouth and throat. The nose
and lips are secondary resonators. (2) The best means o f improving
resonance in high school is by means o f using the various colors o f the
resonators in the expressing o f mood in song. (3) Little effort should
be made to concern the students with the physiological aspects o f
resonance unless the director is a vocal specialist with years o f study
18
with competent teachers to his credit. (4) The teacher should avoid
using the term ‘placing the voice,' for by pushing the voice into one of
the resonators, one limits the tone colors and expressiveness of the
voice. (5) All resonators should be used at once if a ringing, resonant
tone is to be produced. The tongue acts as a ‘traffic cop' in directing
the flow of air, so it is best to keep the tongue out of the way (Helvey,
1952).
Studies have been undertaken within the last several decades that sought not
only to describe the tone quality preferences o f famous American choral directors
from the past but also of prominent choral directors at the time o f the studies. Buehler
performed a study of George Lynn who directed the Westminster Choir from 1964
through 1969. Lynn had studied under Williamson at Westminster and the study
contains many of Williamson’s ideas and techniques (Buehler, 1989). The tonal ideals
of the conductor and educator Eph Ehly were examined by Clarke. The author
interviewed Ehly and video taped rehearsals that Ehly conducted in an effort to
document the techniques used (Clarke, 1997). In 1976, Decker completed a study o f
ten nationally prominent college choral conductors concerning their ideas on teaching
posture, breathing, relaxation, resonance, and diction in the choral rehearsal. His
research and interviews revealed a variety o f methods to teach those elements in the
choral rehearsal setting (Decker, 1976).
In 1991. Giardiniere conducted a study o f the voice matching and placement
procedure of Weston Noble. Noble has just completed his fiftieth year as choral
conductor at Luther College in Iowa. In the Giardiniere investigation, Noble's tonal
19
preferences are discussed along with his blending procedure o f physically arranging
the singers in an order that will most facilitate an overall blended choral sound
(Giardiniere, 1991). Also, the influences o f the conductor and composer Gregg Smith
were examined by Mauldin in his 1989 dissertation (Mauldin. 1989).
The preferences o f high school choral directors also have been o f interest to
researchers. In 1982. Corbin conducted an experimental study o f the use o f vocal
pedagogy in the high school choral rehearsal. One high school choir (experimental)
was trained using vocal pedagogical techniques as identified in choral and voice
methods texts and a second high school choir (control) did not receive this training.
Both groups prepared the same pieces o f music over seven weeks using the different
techniques and were recorded on audio and video tape. A panel o f experts judged the
performances and the subjects were surveyed. The experimental group was judged
significantly better in all areas except student attitude which did not demonstrate a
significant difference (Corbin. 1982).
Rhoads completed a dissertation in 1990 that dealt with the decision-making
processes o f five outstanding high school choral directors. Three rehearsals o f each
director were video taped and then reviewed with the director. Interviews were
conducted with the directors while the videotape was being reviewed in an attempt to
ascertain their reasons for making decisions throughout the rehearsal. The decisions
were based on previous knowledge about the students, time concerns, previous
rehearsal topics, and visual and aural cues (Rhoads. 1990). O verturfs 1985 study
concerning the implementation o f vocal sound concepts used four outstanding high
school choral conductors. She investigated the vocal concepts that were being taught
20
in the rehearsal and the amount o f emphasis placed on the specific concepts. The
concepts identified were phonation, breath management, intensity, range development,
registration, resonance, and articulation. Each conductor presented a forty-five minute
rehearsal tape and an audiotape o f a performance. A panel o f experts judged the
audiotape of the performance. Each o f the rehearsal tapes were transcribed and
evaluated for attention to and amount o f emphasis placed on each o f the tonal
concepts. O f the results reported, the researcher observed that as the vocal concepts
were emphasized, the performance o f those concepts improved. Overturf also
observed that high school voices exhibited potential for development and verbal
imagery seemed to be an effective tool for vocal development (Overturf, 1985).
Also in 1995, Cook-Koenig completed a study in which she interviewed
nationally recognized choral directors in regard to their thoughts on the causes and
possible preventive measures for vocal fatigue and strain in the choral setting. The
conductors that she interviewed included Robert K. Baar. Morris Beachy. Harold
Decker, Rodney Eichenberger, Rhonda Fleming, Lynn Gackle, Frauke Haasemann.
Kenneth Jennings, Colleen Kirk, Clayton Krehbiel. Russell Mathis, Douglas McEwen,
Weston Noble, Doreen Rao, Dermis Shrock, Hugh Thomas, and Larry Wyatt.
Included in the discussion with the conductors was the topic o f implications for
resonance strain in choral singing as well as differences between choral and solo
singing. The researcher noted a "remarkable agreement” among the professionals
regarding their responses to the topics (Cook-Koenig, 1995). Rodney Eichenberger
was quoted by Cook-Koenig as saying, " if one is going to sing with an orchestra, one
must find singer's formant’*(p.l45). Eichenberger also stated that it was still possible
21
and necessary to sing as an ensemble. He suggested that "perhaps we sometimes
mistake the singer's formant for ego, and the inability to give in to a better cause’ (p.
146). Hugh Thomas also endorsed a resonant voice and suggested that it was up to the
conductor to mold them into a choral instrument (p. 146). Rhonda Flemming stated
that resonance in the voice, more specifically vowel resonance, unifies the sound of
the choir (p. 147).
In a 1991 descriptive study by Slusher, voice teachers, choral directors, voice
teacher/choral directors, and voice students were surveyed regarding their experiences
and opinions about conflicts between vocal technique required in the private voice
studio and the techniques required by choral directors. Specific techniques addressed
included straight tone singing, tone placement and focus, dynamics, choral singing,
and confounding technical requests. Nine out o f 27 questions on the survey produced
significant differences. The significant differences were all in areas o f vocal
technique. The subjects reported conflicts in expectations from the voice studio to the
choral rehearsal. There was also a significant difference of opinion regarding the
focus o f tone and dynamic levels between solo and choral singing. The subjects felt
that the amount of focus required in the tone was less in the choral ensemble than in
the voice lesson. Also, the subjects felt that the mezzo forte and forte dynamic levels
were louder levels in studio singing than in choral singing (Slusher. 1991).
Vocal Pedagogue’s Preference for Resonance in Solo and Choral Tone
Texts That Do Not Address Choral Tone Specifically
Most vocal pedagogy texts contain descriptions o f their author’s ideal vocal tone
quality as well as methods used to obtain that ideal sound. Many o f these texts also
22
cover the topic o f vocal resonance and some even contribute information specifically
on desirable choral tone quality. The authors who do not directly address choral tone
quality will be mentioned in brief in order to more quickly move to the directly related
material.
Monahan analyzed the writings on the teaching o f singing that occurred
between the years o f 1777 and 1927 in his book The Art o f Singing (Monahan. 1978).
In regard to resonance there were only a few references before Helmholtz’s work in
1863. Following that date the topics that appeared included nasal resonance which
received the most discussion. He cited eighteen statements supporting conscious use
o f nasal resonators and eight statements discouraging it. The topic o f placement o f the
voice or focus also drew a large amount of comments. Twenty-one statements were
made in support o f focusing the tone consciously and ten statements were made to the
contrary. Humming was determined a useful device to develop resonance by evidence
of thirteen statements in support compared to four statements in opposition. Finally,
statements concerning resonance in the mouth and throat cavities demonstrated the
least amount o f comment in Monahan's work (Monahan. 1978, pp. 102-127). This
area has seen an increase in attention over the last several decades as evidenced by the
eight statements Monahan noted compared to the 45 statements Burgin noted in his
similar study ending in the year 1973.
Fillebrown's 1911 book Resonance in Singing and Speaking demonstrated the
status o f research on vocal resonance at the time. In it he stated "the basic importance
o f resonance in the use o f the voice is still too little recognized, though obvious
enough in the construction o f musical instruments'’ (Fillebrown. 1911).
Witherspoon commented on the confusion that this new topic was causing in
1925 when he stated “probably not even the question o f breath has caused more dire
confusion and uncertainty, not to speak ot faulty emission o f voice, than this
comparatively new bugaboo, RESONANCE!” He went on to cover the topic of
resonance and applied the concept to the singing voice ultimately stating that “perhaps
it will now be seen that we do not really ‘place' the voice ‘forwards’ or ‘back’ or ‘up’
or ‘down’ or any-*where.’ We sing every-'where’ according to the kind o f tone we
want to make, the kind o f sentiment or emotion we wish to express” (Witherspoon,
1925, pp. 21-24).
Stanley identified the pharyngeal cavities as the main resonators involved in
producing vowel sounds. The function o f the oral cavities in the production o f vowels
was discounted and even discouraged. His discussions o f vocal resonance were
presented from a physiological standpoint (Stanley, 1932. pp. 28, 271). In 1941,
Vocal Resonance: Its source and command by Barbereux-Parry was published
promoting her method of teaching singing. She recommended that with the “addition
of overtones alone do we depend for depth and beauty o f quality” (Barbereux-Parry,
1941, p.l 17).
Lawson contributed The Human Voice: A concise manual on training the
speaking and singing voice in 1944. In this work he suggested that all voices of
beauty possessed an element o f the hum. He felt that this nasal resonance was vital to
a healthy voice whether in singing or in speaking (p. 18). He also felt that the words
should be formed as far forward in the mouth as possible (p. 44) and he included
exercises designed to develop his ideal resonance. As for high resonance, he stated
24
that the resonant, “ringing timbre should be employed in singing softly as in singing
full voice” (Lawson, 1944, pp. 18, 44, 46).
In 1947, Fields contributed Training the Singing Voice, to the literature o f the
study o f voice. In the book he reviewed research that had been completed up to that
point. He organized his description o f resonance into the following categories: (a)
description, (b) acoustical factors including vocal quality or timbre, and pedagogical
aspects, (c) physiological factors including head resonance, function o f sinuses, nasal
resonance, mouth and throat cavities, chest cavity, and entire body as resonator.
Further, under the heading “methods o f controlling vocal resonance.” he divided the
discussion into psychological approaches, including (a) expressional intent controls
resonance, and (b) is direct control o f resonance possible, and technical approaches
including (a) quality as a guide, (b) acquiring a vocal focus, and (c) the value of
humming. In regard to resonance, he found that head resonance was valued by some
authorities, not valued by other authorities, and claimed to not even exist by still other
authorities. One o f his strongest points is in noting that in evidence o f considerable
discussion on topics associated with resonance there should be much more research
being undertaken in the area (Fields, 1947).
In Foundations o f the Singer s Art. Fields stated that “the chief determinants o f
quality or timbre, then, are those factors that add overtones to the issuing sound wave.
These factors include the size, shape, composition, and condition o f the air
passageways, muscles, bones, and resonators that comprise the entire vocai tract,
including the larynx and the glottis itself’ (Fields, 1977. p.145).
25
Burgin continued Fields’ work up to 1973 with his book Teaching Singing. In
reference to head resonance, he reported that now there was scientific evidence that
the sinuses and the nasal cavities do not act as resonators and he cites Vennard in
stating that the chest is not a resonator. Burgin observed that the value o f humming is
still great for developing resonance in the voice. He also observed the following from
his research:
In order to achieve the greatest amount o f resonance, as well as ease of
production, the generator and resonator should be in tune with each
other. Vocally, this can be accomplished largely through mental
concept and control. The exact pitch as well as the vowel and the tonal
timbre, or color, should be mentally conceived before producing a tone.
In so doing, the mind has an opportunity to present the proper
psychological impulse for the best physical condition and response.
This is called by some writers ‘natural production' (Burgin, 1973).
Christy stated that “whether or not the head and chest are actual resonators
doesn’t appear particularly important to the artistic act o f singing. The value o f
feeling of head resonance and forward hum in the nasal area on the inception o f attack,
and to provide vital tone in balanced resonation, is questioned, however, by few
singers and teachers o f repute” (Christy, 1961).
In The Singer and the Voice, Rose presented his discussion o f resonance in an
acoustical context instead of a pedagogical context. He discussed forced resonance,
untunable resonance systems (larynx), tunable resonance systems (throat and mouth
cavities), and high partial resonance (Rose. 1971. pp.58-59, 168-173). Fuchs spoke o f
26
head resonance, nasal, palatal, and chest resonance. He also discussed the mixing of
the different resonances (Fuchs, 1964, pp. 59-62,72-75).
In his book Principles o f Singing, Milier stated that the singer should “ feel
resonance in your (a) chest as it is held high, (b) throat as it is in an open position, (c)
relaxed pharynx (to give mellowness to your voice), (d) mouth, and (e) sinuses.” He
continued by listing the effect the tongue, palates, jaw, lips, pharynx, chest, nose, and
the sinuses each have in producing resonance (Miller, 1983, p.34-35). Harpster
discussed resonance in a more physiological context in his 1984 book Technique in
Singing. He described the proper positioning o f the resonanting cavities and suggested
some exercises designed to develop a resonant voice (Harpster, 1984).
Resonance in the voice was covered extensively by Appelman in his book The
Science o f Vocal Pedagogy. He used a voice science approach in his discussion
covering topics o f resonance, physiology, and acoustics. X-ray photographs and
spectrograms added to his physiological and acoustical discussions (Appelman. 1986.
pp. 117-140). In Coffin's Sounds o f Singing, the author discussed resonance in depth
in regard to the solo voice. He used a chromatic vowel chart to suggest studies and
exercises for singers to improve vowel resonance (Coffin, 1987).
The Structure o f Singing by Miller contains another extensive treatment of
resonance in the singing voice. His chapter on the resonant voice contains a thorough
discussion on vowel formants, the singer’s formant, timbre, and vocal placement.
Even more so than the Appelman text, the Miller text contains a wealth o f drawings
representing the physiology o f the vocal tract (Miller, 1986). Also, in 1993, Miller
also authored a text directed exclusively at the training o f the tenor voice. This text
27
amplifies the acoustical aspect o f the voice from the coverage that he gave in his
earlier work (Miller, 1993). Both works contain helpful exercises designed to develop
resonance in the voice.
In her book The New Voice Pedagogy, David described an emerging voice
pedagogy that owes as much to voice science and voice therapy as it does the
techniques o f the traditional vocal pedagogy. The author made the following point
about the current (1995) status o f teaching placement or focus for resonance:
Tone placement or focus is an issue on which singers and voice
teachers are sharply divided, not into two or three groups but into
many. There are those who teach placement, forward or high in the
head almost to the exclusion o f other factors. There are those who
teach it in combination with other factors, again forward, up in the head
or on the chords themselves. And there are those who ignore the whole
idea and use other means to achieve whatever sense o f placement the
student acquires. For each o f these attitudes there are at least as many
variations in how they go about it and what they hope to achieve
(David, 1995, p.70).
The author continues with a description o f various placements and techniques
used to obtain the desired placement. She also gives a helpful list o f the measurement
instruments used to measure various aspects o f vocal production. The instruments
listed to measure resonance are the Manometers. Nasometer. pneumotachometer,
pressure transducers, spectrograph, and tonar II (David. 1995. p. 128).
28
Texts That Address Choral Tone Specifically
O f the textbooks on vocal pedagogy, several mention either contemporary
practice in choral tone or the author's preference in choral tone quality. Klein wrote a
book entitled Singing Technique, in which he not only discussed his ideas on the
function o f the voice but also his ideas on choral tone quality. He approached both
subjects from a physiological standpoint. He identified the pharynx, the nasal cavities,
and the mouth as the resonators for the human voice. In his discussion of choral
music. Klein began with his recommendations for the first rehearsals and the breathing
training that he felt should take place there. He also included a statement from the
American Academy o f Teachers of Singing entitled "Choral Singing and the
Responsibility of the Choral Director." This statement emphasized the belief that all
choral directors must have at least a basic knowledge of the human voice. He
followed this with his own observations o f two conductors whom he admired. The
conductors were Robert Shaw and Roger Wagner. Klein devoted a section in his
choral chapter to training topics for each o f the four voice categories. Regarding
overall choral tone, Klein suggested that singers must sing with resonance in the voice.
He stated that "the singer who tries to sing without proper resonance adjustment
immediately starts a chain o f bad reactions on the whole singing track. He is usually
forcing the larynx to make more sound when, perhaps, it is already overloaded. When
this occurs, hoarseness follows, and proper resonance is almost impossible" (Klein.
1967. p.l 14-128).
Vennard conducted a significant amount o f research in the fields o f vocal
pedagogy and voice science in general. He identified the resonance that produces the
29
“ring” in the voice as coming from the larynx, and referred to this resonance or “ring”
as 2800 because it was located near 2800 Hz. He stated “ ...it appears that what is
commonly called "getting resonance in the voice,' is really getting "2800,' and this is
fully as much a matter of proper vibration as it is proper resonance” (Vennard. 1967,
p.90). This 2800 would later be named the singer's formant. Vennard specifically
stated his preference for choral tone quality in a discussion on vibrato in ensembles.
He stated “To me, "straight' tone can only be acquired at the expense o f quality, and I
like ringing voices. When I hear the concerts o f choirs whose conductors have worked
to eliminate all solo quality, I miss this vibrancy” (Vennard, 1967, p.205). While this
discussion was not about resonance, he referred to the voice as ringing. This was a
term he used often in discussing a resonant voice.
Sunderman cautioned the choir director to make sure that the singers not use
more breath than is needed in order to develop a resonant sound. He also
recommended developing the resonant voice by using vocalizations on an [u] vowel
and maintaining brightness. He also added that the singer must maintain the physical
energy in the high range or the resonance could be lost (Sunderman, 1970, p.58-61).
In the Complete Handbook o f Voice Training, Alderson devoted considerable
attention to resonance in the singing voice. He discussed the material using both the
language of imagery familiar to most vocal pedagogues and more concise aural,
physiological and scientific terms. He also discussed current thoughts on the
operation of the vocal instrument in context with beliefs o f professionals and
researchers from the past. His book contains a chapter on "Strategies and Techniques
for Developing a Rich Choral Sound.” and a chapter on “Effective Procedures for the
30
Choral Rehearsals.” In these chapters he described his preference for a choral tone that
is based on a hum which develops nasal resonance, and a tone that is focused above
the hard palate. Earlier in the book he admitted that tone could not actually be placed
anywhere. He did continue saying that the analogy o f placement was a valuable
pedagogical tool in that it gave the students something to concentrate on. This point
o f concentration, in the author’s opinion, is the sympathetic vibrations that the student
would feel. Alderson felt that this focus above the hard palate produced a 'Tree, rich,
ringing tone which the student may feel diffused within the head. He also continued
in a discussion entitled "dynamics come from resonance,” that “ ...soft singing should
be resonant and free” (Alderson, 1979, p. 198-199).
In the chapter “The Singing Voice Specialist” in SatalofFs Professional Voice,
Emerich, Baroody, Carroll, and Sataloff discuss the roll o f the singing voice teacher.
They discuss the general topics concerning the use o f the voice, the qualifications and
responsibilities o f the singing voice teacher, the evaluation procedure for new
students, and general vocal pedagogical topics including resonance and singer's
formant in the singing voice. The section also includes information on training the
injured voice (Emerich, 1997). Finally, in a 1976 dissertation, Decker reported that
thirty-four vocal pedagogues described forward resonance and most o f them
advocated humming to develop it (Decker, 1976).
To this point, the tonal concepts o f choral conductors and voice teachers have
been considered. We have seen a wide variety o f ideas concerning resonance in vocal
and choral tone quality including an almost equally wide variety o f methods to achieve
that concept o f resonance. The following section will investigate the concept o f vocal
31
resonance and more specifically, singer’s formant resonance from the standpoint o f
the scientific researcher whether that researcher is in the field o f voice science, speech
pathology or therapy, music education, or musical acoustics. The presentation order
o f the following material will consist o f voice science texts, blend and balance studies,
vibrato studies, intonation studies, and resonance studies.
Voice Science Contribution to the Study o f Resonance in Vocal Tone
Voice Science Texts
The beginning o f the era o f voice science is generally attributed to the
pioneering work o f Hermann L. F. Helmholtz. There were at least two scientists who
investigated the human voice earlier than Helmholtz. Willis, as cited in Helmholtz,
devised experiments which would prove a vowel theory based on the length o f reed
pipes in 1830. and Wheatstone (also cited in Helmholtz) repeated Willis' experiments
and developed and published the vowel (formant) theory in 1837 (Helmholtz, 1954,
pp. 117-118, 575). However, Helmholtz’s work is regarded as so significant and
influential that it is still often quoted 125 years after the first publication o f his work
On the Sensations o f Tone.
Helmholtz identified what would later come to be known as the singer’s
formant. He identified the frequency range as between 2640 to 3168 vibrations per
second (Hz). By experimenting with his own ear, he discovered that the human ear is
tuned to a frequency in this range. He did this by placing a small tube to his ear while
the pitch was being sounded. This weakened the sound because the tube was in effect
lengthening the ear canal. He described this element o f the human voice by stating the
following:
32
In powerful male voices singing forte, these partial tones sound like a
clear tinkling o f little bells, accompanying the voice, and are most
audible in choruses, when the singers shout a little. Every individual
male voice at such pitches produces dissonant upper partials...If many
voices are sounding together, producing these upper partials with small
differences o f pitch, the result is a very peculiar kind o f tinkling, which
is readily recognized a second time when attention has been once
drawn to it. I have not noticed any difference o f effect for different
vowels in this case, but the tinkling ceases as soon as the voices are
taken piano; although the tone produced by a chorus will o f course still
have considerable power. This kind o f tinkling is peculiar to human
voices; orchestral instruments do not produce it in the same way either
so sensibly or so powerfully. I have never heard it from any other
musical instrument so clearly as from human voices (Helmholtz. 1954.
p. 116).
The field of musical acoustics has contributed literature that contains material
related to the human voice and, more specifically, the acoustical aspects o f the voice.
Benade wrote a chapter in the Fundamentals o f Musical Acoustics on the voice as a
musical instrument. This section includes information on vocal formants and the
singer's formant in the solo human voice. In The Physics o f Sound by Berg and Stork,
the human vocal tract, vocal formants, and the singer’s formant are briefly discussed.
An equally brief section follows on the analysis o f vocal sounds. This text was meant
to be an introductory text in the area o f musical acoustics (Berg, 1995).
33
The text Measured Tones: The Interplay o f Physics and Music by Johnston is a
book by a physicist who likes music. His approach was intentionally different from
other texts on the same subjects in that he attempted to develop the physical concepts
and the musical applications together. Johnston simplified the scientific portion o f the
material by avoiding algebraic mathematical equations in favor o f verbal descriptions.
He emphasized where the physics was important in a musical context, organized the
material historically, and sequenced the physical ideas. The author included a short
section on the human voice and the singer’s formant (Johnston, 1989).
In M oravcsik's Musical Sound: An introduction to the physics o f music the
author presented the material in a manner in which the reader with no background in
science can comprehend. It requires only an elementary knowledge o f mathematics
and the mathematical functions that were used were covered in an appendix. In the
section on the human voice, the author never referred to the singer’s formant
specifically, but the concept o f the singer’s formant included in the discussion
(Moravcsik, 1987).
Only a brief section on the human voice including spectrographic
representations is included in White and White’s Physics and Music: The science o f
musical sound (White, 1980). However, the subjects o f the human voice, vocal
formants and the singer's formant in the human voice was treated in more detail in
Campbell's The M usicians' Guide to Acoustics. Campbell's text was, like others,
written for the musician with little scientific background (Campbell. 1988).
There are two texts with the title o f The Science o f Sound. The first that we
will consider is by Pierce. It is a musical acoustics text that includes information on
34
resonance and a section on the human voice. The singer’s formant was discussed in
relation to the solo voice (Pierce, 1992). The second book with the title The Science o f
Sound is by Rossing. The Rossing text was written for the non-scientist and contains
only ninth-grade level algebra. It covers, among others, the topics o f the physiology
o f the vocal tract, resonance, singing, vocal formants, registers, and the singer’s
formant. The text was written by a researcher who has performed studies in the area
o f the singing voice and the choral voice. Individual studies by this author will be
discussed later in this document.
Tonmeister Technology: Recording Environments, Sound Sources and
Microphone Techniques is a text with a different purpose than those discussed above.
It is a text that is meant for a professional sound engineer. It does, however, include a
brief but informative section on the human voice including the aspect o f the singer’s
formant (Dickreiter, 1989).
There are reference sources in the field o f acoustics that also contain
information on singer’s formant resonance in the human voice. Crocker’s
Encyclopedia o f Acoustics contains a section on the human voice that is written by
Johan Sundberg. This section contains information on the vocal tract physiology,
resonance, vowel formants, and the singer's formant among others. It is a clear
concise description of the processes o f the human singing voice (Crocker, 1997).
Another reference source edited by Crocker is the Handbook o f Acoustics. This text
was intended to act as a one-source reference for the professional in the field o f
acoustics. The material is presented in the various categories o f acoustics and, while it
does not include information on the human singing voice, it does contain information
35
on measurement tools (Crocker, 1998). Parker contributed the Acoustics Source Book
in 1987. The reference text contains information on the measurement of sound
including acoustic signal processing, and human sound production (Parker, 1987).
Many texts have been written in the area o f speech science. Several o f those
texts relate information about the human voice and more specifically, spectral
components o f the human voice. The Speech Chain by Denes is an example o f a
speech text that contains basic information on vocal formants and the sound
spectrograph (Denes. 1973). Acoustic Phonetics: A Course o f Basic Reading is a text
edited by Fry that contains articles from 1970 and earlier that were influential in the
developing fields o f speech science, phonetics, and voice science (Fry, 1976). Fry was
also the author o f The Physics o f Speech which contains information on resonance, the
function of the vocal tract, and the sound spectrograph. While the information is
primarily concerned with the speaker much o f it is also applicable to the singer (Fry,
1979).
Another text that represents older important research in the area of speech
science and acoustics is the Acoustic Theory o f Speech Production by Fant. The
author includes information on the resonators in the vocal tract through use o f X-ray
studies (Fant, 1970). In 1967. Lehiste edited a collection o f articles that proved to be
influential in the speech science, and voice science fields. This text was Readings in
Acoustic Phonetics and it included information on vocal and vowel formants,
resonance data, and spectrum envelopes derived from formant frequencies (Lehiste,
1967). In Music Speech Audio by Strong, the human voice is one o f the main subjects.
36
The vocal tract and vocal folds were covered in a basic physiological approach. The
text also included a chapter on the singing voice (Strong, 1992).
The field o f vocal therapy has contributed a great deal o f information to the
subject o f the human voice. Most o f the texts in this field give a basic physiological
description of the human vocal tract. The Human Vocal Traci: Anatomy. Function.
Development, and Evolution by Crelin relates the subject in a great detail (Crelin,
1987). Still other texts in this field deal more directly with the human singing voice.
Is Your Voice Telling on You? was written by a speech pathologist for people with
“poor or ineffective voices” as a means to improve their speaking voices. Boone, the
author, directs all o f the information toward the reader as speaker instead o f singer.
However, he does include information on resonance in the voice and he even borrows
imagery from the vocal pedagogue in his discussion on focusing the voice (Boone,
1991). Boone with McFarlane co-authored The Voice and Voice Therapy. This text is
written for the voice therapy professional and contains physiological as well as
therapeutic information. Resonance in the voice is discussed in detail although the
specific topics o f vocal formants and the singer's formant resonance are not covered
(Boone, 1994).
Sataloff contributed a large collection o f essays on various topics related to
voice science in his second edition of Professional Voice: The Science and Art o f
Clinical Care. The work is divided into eight parts each with a collection o f essays.
The parts include the introduction, basic science, clinical assessment, conditions
commonly managed without voice surgery, neurologic disorders affecting the voice,
structural disorders and surgery, voice therapy and treatment, and special
37
considerations. Topics of specific interest to this study include choral pedagogy, the
singing teacher, and vocal tract resonance. These essays will be referenced later in
this chapter (Sataloff. 1997).
There are several texts that were written by authors with expertise in
both voice science and vocal pedagogy. The authors o f these texts wrote them
in an effort to provide each profession with a common text that would provide
insight into research and tenants from the other profession. One such work is
the Dynamics o f the Singing Voice, by Bunch. In addition to the standard
topics one would find in a vocal pedagogy text, the text contains chapters on
vocal problems, vocal quality, and resonation (Bunch, 1982).
The Principles o f Voice Production by Titze is another text that is
meant to cover a course in voice science, speech pathology, language
pathology, vocal pedagogy, or theater speech. The text covers the physiology
of the vocal tract, basics o f vocal acoustics, normal and abnormal vocal
production. It also includes information on the singer’s formant in the human
voice.
One o f the most notable works concerning the science o f the vocal mechanism,
and more specifically, the singing voice is The Science o f the Singing Voice by
Sundberg (Sundberg. 1987). The author has devoted an enormous amount o f effort
and time to the study o f the singing voice and has become one o f the most substantial
contributors to the profession in this area. Basic physiological and acoustical aspects
of the voice are conveyed to the reader in easily understood terms. Sundberg not only
includes information on singer’s formant resonance in the solo voice, but he also
38
includes a chapter on the choral voice. His initial statement in this chapter is one that
acknowledges the popularity o f choral singing but also laments the rarity o f research
that has been completed on the choral voice. The author presented information on
how well choral singers sing in tune and followed that with research on the effect of
hearing other singers singing in consort, at various intensity levels. Following the
reporting o f research on the singer's preference for room acoustics and reverberation.
Sundberg reported information on the difference between solo and choral singing. In
his discussion, he cited both the Goodwin and the Rossing studies that will be
discussed at length later in this chapter. He noted that in the case o f the solo singers,
they had a stronger singer's formant and weaker overtones below roughly 500Hz than
did the choral singers. Sundberg concluded that the use o f the voice in the choral
setting is different in certain aspects from the use o f the voice in a solo setting. There
are, however, many questions about the differences between solo and choral singing
that have not been researched. He felt that "it would be advantageous to know that the
same type of voice timbre is not sought in choral and in solo singing" (Sundberg.
1987. pp. 134-143).
Voice Science Studies Related To Resonance In Vocal Tone
Some o f the articles are general overviews o f the subject. One example is
"The Implications o f Voice Science for Voice Pedagogy: The Singer's Formant" by
Callaghan. This article gives a brief summary o f research on the singer's formant
(Callaghan. 1994). In the Sundberg article "Music Acoustics on the Threshold o f the
2T ‘ Century." the author summarized the developments in musical acoustics over the
39
last several decades and placed them in an historical perspective. The paper includes
specific information on the human voice and the singer's formant (Sundberg, 1997b).
Sundberg has also written several articles for edited books that cover
specifically the human singing voice. One article is the “Human Singing Voice” in
Crocker's “Encyclopedia of Acoustics.” In this article. Sundberg covers respiration,
the voice source, types o f phonation, articulation and formant frequencies including
the singer’s formant. Sundberg also included a paragraph summarizing the following
dissertation findings from Temstrom:
Choir singers exhibit less singer’s formant/ high-frequency components
than operatic singers. Probably this promotes the choral blending o f
voices. In this respect, then, choral singing is closer to speech mode
than operatic singing (Sundberg, 1997a, p. 1694).
The Temstom study will be discussed later in this chapter. Sundberg
continued stating that there was less scatter in the vowel formant area in choral
singing mode than in speech mode and high fundamental frequency agreement.
He also reported that room acoustics seemed to affect the singers (Sundberg,
1997a).
Sundberg also authored an essay entitled “Vocal Tract Resonance” in
Robert Sataloff s "Professional Voice: The Science and Art o f Clinical Care.”
This article covered the same material as the previous one but stressed less o f
the acoustical elements since it was meant for voice professional readers
instead o f acousticians (Sundberg, 1997c). Sundberg presented a paper at the
July 1987 International Congress o f Voice Teachers in Strasbourg. France that
40
was reprinted as "Vocal Tract Resonance in Singing” in the National
Association o f Teachers o f Singing Journal. This article was essentially the
same as the articles in the Crocker and the Sataloff books (Sundberg, 1988b).
Sundberg’s 1977 article for Scientific American was also an overview entitled
"The Acoustics o f the Singing Voice.” However, it was written for the non
professional and it contains more basic physiological and acoustical
information than the articles intended for a more expert readership.
Information included in the article centers on the singing mechanism, and
acoustics from the physiological standpoint o f the vocal tract and the physical
standpoint o f vocal formants, harmonics, and the singer's formant (Sundberg,
1977).
There have been many studies published about all of the vocal formants and
specifically, the singer's formant. Some o f these articles represent significant early
research into what would later be known as singer’s formant. In 1922, Paget wrote an
article reporting his research into the different resonating cavities in the vocal tract. In
his report he referred to vocal formants, or more specifically, the vowel formants as
“resonance notes’ (Paget, 1922).
Bartholomew wrote an influential article entitled "A physical definition o f
■good voice quality’ in the male voice” in 1934. This article reported research
involving 46 waveforms of male voices. The author found four characteristic
attributes o f "good voice quality.” These were (1) a smooth vibrato o f about 6 or 7
Hz. (2) a high vocal intensity, (3) an extra low formant in the vicinity o f 500 Hz. and
(4) a large concentration o f energy in the frequency region between 2400 and 3200
41
Hz. This large concentration o f energy in the 2400 to 3200 Hz range would later be
called the singer’s formant.
In his study, “Theoretical and experimental analysis o f networks o f resonators
and their application to the production o f sound by the vocal tract,” Albert made the
following conclusions: (a) an increase in the diameter o f any constriction in the vocal
tract increases the frequencies o f the formants, (b) An increase in the length of any
constriction in the system decreases the formant frequencies, (c) An increase in the
volume o f any cavity in the system decreases the formant frequencies.” He also
reported that according to his calculations the relative dimensions instead o f the
absolute dimensions o f the vocal tract determine the formant frequencies (Albert,
1951).
Arment conducted a spectrographic study o f bright and dark vowels and found
that the perceived brightness o f a vowel depends on the strength o f the high partials
and narrow formant bands. Conversely, the perception o f darkness depended on a lack
of high partials and broad formant bands (Arment, 1960). In the same year. Gunn
found that brightness and darkness were directly impacted by the frequency o f the first
two formants, the intensity of the second and third formats, and the intensity o f the
harmonics in the range o f 2800 cps (Hz) (Gunn. 1960).
In 1956 the Russian scientist Rzhevkin, in the journal “Soviet Physics-
Acoustics,” reported detecting singer’s formants in the regions from 500 to 2500 cps
(Hz). He reported finding two formants that were identical for all o f the vowel
sounds. When comparing the voice o f a trained singer and an untrained singer, he
noted that the untrained singer's upper formants were not as clearly defined. Further,
42
in the case o f the highest formant, the untrained singer’s formant was missing. This
was the formant Rzhevkin reported as making the voice sound metallic (Rzhevkin,
1956).
Wolf, Stanley, and Sette, published “Quantitative studies on the singing voice”
in 1935. This is an early article listing research on the singing voice. Topics covered
include intensity as a function o f time and pitch, vibrato, vibrato-tremolo and tremolo
and quality including information on formant frequencies. The purpose o f the study
was to "evaluate the caliber o f a voice as completely as possible insofar as its external
physical manifestations are concerned" (Wolf, 1935).
In 1952, Delattre, Liberman, Cooper, and Gerstman published an article
entitled “An experimental study o f the acoustic determinants o f vowel color;
observations on one- and two-formant vowels synthesized from spectrographic
patterns.” The researchers used a pattern playback machine to play the results of
hand-painted spectrographic patterns in an attempt to determine the effect of various
acoustical features on the vowel sound produced. The researchers then modified
various formants and reported the resulting changes in the subjects perception o f the
vowel and vowel color. Delattre also published an article in 1958 dealing with vowel
color and voice quality. In this experiment, he examined the vocal tract in an attempt
to determine its effect on vowel color and voice quality (Delattre, 1958).
Vennard and Irwin reported on the acoustical aspects o f singing compared to
speech in their 1966 article. The authors compared a spoken and sung version o f a
secco recitative by examining sonagrams o f the performances. Among other
differences, the authors noted a difference in the formant in the vicinity o f 3000 Hz.
43
Vennard referred to this formant as the 2800 due to the fact that 2800 Hz seemed to be
an average location of the formant. The authors stated that this formant produced the
“ring” in the singing voice (Vennard, 1966).
In "A comparison of the singing formant in the voices o f professional and
student singers,” Magill and Jacobson examined all voice categories for the presence
o f a singer’s formant. They were also looking for a difference between college level
voices and professional voices. Out o f the twenty-two singers used as subjects (four
basses, four baritones, four tenors, five mezzo-sopranos, and five sopranos), nine were
college level and thirteen were professional level. Following procedures designed to
examine various vowels at different pitch levels, the researchers concluded that the
singer’s formant may be present in all voice types, and the intensity o f the singer’s
formant is subject to training (Magill, 1978). J. C. Shanks suggested that changes in
resonance are due to “(a) changes in the wall separating two cavities; (b) a direct
opening connecting two cavities; or (c) the opening between the cavity and the
atmosphere outside he body” (Shanks, 1983, p.40).
There are many articles that report investigations into the singer’s
formant in the solo voice. Ekholm, Papagiannis, and Chagnon presented a
paper at the 25th Annual Symposium on the Care o f the Professional Voice and
the International Association o f Phonosurgeons’ 4th International Symposium
on Phonosurgery in Philadelphia. Their paper reported the investigation o f the
evaluation o f four elements o f vocal tone quality: (a) vibrato, (b) color/warmth,
(c) resonance/ring or singer’s formant, and (d) clarity/focus (intensity). This
investigation drew correlations between acoustical features o f the voice and
44
perceptual descriptions of voice quality. A strong correlation was noted
between a strong singer’s formant and the perceptual quality o f “ring” in the
voice. Results also demonstrated that the center frequency of the singer’s
formant was lower for baritones than tenors and voice quality was perceived as
better in relation to “ring” or resonance when the singer’s formant frequency
was appropriate for the voice category o f the singer (Ekholm, 1996, June).
Bloothooft and Plomp conducted a study in 1986 that sought to
measure the sound level of the singer’s formant in professional singers. They
found almost no difference in sound level between male singers (4 dB).
However, they did find a greater sound difference in female singers (24 dB)
(Bloothooft, 1986). In a later study, Bloothooft noted qualities that constitute a
voice perceived as being of good quality. In the section o f his article on
singer’s formant, he suggested that one must remember that singer’s formant is
not the sole determinant factor o f a good quality resonant voice. Further, in the
higher range o f the female voice, the singer’s formant is likely not even the
most important aspect that determines a resonant voice o f good quality
(Bloothooft, 1987).
Cleveland and Sundberg investigated three male voices o f different
voice quality in order to map voice source differences. The researchers also
noted the sound pressure level o f the singer’s formant during their trials. They
noted when pitch and/or vocal effort increased, the level o f the singer's
formant also increased. They also noted that the amplitude of the singer’s
45
formant increased at a greater level that that o f the lower formants (Cleveland,
1983).
Nawka, Anders, Cebulla, and Zurakowski observed a peak in the spectrum in
a male speakers voice near the level associated with the singer's formant. They report
that this "speaker’s formant” is associated with a voice o f sonorous quality (Nawka,
1997). In a two-part article published in 1979, Schultz-Coulon, Battmer, and Riechers
related their investigation o f the singer’s formant. In the first investigation, 24 trained
singers, 13 o f which were male and 11 o f which were female, were examined. In the
second investigation, 41 untrained singers, 19 o f which were male and 22 o f which
were female, were examined. The researchers were looking for dependency o f the
relative amplitude of he singer’s formant on pitch and intensity. The data in both
studies were combined to provide for the factor o f training. Results o f the untrained
group seemed to indicate that the relative amplitude o f the singer’s formant grew as
vocal intensity increased or diminished as the pitch rose. They also found that it was
more pronounced with the male voices that the female voices. Following the study o f
the trained voices the results were combined to show that the trained voices had more
energy in the singer’s formant range although not for all pitches. The combined
results also reflected the difference between the singer’s formant intensity from male
voices, which were stronger, to female voices, which had relatively weaker energy in
the singer’s formant range (Schultz-Coulon, 1979a; Schultz-Coulon, 1979b).
Schutte and Miller reported the results o f their study o f the singer’s formant in
a single voice in the article 'intraindividual Parameters o f the Singer’s Formant.” A
single tenor voice was measured while singing chromatically from C (65.5 Hz) up to
46
F#5 (698 Hz). The researchers found that the frequency o f the singer’s formant
increased roughly 2800 to 2900 Hz up to 3 100Hz on the higher pitches. However,
throughout the normal performance range o f the tenor the spectral components
remained constant and the timbre perceived by a listener also remained constant
(Schutte, 1985).
Seidner, Schutte, Wendler, and Rauhut conducted a study o f five professional
singers in which they found that the singer’s formant was located at a higher
frequency in higher voice categories. They found no relation between the main
singer’s formant frequencies. The differences between male and female singers that
they found were that the female singers generally had two peaks in the spectrum in the
singer’s formant range. One occurred between 2500 and 3000 Hz and the other
occurred between 3000 and 4000 Hz. They also found that the male singers had a
higher relative intensity and narrower bandwidth o f the singer’s formant (Seidner,
1985).
In his study “A comparative study o f the development o f the third formant in
trained and untrained voices,’’ Teie studied the voices o f ten undergraduate freshman
voice students, ten undergraduate senior voice students, six untrained singers, and four
voice faculty members. All four traditional voice categories were represented. The
researcher concluded that the development o f the singer’s formant is related to the
amount o f vocal training. He also noted that even the untrained voices possessed
resonance in the singer's formant range in an [i] vowel. This seemed to suggest to the
researcher that all vowels should be colored with the [i] vowel for resonance
development (Teie, 1976).
47
Wang published a study in 1985, demonstrating that the singer’s format could
be produced in different manners. He studied singers who specialized in western
operatic singing, Chinese singing and western early music singing. The singers
demonstrated the spectrum peak in the range attributed to that o f the singer's formant
but did so with varying heights o f their larynx. He not only took measurements by
spectrographic means but also measured the height of the larynx. The author stated
that the low larynx was not the only method o f producing a bright timbre. He also
stated that there was "no reason to conclude that singing with a high larynx necessarily
produces a voice of poor quality (at least in respect to brightness) or poor vocal
health” (Wang. 1985). In the "Study on some aspects o f the ‘singer's formant' in
North Indian Classical Singing,” Sengupta found similar results to Wang. The center
frequency of the singer's formant and the resonance balance rose with the frequency
of the fundamental (Sengupta, 1990).
Yanagisawa. Estill, Kmucha, and Leder studied the relation o f aryepiglottic
constriction to the presence o f singer's formant in a voice speaking, singing in falsetto,
singing as if sobbing, singing with a "twangy.” country-western sound, singing with a
belting placement, and singing with operatic placement. The researchers observed the
following: "(a) a normal phonation o f speech or modal quality; (b) a open, more
exposed view of the folds, with little or no closure, as seen in falsetto and sob
qualities; and (c) a tight aryepiglottic constriction that accompanies the three loudest
qualities (twang, belting, and opera)." In relation to the singer's formant, the
researchers noted more energy "when the aryepiglottic sphincter was narrowed, and
less energy when the spincter was relaxed and open” (Yanagisawa, 1989).
48
An early research study by Sundberg was “Formant frequencies o f bass
singers.” It was published in 1968 and contains information on formant frequencies of
a bass singer including information on the singing formant and the author’s suspicion
that its source was in the larynx. This research was followed by two studies in 1970
and two studies in 1972 on formant structures and articulation o f spoken and sung
vowels. (Sundberg, 1970a; Sundberg, 1970b). He published “An Articulatory
Interpretation of the ‘Singing Formant” ’ in 1972. This study suggested that a lowered
larynx, as revealed by tomogram data, increased the laryngeal ventricle, the sinus
piriformes and the cross-sectional area which produced a resonating chamber that
would appear to be the source o f the singer’s formant. Sundberg also suggested that
the singer's formant was produced acoustically by a clustering o f the third, fourth, and
fifth formant frequencies (Sundberg, 1972a).
Also in 1972, Sundberg published “A Perceptual Function o f the ‘Singing
Formant’." This is an article that suggested that the purpose for the singing formant
was to project the voice over a loud orchestral accompaniment. An average spectrum
was taken o f an orchestra playing alone and an orchestra accompanying a singer. The
spectrum revealed a pronounced peak in the 2800 Hz range when the singer was
singing. Due to the fact that the frequency range o f the singer’s fundamental pitch
was produced at a similar level as the fundamental frequency range o f the orchestra, it
was concluded that there would be a masking effect for the fundamental. This singing
formant peak seemed to be the spectral component that caused the human voice to
project through the orchestral sound. Sundberg noted that the style o f singing
necessary for singing with a lute would not demand the singing formant to project
49
over its sound. He noted that “the style o f singing is in this case more speech-like."
He also noted that the style o f singing for popular music did not require a singing
formant due to the fact that the function o f the singing formant was replaced by
electronic amplification (Sundberg, 1972b).
Sundberg published the “ Perception o f Singing" in 1979. This article reported
a further investigation into the perceptual aspects o f the singing voice. It was noted
that the singer’s formant and pitch dependent formant frequencies were both
responsible for audibility o f the voice over loud orchestral sounds. He also stated that
“as resonatory phenomena occur independent o f vocal effort, a purpose in both these
cases is vocal economy" (Sundberg, 1979).
In 1994, Sundberg published another article regarding the perceptual aspects of
singing. He related two qualities o f the singing voice, one was vowel quality, which is
determined by the lower two formants. The other quality, vocal quality, is determined
by the higher frequency components, specifically the center frequency o f the singer's
formant. He stated that while singer’s format could be found in male voices and alto
voices, it appeared not to be present in the soprano voice. He did caution that the
studies had used measurement tools that had fixed and narrow band-pass filters and
that if the soprano singer’s formant was much higher or much broader in frequency it
might have gone undetected (Sundberg, 1994).
Sundberg wrote a lengthy article entitled “The Perception o f Singing" for
Deutsch’s The Psychology o f Music. Specifically, he presented further information on
when the soprano’s voice becomes masked by a loud orchestral sound. Unless the
pitch is high (above B4) the soprano only can be heard clearly on the vowels [a, a. ae].
50
Sopranos use a method o f formant tracking to boost the projecting power o f their
voices in absence o f a singer's formant. This occurs when the fundamental frequency
approaches and passes that o f the lowest formant frequency. The singer then adjusts
her mouth opening wider and raises the lowest formant, keeping it in close proximity
to the fundamental. In the section o f the article on singer's formant. Sundberg stated
that the lower voice categories o f alto, tenor, baritone, and bass do not need to use the
formant tracking procedure. This is due to the fact that they were able to cluster the
third, fourth, and fifth formants and produce the singer’s formant. This procedure of
clustering the formants does result in the modification o f the vowels but not in the
same manner as the formant tracking procedure (Sundberg, 1999).
Studies o f Choral Tone Quality
A number o f articles and dissertations have studied aspects o f choral tone
quality. Many o f them deal with multiple aspects o f choral tone quality while others
concentrate on a few specific aspects.
Blend And Balance Studies
Blend in choral tone is a major concern o f conductors. One o f the principal
concerns o f many choral conductors is training their choral singers to sing together as
an ensemble instead o f as a collection o f independent voices. This is no different from
the orchestral conductor who strives for a unified sound in his or her string section.
Throughout the history o f the American choral tradition there have been varied
approaches to the blending o f voices in a chorus.
In Morris' 1951 study a questionnaire was sent to 30 choral conductors that
listed nine factors impacting choral blend. The respondents were asked to rank order
51
the factors relative to their importance in the act o f blending a chorus. The author
drew the following conclusions from the responses: (a) blend is a complex issue, (b)
“ ...the primary basis for good or desirable choral tone lies in free, well supported
individual tone, which does not necessarily have to be o f solo calibre,” (c) the field o f
acoustics has provided potential areas o f benefit to the choral conductor, and (d) due to
the interdependence o f tone quality and vowel sound, work with vowels has even
more increased potential for benefiting choral conductors (Morris, 1951).
In 1966, Wyatt interviewed, through questionnaires, 58 choral directors in
churches, high schools, and colleges throughout America. He combined the results of
the questionnaires with a thorough literature review covering written statements by
choral musicians and scientists. Wyatt came to the conclusion that blend is an
important element o f choral sound. He found that the experts he interviewed and the
authors that he consulted had both distinct definitions o f blend and methods to obtain
blend in choral sound. Wyatt cited scientific studies that dealt with the acoustics of
blend. He recommended the following: (a) further study into the acoustical properties
o f choral tone, (b) further study into specific problems related to choral blend, and (c)
further study into specific problems related to choral sound in relation to musical style.
Further more, he recommended that teachers become more familiar with scientific
studies and incorporate that knowledge into their teaching. Wyatt also felt that
composers should incorporate this knowledge o f choral blend into their compositional
techniques (Wyatt. 1967).
In 1987. Knutson conducted a study on choral blend in which he presented the
ideas o f important American choral conductors from the past through an investigation
52
of their writings and o f writings and interviews with professionals who knew them.
The author reported their ideas on choral blend and placement o f voices. The
conductors researched included F. Melius Christiansen, John Finley Williamson, Fred
Waring, William J. Finn, O laf Christiansen. In addition, Knutson interviewed eight
important American conductors who were living at the time o f his study: Robert
Shaw, Kenneth Jennings, Weston Noble, Joseph Flummerfelt, Robert Scholz, Harold
Decker, Fiora Contino, and Dale Warland. He also reported their ideas on choral
blend and placement o f singers, and included information on their preferences
regarding choral tone quality. Knutson noted two trends in American choral singing.
The first revealed that a static tone quality that was the same for all music made it
difficult for the choir to perform literature from different time periods or styles. The
second trend the author noticed was that a more flexible ideal o f tone quality emerged
which allowed the chorus to perform a more diversified music (Knutson, 1987).
More recently. Moore conducted a study in 1995 on aspects o f choral ensemble
in which he conducted telephone interviews with 14 prominent American choral
directors in an attempt to identify the technical and expressive techniques that they
employed in their rehearsals. The conductors that Moore interviewed were Anton
Armstrong, Peter Bagley. Dennis Cox, Janet Galvan, John Haberlen, William D. Hall.
William Hatcher, Gregory Lyne, Fritz Mountford, Donald Neuen, Charles K. Smith.
Axel Theimer, Lynn Whitten, and Leonard VanCamp. The components o f sound that
he investigated included tempo, phrasing, enunciation, articulation, dynamics, blend,
balance, timbre, breathing, pitch, rhythm, text, harmony, and melody. The author
53
sought to more clearly define terms associated with the above elements as well as
techniques used to address each element (Moore. 1995).
Additional recent scientific studies have been undertaken in an attempt to
describe the vocal differences between singing in a blended choral mode and singing
in a solo mode. In 1977, Goodwin conducted an acoustical study o f individual
soprano voices in unison choral blend and in solo singing mode. The author examined
30 randomly chosen sopranos from the advanced choruses at North Texas State
University. A recording was made o f the entire group singing a sustained vowel while
blending their voices in a way that no one voice was distinguishable from the group
sound. The singers were instructed not to eliminate their vibrato or alter their dynamic
level. The individual voices then were recorded and measured by having the singer
blend with the recording o f the ensemble as played through headphones. In addition,
the sound o f the individual singer’s voice was played simultaneously with the
recording through the headphones. The singers were then recorded singing in a
"blended mode." Next, the singers were asked to sing the same vowel sounds in a
"solo mode" o f performance and a recording was made for analysis. Goodwin found
that in comparison to the tones sung in "solo mode,” the blended sounds tended to
have lower intensity levels, stronger fundamental frequencies, fewer and weaker upper
partials, stronger first formants, somewhat slower vibrato rates, less frequency
variation in vibrato, and more occurrences o f nonperiodic vibrato and vibrato-free tone
(Goodwin. 1977).
In a study on balance. Killian examined the operant preference for balance
between the voice parts o f a four-voice choral. In her study, subjects listened to a
54
recording and could control the intensity o f the four voice parts with four separate
intensity controls. The author found that subjects preferred a balance in which the
bass was significantly less intense than the other three parts. She also found that the
subjects could identify a single unbalanced voice but they would then balance that
voice significantly louder than the other voices. This unbalanced correction was
reported as representing an initial perception effect. In other words, when the subjects
were presented with an unbalanced example first, their preference was influenced
toward the unbalanced version. Killian also noted that there were no significant
preference differences between students and conductors. The only preference
difference for overall loudness was that men preferred significantly louder levels than
women did. Further, the voice part that the subject sang only appeared to influence
the high school basses who chose significantly more intense bass than did the
conductors -- who were basses (Killian. 1985).
Vibrato Studies
In Bartholomew's early study on the physical attributes o f a good solo voice
quality, he identified an even vibrato o f around 6 to 7 Hz as being a necessary
component (Bartholomew, 1934). In a later study, Bloothooft came to the same
conclusion as to the speed o f vibrato in a solo voice (Bloothooft. 1987). Large and
Iwata measured the amount of time that the German baritone Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau
sang with and without vibrato in his recording o f the Liederkreis. Op. 24 by Robert
Schumann. They found that he sang with vibrato 60% o f the time and without vibrato
40% averaged over the nine-song cycle (Large, 1971).
55
Many of the articles dealing with vibrato in choral tone have been directed
toward performance practice issues. As with choral tone quality in general, the ideals
involved with vibrato in regard to performance practice have undergone considerable
evolution in this century as well (Henahan, 1987; Neumann, 1987). During the first
part o f this century much o f the writings in America concerning vibrato in choral tone
centered around the “straight tone” (no vibrato) versus vibrato controversy, and was
made most apparent in the tonal ideals o f the St. Olaf Choir and the Westminster
Choir (Christiansen, 1932; Christiansen, 1965; Jones, 1948; Krone, 1945; Regier,
1962; Smallman, 1933; Wilcox, 1943).
F. Melius Christiansen wrote an article in 1932 that made the following
comment about vibrato in choral tone: “The vibrato voices are the greatest menace we
have to contend with in our choir work... we must have straight voices.” The author
discussed the importance o f intonation in ensemble blend and listed fourteen points on
which potential choir singers should be tested (Christiansen. 1932).
Beyond these studies, the majority o f authors felt that vibrato, as a naturally
occurring feature of the well-trained voice, should be present, in various extents, in
adult choral tone. Mayer wrote an article examining the importance o f intonation to
the concept o f blend in a chorus. Mayer states that “ ...blend in a section or the whole
choir is achieved through careful attention to three factors: timbre, dynamics and
pitch.... ‘off-colof sound and improper tone production are not compatible with good
blend” (Mayer. 1964).
In 1962, the conductors Regier, Opheim. and Wise co-authored an article
entitled “The Individual voice in the Choral Ensemble.” The article contains the
56
contents of the three choral conductor’s speeches regarding the topic o f the individual
voice in the choral ensemble. While dealing the controversy o f straight tone versus
vibrato in choral tone, the points listed are not radically divergent (Regier, 1962).
In 1977, Trevor conducted a study examining the influence o f vibrato on
choral blend. In this study he found that the blend o f the voices in a chorus was
judged to improve as the individual differences in vibrato rate and extent decreased
(Trevor, 1977).
Weber studied the sound pressure level differences between a soprano singing
with vibrato and straight tone. He found that the tones sung with vibrato were
significantly louder than ones sung with (a) a straight tone at high pitch and, (b) a
straight tone at high pitch with loud dynamic level were. He found no difference
between tones sung at loud or soft dynamic level, or medium or low pitch level
(Weber, 1992).
The book Vibrato, edited by Dejonckere, Hirano, and Sundberg, contains eight
articles on vibrato in the human voice. While vibrato in choral tone is not a subject o f
this research, the importance o f the research is substantial. The titles o f the articles are
as follows: (a) “Physiological aspects o f vibrato”; (b) “Acoustic and psychoacoustic
aspects o f vocal vibrato"; (c) “Dependence o f the vibrato on pitch, musical intensity,
and vowel in different voice classes”; (d) “The pitch o f short-duration vibrato tones:
experimental data and numerical model”; (e) “Tremor in the light o f sound production
with excised human larynges”; (f) “Caruso’s vibrato: an acoustic study”; (g)
"Measurement o f the vibrato rate o f ten singers’; (h) “The history o f vibrato in the
57
singing voice"; and (i) “ Inducing factors and treatments for vibrato problems"
(Dejonckere. 1995).
Intonation Studies
Several studies have been conducted in attempts to construct an evaluation
instrument for the evaluation of intonation, in relation to an equal tempered scale, in
choral contests and festivals. Larkin examined a rating scale that was constructed to
measure five dimensions o f achievement in choral music performance: tone quality,
intonation, rhythmic precision, expression, and balance/blend. The author concluded
that it was possible to construct a valid rating scale to aid conductors in the preparation
and evaluation of their choirs (Larkin, 1985).
Cooksey developed a facet-factorial instrument to rate high school choral
music performances. The seven factors evaluated in his instrument were diction,
precision, dynamics, tone control, tempo, balance/blend, and interpretation/musical
effect. The results of his study indicated that it is possible to devise a reliable rating
instrument to measure high school choral performance in an objective manner
(Cooksey, 1977).
Stutheit devised a study to examine the hierarchies o f musical elements that
adjudicators fV = 54). choral directors (N = 34) and choral students (.-V= 1290) used in
their preparation and evaluation of a high school choral contest performance. They
were asked to rank balance and blend, diction, interpretation and musicianship,
intonation, other performance factors, rhythm, technique, and tone quality as to their
importance in the preparation and evaluation o f a performance. A hierarchy was
58
established that the author believes will aid students and directors in developing
common goals when preparing music (Stutheit, 1994).
In his study Robinson had 120 music educators, undergraduate non-musicians,
and musicians evaluate a recorded choral performance. He found that non-musicians
picked tone as the best aspect o f the performance and diction as the worst aspect ot the
performance. The undergraduate musicians picked tone and interpretation as best and
intonation as worst. The music educators picked tone and interpretation as the best
aspect o f the performance and either tone, balance or intonation as the worst aspect of
the performance (Robinson, 1988a).
Other researchers have been interested in constructing intonation evaluation
instruments for the training o f future conductors. In his 1989 study, Tamte-Horan
constructed instructional materials that sought to teach five characteristics o f tone
quality for student evaluation. The five characteristics were tone quality, diction,
blend/balance, precision, and intonation. It is assumed that the term tone quality is
being used in both a general and a specific sense in this study. The study used a
pre/post test design and involved 47 undergraduate and three graduate students. The
author noted a slight increase in correct judgments o f tone quality and a large increase
in correct descriptions of problems o f tone quality (Tamte-Horan, 1989).
Voice scientists have been interested in how accurately vocal soloists sing in
tune. In a 1982 paper, Johan Sundberg reviewed research into intonation in solo
vocalists. First, he discussed intonation in relation to the equal temperament system.
As is well known, in this temperament system, the octave is divided into twelve equal
intervals. Next, he discussed intonation in relation to pure scales, which are
59
constructed from three pure triads stacked one on top o f the other. The last
temperament system that Sundberg examined was the Pythagorean temperament
system. The scale in Pythagorean temperament is obtained by stacking perfect fifths
on top of each other until all seven scale degrees have been identified. The research
covered string instrument performance, barbershop singing, and concert singing. In
his conclusions, Sundberg found that small number integer scales such as pure scales
and Pythagorean scales did not explain the intonation practices of performing
musicians. He went further in saying that it is “rather questionable whether the pure
and the Pythagorean theoretical scales are o f relevance to the scale tone frequencies
used in musical reality .R eg ard in g the equally tempered scale, he felt that it was only
used in organs. Sundberg reported that barbershop singers perform much closer to
pure tuning. He speculated that this was due to the vibrato-free tone that they used.
This tone was more unforgiving compared to tone qualities that possess vibrato. In the
later case, variations in intonation are more accepted. He also noted that the concert
singing tones, with their natural vibrato, resulted in much wider fundamental
frequency variations being accepted as in tune by judges (Sundberg, 1982).
Researchers also have turned their attention toward intonation in the practice o f
choral singers. A study by Temstrom and Sundberg examined six choral singers
individually. The authors found that the following affected the accurate performance,
by a choir singer, of a pitch played for the singer: (a) the loudness o f the stimulus tone,
(b) changes in vowel quality, (c) absence or presence o f certain partials. and (d)
absence or presence of vibrato. Since the procedure involved pitch matching instead
60
o f melodic performance, the temperament system was not discussed (Temstrom.
1988).
Resonance Studies
Some researchers have concentrated their efforts studying timbre and the
listener's preference for timbre. In a 1988 study. Faes used an experimental design to
test whether a lexical set o f words designed to describe music preference would
change when timbral aspects o f the performance were changed. The words used were
exciting, fa n , intense, melodic, and relaxing. He found that, among other things, it was
helpful to use the listeners own vernacular in evaluating their preference (Faes. 1988).
Madsen, and Geringer conducted a study o f good versus bad tone quality in
accompanied and unaccompanied vocal and string performances. In this study, the
fifth in a series of focus-of-attention studies, the researchers tested forty-eight college
music students using musical exerpts from a soprano, tenor, violin and cello
performing with good and bad tone and intonation. They found that the musicians
were able to discriminate between good and bad performances. Intonation was rated
as most in need o f improvement. The soprano excerpts were rated higher than the
other three instruments and performance with accompaniment was rated higher than
performance with no accompaniment (Madsen. 1998).
Dolson examined solo and a chorus using a tracking phase vocoder in an
attempt to discover the minimum amount o f differences required to make the listener
perceive an ensemble - as opposed to a solo. This system is an additive analysis -
synthesis procedure. Part o f Dolson's study was directed toward discovering and
explaining errors in previous studies with the equipment. The second part o f his study
61
investigated the choral versus solo timbre questions. He concluded that the sound
must contain at least four to eight harmonics o f distinct and proportional amplitude
modulation to the fundamental frequency in order to be perceived as an ensemble
sound. (Dolson, 1982).
Harper recorded subjects while they were singing in a choir by using close
microphone techniques. The researcher observed that there were no consistent
differences between the first two formant frequencies between solo and choral singing.
However, the judges did find a significant difference between the vowel sounds o f
solo and choral singing. There seemed to be no pattern of change between the vowel
sounds during solo and choral singing. He also reported a difference from solo to
choral singing in the amount o f energy located between formant frequencies (Harper,
1967).
Recently, some voice researchers have begun to focus their attention on choral
tone quality in comparison with solo tone quality (Goodwin, 1980: Rossing, 1985a;
Rossing, 1985b: Temstrom. 1989a; Temstrom. 1989b; Titze. 1994). These studies
have dealt with fundamental pitch intensity, formant intensity, singer's formant, and
vibrato. Because o f the limitations o f the electronic measurement equipment, almost
all of these studies have investigated the individual voice in a choral situation as
compared to the total sound o f all o f the voices o f a chorus singing simultaneously.
Bolster published an article entitled “The Fixed Formant Theory and its
Implications for Choral Blend and Choral Diction," in which he equated the fixed
formant to the singer's formant. He stated that "ideally, the singer's formant is found
to some degree in every vocal sound.-' Further. Bolster stated that this resonance
62
should be in choral tone and the removal o f it from the voice is unhealthy for the
voice. He cited Coffin (1976) in reference to his belief that the amount o f time that
the glottis is closed on a cycle determines the amount o f singer’s formant in the voice
(Bolster, 1983).
Christiansen conducted a study in 1988 using four college-age baritone singers
and spectral analysis of their vowel sounds. The researcher was investigating the
intelligibility of [i] and [u] vowel sounds on a single frequency as sung with various
oral shapes. He used both a mechanical spectral analysis to describe the physical
properties of the sound, but he also used a panel o f judges to evaluate the intelligibility
of the vowel sounds. He concluded that even through manipulation o f the oral
cavities, it was possible to maintain intelligibility o f the vowel. This study also
provides data on the frequencies o f the formants during oral manipulation
(Christiansen, 1988).
Rossing, Sundberg, and Temstrom conducted two studies in 1985 that
investigated the solo versus the choral voice. The first study was an “Acoustic
comparison o f soprano solo and choir singing.” The researchers recorded five soprano
singers singing in solo mode and choral mode on the same text. Recordings were
made from inside the soprano section o f a choir and played back for the subject
through headphones while she sang. This made it seem that she was in the soprano
section o f a choir while she sang. However, since she only heard the sound through
the headphones, her voice could be recorded separately. The researchers noted that
the singers sang with more intensity in the singer’s formant range and a slightly
greater vibrato extent in solo mode compared to choral mode (Rossing, 1985a). In
63
their second study entitled “Voice timbre in solo and choir singing: is there a
difference?,” the researchers examined bass and baritone singers using similar
methods from the earlier study. They found that articulation and phonation seem to be
different from solo to choral singing. Similar to the first study, the strength o f the
singer’s formant was greater in solo singing than it was in choral singing. They also
found that the fundamental was weaker in solo singing than it was in choral singing.
The lower-voice men seem to cluster their third, fourth and fifth formants in order to
strengthen the singer’s formant (Rossing, 1985b).
Sten Temstrom, in his 1989 dissertation at the Royal Institute o f Technology in
Sweden, investigated the acoustical features o f choirs with three different types of
studies (Temstrom, 1989a). An overview of this dissertation research was presented
in an article for the Journal o f Voice in 1991 (Temstrom. 1991). The first study
investigated the intonation precision and the vowel articulation o f singers in a choir.
In this study the author found that intonation was affected by the aural feedback that
the singer received from the physical environment, including the singer's own voice
and the voices of the rest of the chorus. The author also found that singers from one
choir used different vowel articulations in choral singing than they used in speech and.
to a lesser extent, in solo singing. The second area o f study in the dissertation dealt
with choir sound level and frequency scatter, its relation to room acoustics, and sound
spectra o f individual singers in a choir. Frequency scatter occurs when different
voices attempting to sing a unison pitch sing with slightly different fundamental
frequencies. In these studies, Temstrom found that choirs adapted their sound level
and vocal technique to the acoustics o f the room. He also found that room acoustics
64
affected the long-time (or long-term) average spectrum (LTAS) o f the choir sound.
The researcher cited Kitzing’s 1986 study, ”LTAS criteria pertinent to the
measurement of voice quality,” in his statement that the LTAS is “designed to ignore
the short-term spectral variations that are caused by the phonematic variations in
running speech or singing, and to retain long-term aspects of voice timbre that are
more related to basic phonatory and articulatory function” (Temstrom, 1989c, p. 15).
He examined a boy’s choir, youth choir, and an adult choir singing in three different
acoustical environments. By taking LTAS o f the choir sound he concluded among
others: (a) the acoustics o f the room had a large effect on the spectral shape of the
sound; (b) the youth choir and adult choir increased vocal effort in acoustically
absorptive rooms; (c) and all choirs raised their larynx during voice production in
acoustically absorptive rooms.
The third area of study in the dissertation dealt with synthesizing vocal sound
and examining the aspects o f flutter. Flutter is the natural frequency variation that is
present in the human voice. The author synthesized a single human voice and added
flutter. He found that without it, synthesized voices sounded more like a "mediocre
electric organ” than a chorus; however, with the presence o f flutter, the synthesized
chorus sounded realistic (Temstrom, 1991. 141). In the author's discussions on vocal
tone quality he made reference to the singer’s formant. The singer's formant was
defined here as the clustering o f the higher overtones in the male and sometimes alto
voices. This clustering produces a strong area o f concentrated energy or resonance in
the 2 to 4 kHz range. In reference to vocal tone quality in a chorus. Temstrom stated
that this "singer's formant ...would defeat choral blend, unless it is used by most or all
65
of the choir members." He also stated that through his research he had only rarely
recorded an experienced chorus singer singing with a pronounced singer's formant.
In a separate study, Temstrom investigated the formant frequencies o f eight
bass choir singers in an attempt to try and discover whether or not the singers alter
their formant frequencies from those used in normal speech and those used in an
attempt to blend with other voices. One observation that the researcher made was that
none o f the choral singers sang with a pronounced singer’s formant. As for the vowel
formants, the researcher noted a difference between those used for speech and those
used for singing (Temstrom, 1989b).
Ekholm examined choral tone quality and choral blend in a yet unpublished
study. She was kind enough to share the abstract through a personal electronic mail
correspondence. In this study, the researcher recorded four choral pieces with a
twenty-two-voice choir singing in a “soloistic choral mode” and again in a "blended
choral mode.” She also varied the seating arrangement o f the choir from random
sectional seating to a seating arrangement o f acoustically matched voices. The judges
were 37 choral conductors, 33 voice teachers and 32 non-vocal musicians. Also, eight
of the singers were recorded while they sang in the chorus and then re-recorded
singing the same part as if it were a solo. Twelve voice teachers evaluated the
recordings.
As for the choral singing recordings, the choral directors picked blended
singing significantly more often than solo singing. Also, the voice teachers picked
blended singing significantly more than solo singing only in relation to the category o f
"blend/homogeneity.’’ For the rest o f the evaluation categories, both voice teachers
66
and non-vocalists showed no significant difference in their preferences. On the single
voice recordings, the voice teachers ranked singing mode in the following order: (a)
solo mode; (b) solo choral mode; (c) blended choral mode. Ekholm reported that the
voice teachers commented that the blended voice production was unsatisfactory due to
"a lack o f freedom, intonation problems (especially flatting in the higher range), lack
o f vibrancy due to straightening of the tone, lack o f breath control, lack of focus or
ring in the tone, and a dull, weak and breathy tone quality.” She also noted that when
the singers sang in a soloistic mode they tended to over-sing because they could not
hear themselves as well. She concluded that singing in a choir does involve a different
technique from that employed as a solo singer (Ekholm, 1998).
Summary
All o f the above studies and writings have dealt with either a conductor’s ideal
tonal qualities, an investigation into the acoustical properties o f the individual singing
voice, or an investigation into the differences between the solo voice and the vocal
tone produced to blend with a chorus. Preference studies have investigated subjects'
preferences for tempo in music performance (LeBlanc, 1988; Montgomery. 1996) and
length o f the musical example (Palmquist, 1990). However, to this date, no study has
investigated the preference o f undergraduate vocal music majors, instrumental music
majors with no choral experience, and nonmusicians for a choral tone quality
produced with a fully resonant sound as opposed to a choral tone quality with weak
resonance.
67
Need for the Study
Conductors, voice teachers, and choral music educators have contributed to the
discussion o f choral tone quality. However, these discussions have been largely
anecdotal. Voice scientists, among others, have undertaken investigations into the
acoustical components of the solo singing voice. In dealing with resonance issues
alone, studies have shown that full upper resonance in the singer's formant range is
one of the components that is preferred for a solo voice quality to be judged as good
(Bartholomew. 1934: Bloothooft, 1987).
Now that it is becoming possible to identify and more closely analyze the
spectral components of choral sound, studies dealing with musician's and non
musician's preference o f specific elements o f choral tone quality are becoming
possible. A few studies have been undertaken in an attempt to measure the changes a
singer makes when singing with a choral group as opposed to singing in a solo "mode"
o f performance (Bartholomew. 1934; Rossing. 1985a; Rossing. 1985b: Temstrom.
1989a: Temstrom. 1989b; Temstrom, 1991). However, no research has been found
that attempts to isolate specifically the resonance factor of tone quality and also tries
to ascertain undergraduate vocal music major's, instrumental music major's with no
choral experience, and non-musician's preference for a choral tone quality with a fully
resonant tone in the singer's formant range as opposed to a choral tone quality with
little resonance in the singer's formant range.
68
CHAPTER THREE
METHOD
Definitions
Fast Fouier Transform (FFT): The FFT is spectral analysis system that uses a
mathematical algorithm to convert a sound signal from time to frequency domain.
Formant: Formants are resonance frequencies within the vocal tract.
Singer's Formant, Singer s Formant Resonance: “This is a prominent
spectrum envelope peak appearing in the range of 2 to 4 kHz in all vowel spectra sung
by male singers and also by altos. It belongs to the typical features o f a sung vowel”
(Sundberg. 1988b).
Spectrogram. Spectrograph: A graph that displays sound spectral data over
time. Time is shown horizontally, frequency is shown vertically and amplitude is
shown in shading or color.
Limitations
1. This study involved choral music from the Renaissance and Romantic time periods
only. No attempt was made to transfer the results to all choral music.
2. The chorus for the stimulus recording was limited to eight adult male and female
voices due to the size o f the anacohic chamber and the amount o f singers who
could alter the singer's formant resonance in their voices without

69
substantially altering the dynamic level or the vibrato speed or amplitude.
3. The subjects for this study were taken from the populations o f undergraduate
college choral or vocal music majors with extensive choral training or experience,
undergraduate college instrumental music majors with very little or no experience
or training in choral music, and undergraduate college students who had no
experience or training in choral or instrumental music. All subjects were from a
single University in the Southeastern United States.
Stimulus Recording
A group o f eight graduate students from the voice and choral department o f the
Florida State University (2 soprano. 2 alto. 2 tenor. 2 bass) were selected based on
their ability to sing with full singer's formant resonance and reduced singer's formant
resonance without greatly altering the vibrato or the dynamic level of their voice.
Each singer was instructed in the task and asked to sing into a Radio Shack PRO-3010
dynamic microphone connected to a personal computer which was running the
software package Spectra Plus™ version 2.32.01 by Sound Technology Inc (1998).
Spectra Plus™ is a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) spectral analysis system. The FFT
system is a mathematical algorithm that converts the sound signal from time to
frequency domain. The software was running in real time mode and a spectrographic
representation of the singers vocal tone was displayed on the monitor. Each singer
was then able to see the prominence o f the singer's formant and was able to
experiment with altering the energy level in the frequency range that corresponded to
that of the singer's formant (2 kHz-4 kHz). After instruction and experimentation, the
70
singers performed an exercise while singing once with full singer's formant resonance
and then again while attempting to greatly reduce the singer's formant resonance. The
singers were instructed to attempt to make this resonance change without significantly
altering dynamics or vibrato speed. Those singers that were most successful were
selected for the recording.
Music
Upon identifying the eight singers, they met to record eight musical examples.
Four of the examples were basic four voice chord progressions that were seven
measures long. These chord progressions were psalm settings taken from The Hymnal
1982 (Butcher. 1985). The chord progressions were sung to an [a] vowel. The
remaining four examples were selected from “real music,'' sung with the original text:
two of the final four examples were from the Renaissance time period and two were
from the Romantic time period. The pieces selected from the Renaissance were I f Ye
Love Me by Thomas Tallis (1505-1585). and Adoramus Te by Giovanni Gastoldi
(1550-1609). commonly attributed to Giovanni Palestrina. The pieces selected from
the Romantic period were Waldesnacht (Op. 62 No. 3) by Johannes Brahms (1833-
1897). and Locus iste by Anton Bruckner (1824-1896). The pieces were selected
because each had an opening phrase that was almost completely homophonic. Each of
the music examples used for the study consisted o f roughly 8s to 14s o f the opening
phrase o f each piece performed at the same tempo. The first four pieces with no text
were judged as redundant and were discarded following the first pilot study. The two
pieces from the Renaissance and the two pieces from the Romantic period were used
for the main study (See appendix B).
71
Recording Process
The recordings were made in an anechoic chamber in the School o f Music at
Florida State University. The anechoic chamber is a specially designed room that
produces almost no echo or reverberation and eliminates all outside sound. Its
construction was a joint project o f the Center for Music Research in the School of
Music at Florida State University, the Institute o f Molecular Biophysics at Florida
State University, and the Department o f Mechanical Engineering at Florida
Agricultural and Mechanical University and Florida State University. Tom Phipps
and Michael Kasha designed the anechoic chamber and Yulu Krothapalli completed
the calibration. The eight singers stood in a circle along the walls of the chamber
facing toward the center. The two sopranos stood beside each other as did the two
altos, tenors, and bases. A Briiel and Kjaer Type 2669 microphone was suspended
from the ceiling in the center o f the chamber. The singers were placed an equal
distance (0.75 m) from the microphone for the recording. However, during the
recording process it became evident that the tenors were louder than the other sections
of the chorus so the tenors were moved to a distance o f 0.92 m from the microphone.
This process of balancing the voices was viewed as less vocally inhibiting than asking
the tenors to alter their vocal production in order to balance with the other voices. The
recording was made on a Sony digital audio tape recorder, model DTC-75ES.
Each of the eight musical examples was recorded twice, once with a fully
resonant tone in the singer's formant range and once with a tone with much less
resonance. In addition to the above mentioned training experience with the Spectra
72
Plus software, the singers relied on the use o f a hand-held Singer s Formant Analyzer 1
which was monitored during the recording in order to further assure that there was a
difference in the level of the singer’s formant. This hand-held unit uses a relative
scale to indicate the intensity o f sounds in the frequency range o f the singer's formant.
All other frequencies are filtered out. The Singer's Formant Analyzer has an
adjustable intensity response and therefore does not represent the singer s formant in a
standard fixed scale such as a decibel scale. It was used to give the singers a visual aid
in singing with a reduced singer’s formant.
The following instructions were read to the singers before the recording
process:
1. *'We will sing through the 8 pieces before we begin recording so that we are
sure o f the notes.
2. On entering the anechoic chamber: (a) stand with your toes touching the
masking tape lines, (b) stand in sections, (c) face the microphone with your
head facing forward instead o f down at your music.
3. One o f the singers will give the pitch, you may hum your first note, and he will
then direct the examples.
4. You will sing examples 1.2,3. & 4 on an [a] vowel and examples 5.6.7. & 8
on the printed text.
5. You will sing all 8 examples with full resonance then you will go back to the
first example and sing all 8 examples with tone quality that is lacking the
1The singer's formant analyzer was designed and built by Dr. Allen Goodwin o f
Advantage Showare. Inc. in Ringgold Georgia.
73
resonance, ring, or singer’s formant (which ever term you are familiar with).
The object is to not alter the vibrato speed or the dynamic level. We are not
aiming for a “straight tone” sound. Vibrato needs to remain constant so that it
does not become a variable in the study.
6. You may be asked to repeat a recording if the diction varies from recording to
recording or if the intonation becomes inconsistent. Also, one o f the singers
will be monitoring the Singer’s Formant Meter and if the presence of singer’s
formant approaches that used when singing with full resonance, he will start
the music example over.
7. Thank you for making this recording for me. Please fill out the form and
include your mailing address.”
The recordings from the digital audio tape were then converted into wave files
and recorded onto a Compact Disk. Following the recording process, the stimuli were
converted to monaural wave files and analyzed using the Spectra Plus software
package running on a Personal Computer. Then the wave files were used to make the
stimulus recording for the study. The Spectra Plus software package uses a Fast
Fouier Transform (FFT) algorithm to convert sound from the time domain (amplitude
versus time) into the frequency domain (amplitude versus frequency). The sampling
rate for the wave file was 44,100 Hz or CD quality at 16 bits per sample. The FFT
size was set to 8192 points and the decimation ratio was set at one. This produced
spectral lines of 5.38 Hz. For additional clarity, the Blackman smoothing window was
employed on the data.
74
The recorded music examples were arranged into matched pairs o f the same
example with a resonant tone and without a resonant tone using Cool Edit 96 software
by Syntrillium Software Corporation (Johnston, 1996). The matched pairs were
measured for total power using the Spectra Plus software. The overall power level o f
the two examples was matched using a gain control in the Spectra Plus software that
adjusted all aspects of the sound uniformly. In this way, individual spectral
components o f the sound were not altered in relation to the fundamental frequency. A
panel of six judges of music faculty and doctoral choral music students rated the
performances as being resonant or not resonant and the results were examined for
inteijudge reliability. The judges were only in complete agreement on examples 5, 7
and 8 . One of the six judges differed on example 1 and two o f the six judges differed
on examples 2, 3 ,4 , and 6 . Upon examining the results and the comments made by
the judges, it appeared that by adjusting the gain on the examples that lacked
resonance, the recording o f the non-resonant example was perceived as louder and
more sonorous than the resonant example. Due to this effect it seemed prudent to
make another tape without adjusting the gain on the examples with less resonance then
have six new judges rate the examples. This produced a slight perceived volume
difference between the two examples but the judges were instructed to attend to the
tone quality differences and to not consider volume in their decision. The judges were
in 100% agreement on all eight o f the examples. The adjusted recordings were
discarded and the unadjusted recordings were used for the study. The total root mean
square (RMS) power output for both versions o f the four music excerpts used is
75
contained in a table in Table 1. Furthermore, an instruction to disregard the volume
difference was incorporated into the questionnaire used by the subjects.
Recordings For The Main Study
The composite choral sound o f the four music excerpts was analyzed using the
Spectra Plus™ software to investigate any difference o f energy in the singer's formant
range. The data for the analysis o f the four pieces used in the main study is contained
in appendixes D. E, F, and G. While the Spectra Plus™ software does not separate
voices for individual comparisons o f vocal spectra it does indicate if a strong sound
component or energy level exists in the singer's formant range o f the total sound.
Table 1
Total RMS Power for Each Music Example and Differences Between Versions
Example Total RMS Power Difference Between Resonant

and Non-Resonant Version
Tallis Resonant -18.69 dB -4.08 dB

Tallis Non-Resonant -22.77 dB
Gastoldi Resonant -17.77 dB -4.31 dB

Gastoldi Non-Resonant -22.08 dB
Brahms Resonant -20.80 dB -4.83 dB

Brahms Non-Resonant -25.63 dB
Bruckner Resonant -18.71 dB -4.84 dB

Bruckner Non-Resonant -23.55 dB
The recordings that were used for stimuli for the main study were the opening
phrases o f the Tallis. Gastoldi. Brahms, and Bruckner pieces (Appendix B). Eight
76
graduate voice students recorded the stimuli in an anechoic chamber in the School o f
Music at Florida State University. Each o f the four pieces was recorded, in its original
language, once with a fully resonant placement and once again with diminished
resonance in the singer's formant frequency range (approximately 2-4 kHz).
The analysis o f the wave files revealed information about the relative strength
o f the singer's formant in each o f the recordings. The Spectra Plus ™ software
package was used to compute an average spectrum for each o f each o f the wave files
and to view spectrographic data on the wave file. The average spectrum plots the
average strength in decibels for specific frequencies over time throughout, in this case,
the entire musical example.
Tallis - I f Ye Love Me Keep Mv Commandments. A comparison o f the
spectrographs o f the wave files for the resonant (Figure 1) and the non-resonant
version (Figure 2) of the Tallis example demonstrates the difference in singer's
formant resonance. A concentration o f energy in the singer's formant range
(approximately 2 —1 kHz) can be observed from the resonant example (Figure 1).
That energy is much weaker in the non-resonant example (Figure 2).
The vibrato can be seen in both examples by noting the oscillating lines.
Based on this visual information, it is clear that vibrato is present in both the resonant
and the non-resonant examples. The lightening o f the color denotes the intensity.
Darker shades o f color note less intense sound (or non-existent sound) and the lighter
shades represent increasing intensity.
The average strength over the entire musical example can be seen in the
average spectrum o f both the resonant example and the non-resonant example (Figure
77
3). The average spectra for both versions o f the song are represented on this chart.
The black line is the average spectra of the non-resonant example and the red line
(gray line for photocopies o f this study) is the average spectra o f the resonant example.
A slight peak in the red (or gray if you are reading from a photo copy) average
spectrum from roughly 2.5 kHz to 3 kHz in Figure 3 represents the singer's formant
resonance averaged over the entire sound file.
Even more detail can be noted in the Table o f Relative Strength o f Frequency
for the Tallis example (Appendix D). This table lists frequencies from 10.8 Hz in
roughly 5 to 6 Hz increments up to 5676.5 Hz. The relative strength is listed in two
columns beside the frequency. The first column o f data represents the resonant
example and the second column represents the non-resonant example. The column on
the right side represents the difference in sound level between the resonant and the
non-resonant examples. All o f the sound measurements in Appendix D. E. F. and G
are in decibels (dB).
Gastoldi - Adoramus te. The spectrogram o f the Gastoldi Adoramus te
illustrates a greater difference in the strength o f the energy level in the singer's
formant range between the resonant example (Figure 4) and the non-resonant example
(Figure 5). Also, the average spectrum o f the resonant and the non-resonant (Figure 6)
versions of the Gastoldi example reveal a difference in the strength o f the sound at the
singer's formant level. The individual frequency data for the Gastoldi examples
reveals large differences in the frequencies in the singer's formant range (Appendix
E).
78
Figure 2. Tallis - non-resonant - average o f left and right channel with spectrum
expanded
79
A w nqa o t Lett and Right
S'
-60.0
■70;0
•810
•90.0
1.0k 4.0k
Figure 3. Tallis - average spectrum - black = resonant, red (gray) = non-resonant
Figure 4. Gastoldi - resonant - average o f left and right channel with spectrum
expanded
80
rSOia
Figure 5. Gastoldi - non-resonant - average o f left and right channel with spectrum
expanded
UftChannat
0.0
F? Gastoldi Res
1“ Overlay 2
r Overlay 3
I- Overlay 4
-40.0
- 00.0
4.0IC
Figure 6. Gastoldi- average spectrum- black = non-resonant, red (gray) = resonant
81
Brahms - Waldesnacht du wunderkiihle (Od.62 No. 3). The spectrogram o f the
Brahms piece was similar to that o f the two Renaissance pieces in that the sound
energy in the singer’s formant range is noticeably stronger in the resonant example
(Figure 7) than the non-resonant example (Figure 8). The average spectrum also
reveals this difference in energy from the resonant example to the non-resonant
example (Figure 9). The average spectrum data (Appendix F) illustrates this point
numerically with a larger difference in intensity between the resonant example and the
non-resonant example in the singer's formant range.
Bruckner - Locus iste. The final musical example used for the present study
was Locus isle by Anton Bruckner. The spectrograms for these recordings also
demonstrate a difference in energy at the singer’s formant level from the resonant
example (Figure 10) to that o f the non-resonant example (Figure 11). The average
spectrum for the resonant example and the non-resonant example (Figure 12) show
similar differences to the other three examples. In the fundamental frequency range, it
is possible to see that the intensities are very similar. However, as the graph
progresses to the singer's formant range the gap between the intensity o f the resonant
example and the non-resonant example widens. As in the other examples, the data
generated from the average spectrum o f each o f the examples reveal a widening gap in
intensity levels between the two examples throughout the singer's formant range
(Appendix G)
82
TfcnatVsaddlifr
Figure 7. Brahms - resonant - average o f left and right channel with spectrum
expanded
.t AwmaotmtaiKtRlnht-.
Figure 8. Brahms - non-resonant - average o f left and right channel with spectrum
expanded
83
Lett Channel
o :o r
85 v :-
.iJ F Brahms Res
• 10.0 2 lr Overlay 2
J jr Overteyi
- 20.0 jijr Overlay 4
-30.0
s*
® -40.0
■a
3.
J - 5 0 .0
I -60.0
ac
•70.0
•800 ,-s\ V
•90.0
- 100.0
UJJ
1.0lc 2.0* 3J)|C 4.01c
Frequency (Ha
Figure 9. Brahms - average spectrum - black = non-resonant, red (gray) = resonant
..AwrsoeofLeftandRIohfc.
- 20.0 S
£ 3.0k
-40.0 a .
P I - »-802)
T frrw tP secm lft 11.20.
Figure 10. Bruckner - resonant - average o f left and right channel with spectrum
expanded
84
Tlm«(TgeettM*
Figure 11. Bruckner - non-resonant - average o f left and right channel with spectrum
expanded
Owraa> of U ftand Right

0.0
- 20.0
•30.0
•40.0
f - -50.0
-70.0
Figure 12. Bruckner- average spectrum- black = non-resonant, red (gray) = resonant
85
Pilot Studies
Pilot Study One
A questionnaire was developed that included demographic questions and a
forced-choice response grid for the matched pair music examples. The forced-choice
design was selected due to the fact that neither specialized knowledge of music nor
previous experience in music was required to make a decision on preference. Also,
studies conducted by Schuman and Presser indicate, the outcome is not significantly
affected when a questionnaire using forced-choice design is given in comparisons to a
questionnaire with a “don't know" option (Schuman, 1981 149).
The music examples were paired with resonant versus non-resonant or non
resonant versus resonant music examples. On each pair the subject was asked to
indicate which of the two examples he or she preferred. In addition, the subjects were
asked to respond to the intensity o f their preference by circling a number on a scale
from one to five with one being a low intensity and five being a high intensity
preference. Each of the pairings was used twice to make thirty-two possible
combinations. Three random orderings o f the examples were developed and recorded
for the study.
The first pilot study was conducted using graduate students and non-student
adults (;V = 38) so that potential subjects would not be disqualified from the main
study. The subjects were divided into two groups. The first group (N = 11) were
subjects with little or no training in choral music. The second group TV = 27) were
subjects with training in choral music.
86
The first pilot study revealed a difference between the two groups. The results
indicated that the first four chord progressions were redundant, therefore they were
removed from future versions o f the study. Another observation from the pilot study
indicated that the subjects changed their minds considerably between the resonant and
non-resonant examples. However, data were examined for potential bias due to fatigue
and order effects, and no apparent patterns emerged. Nevertheless, it was decided to
limit the study to the point of each subject responding to either the two pieces from the
Renaissance or the two pieces from the Romantic period. The repetitions were
increased to three o f each presentation order, which resulted in six paired examples o f
each piece. The questionnaire was rewritten and new stimulus recordings were made
for a second pilot study.
Pilot Study Two
The subjects for the second pilot study were graduate students and non-student
adults (A1’ = 12) so that potential subjects (undergraduates) would not be disqualified
from the main study. The subjects listened to six randomly ordered presentations o f
two pieces of choral music from the Renaissance (/V = 6) or Romantic (N = 6) time
periods. This produced a total o f twelve parings o f music examples. The subjects
were divided into two groups with one group representing subjects with training in
choral music (N= 10) and one group representing subjects with no musical training {N
= 2 ).
The number of subjects who changed their minds from either resonant to non
resonant or non-resonant to resonant example was greatly reduced in the second pilot
study. Also, after examining the demographic data from both pilot studies, there
87
appeared to be a distinct third group. That group was made up ot instrumental
musicians who had no training in choral music. Therefore, the final study was
designed with three groups instead o f two.
Main Study
The participants in the study were students from a large public university in the
southeastern United States. Demographic data were collected on each subject that was
used to three groups based on training: (a) undergraduate music majors who had
training in choral music (choral training) (N= 49), (b) undergraduate music majors
who had training in instrumental music but very little or no training in choral music
(instrumental training) (/V = 47), and (c) undergraduate students who had no training in
music (no music) (N = 43). The designation o f very little or no choral music training
was made based on no choral music training or choral training that either consisted o f
(a) elementary school experience that was judged limited in amount o f time and five
or more years in the past, (b) elementary school and middle school experience and a
self-rating o f very little or no choral training, or (c) elementary school training and
church choir experience if their self-rating was very little or no choral training.
The subjects were randomly assigned to one o f two listening groups. One of
these groups listened to a presentation consisting o f two short choral music exerpts
from the Renaissance (choral training N = 28, instrumental training N = 23. no music
N = 24) and the other group listened to an equivalent presentation o f two choral
exerpts from the Romantic period (choral training A' = 21. instrumental training A' =
24. no music Ar = 19). Each o f the four pieces (two Renaissance and two Romantic)
was paired with the identical piece that was recorded with the same voices, in the
88
same acoustical environment but with a different vocal technique. Each pairing was
presented six times (three times in one order and three times in the reverse order). The
result was a stimulus tape that contained twelve pairings o f two choral music exerpts
that were randomly ordered. Three different random orderings o f the two groups o f
music were prepared and the subjects were randomly assigned to one o f the six
random orderings.
The questionnaire was rewritten for the main preference study (Appendix C).
The music examples were paired with resonant versus non-resonant or non-resonant
versus resonant music examples. On each pair or trial, subjects were asked to indicate
which o f the two examples they preferred. Additionally, the subjects were asked to
respond to the intensity o f their preference by circling a number on a scale from one to
five with one being a low intensity and five being a high intensity preference. Each o f
the trials were used three times to make twelve possible combinations. Three random
orderings o f the Renaissance pieces and three random orderings o f the Romantic
pieces were developed and recorded for the study. The instructions for the subjects
were also recorded so they would have the instructions both in written and in audible
forms.
The recording of each trial was comprised o f a beginning three-second silence
followed by an announcement o f "pair N.” The instructions on the CD were equalized
to roughly the same intensity level as the musical examples. The announcement was
followed by a two-second silence, followed by one version o f the music excerpt,
another two-second silence, and the alternate version o f the music excerpt. The three
random orderings o f Renaissance music excerpts and the three random orderings of
89
Romantic music excerpts were recorded onto six separate compact discs for the main
study.
The experimental room was a sound dampened room with the approximate
dimensions of 4 m by 5.5 m. Tables, desks, and chairs lined the walls and two desks
were placed in the center o f the room. Blinders were constructed so that the subjects
could not see each other’s responses. Cabling was laid throughout the room so that a
total of 10 headphones could be connected to a single music source. Eitaro
Kawaguchi, who is the Senior Engineer in the Center for Music Research at Florida
State University, constructed the cabling for the study. The 10 headphones were Koss
gt/4 portable headphones with a frequency response o f 20 to 20,000 Hz. Each
headphone had an intensity control on the cord. The headphones were connected to a
Pioneer SA1510 amplifier and a JVC XL-2441 compact disc player.
The subjects were instructed to enter the room, take a seat and fill out the
demographic portion of the questionnaire (Appendix C). Upon completion o f the
demographic information, the subjects were instructed to put on their headphones and,
during the instructions, adjust the volume to a comfortable level. The instructions
(Appendix C) were printed on the questionnaire and were read on the compact disc.
90
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS
Order Effect
Frequencies and general descriptive statistics were used on all o f the analysis.
In addition, a paired-samples /-test was used to investigate the first question and a
One-Way Analysis of Variance was used for the second question.
A separate Paired Samples /-test was used to investigate any order effect that
might have occurred. A significance level o f a = .05 was used for all o f the statistical
tests. The /-test compared the three presentations o f each ordering of each piece. For
example, the three orderings o f the Tallis piece that had the non-resonant version first
were compared with the three orderings that had the resonant version first. This test
revealed that there were no significant order effects in the first three pieces. The Tallis
piece produced a two-tailed significance o fp = .390. the Gastoldi piece produced a
two-tailed significance of p = .260. and the Brahms piece produced a two-tailed
significance o f p = .717. However, the Bruckner piece revealed a two-tailed
significance o fp < .000 (Table 2). This level o f significance would normally suggest
an order effect for this piece.
91
Demographic Data
The subjects for this study totaled 139. O f those subjects. 28 (20%) were
freshmen, 39 (28%) were sophomores, 30 (22%) were juniors, and 42 (30%) were
seniors.
Table 2
T-Test Results for Order Effect
Paired Differences
Music Mean sd sd error t df Sig.

mean 2-tailed
Tallis NR/R .08 .80 .09 .865 75 .390

Renaissance Group
Gastoldi NR/R -.13 1.01 .12 -1.134 75 .260

Renaissance Group
Brahms NR/R -.05 1.02 .13 -.364 64 .717

Romantic Group
Bruckner NR/R -.58 .96 .12 -4.837 63 .000

Romantic Group
Music Majors With Choral Training
Of the subjects that comprised the group Music Majors with Choral Training
(.V = 49). 5 (10%) were freshmen. 9 (18%) were sophomores. 16 (33%) were juniors.
92
and 19 (39%) were seniors. Two o f the subjects (4%) reported that they had from one
to two years of experience singing in a choir. Three o f the subjects (6%) reported that
they had from three to four years o f experience singing in a choir. Naturally, the
majority o f subjects in this group had more extensive experience in choir: eleven
(22%) that had between five and six years o f experience, and 34 (69%) that had seven
or more years of experience singing in a choir.
This group also contained subjects with considerable experience in singing in a
solo situation. Only nine (18%) reported that they had no experience singing solo.
Three subjects (6%) reported one year o f solo experience, five subjects (10%) reported
two years o f experience, one subject (2%) reported three years o f experience, and
seven subjects (14%) reported four years o f experience singing in a solo setting.
Finally, 25 (51%) o f the subjects had five or more years of experience singing in a
solo setting.
Forty-one (84%) o f the subjects in this group had some private voice
instruction. Seven (14%) of the subjects had one year o f private instruction, six (12%)
of the subjects had two years o f instruction, six (12%) had three years o f instruction,
and eight (16%) of the subjects had four years o f private instruction in voice. The
greatest concentration of experience was with 15 (31%) of the subjects who had five
or more years of private voice instruction.
Only one (2%) o f the subjects had no instrumental music experience, while
three (6%) had two years of instrumental experience, four (8%) had three years o f
experience, and five (10%) had four years o f experience with a musical instrument.
93
The majority o f students (37 or 76%) had five or more years o f experience playing a
musical instrument.
Music Majors With Instrumental Training But No Choral Training
The second group examined in this study was comprised o f subjects (N = 47)
who were instrumental music majors who had very little or no choral music training or
experience. O f the 47 subjects. 13 (28%) were freshmen. 19 (40 %) were sophomores,
5 (11%) were juniors, and 10 (21%) were seniors.
As would be expected from the orientation of the group, most o f the subjects
(40 or 85%) had no experience in choral music. A total o f 7 students had limited
experience in choral ensembles. O f those, 5 (11%) had from one to two years o f
experience, one subject (2%) had from three to four years experience, and one subject
(2%) had from five to six years o f experience singing in a chorus. O f the subjects with
limited choral experience, two had only been in elementary school choir, one had been
in elementary school choir and middle school choir, and four had been in elementary
school choir and church choir. They all gave themselves a voluntary rating o f very
little or no training in choral music.
All of the subjects (N = 47) reported that they had no experience singing in a
solo setting. Further. 46 (98%) o f the subjects responded that they had no private
voice instruction. One subject (2%) had private voice lessons for one year or less. As
would be expected, all of the subjects reported that they had five years or more of
experience playing a musical instrument.
94
Nonmusic Majors With No Choral Or Instrumental Training
The final group of subjects (/V = 43) consisted o f individuals with no
experience or training in choral music or in instrumental music. O f the 43 subjects, 10
(23%) were freshmen, 11 (26%) were sophomores, 9 (21%) were juniors, and 13
(30%) were seniors.
As expected from subjects in this group, there were almost no subjects with
music experience. Only one subject (2%) had from one to two years o f experience in
an elementary school choir and the rest o f the subjects (42 or 98%) had no experience
in a choral ensemble. None o f the subjects (/V = 43) reported experience singing in a
solo situation or experience in private voice instruction. Finally, none o f the 43
subjects reported that they had any experience in playing a musical instrument.
Research Question One
All o f the statistical tests used on the two research questions were computed at
the .05 alpha level. The first question involved an investigation into all o f the
subject's preference for a choral tone quality with or without singer's formant
resonance. The results of all four of the music examples were combined and a Paired
Samples /-test was used to carry out the investigation. Also, frequencies, mean scores,
and standard deviations were used in the analysis o f the first question. The range of
scores for non-resonant or resonant was from zero to twelve. That is. each subject had
the possibility of preferring a resonant or a non-resonant version o f any or all o f the 12
pairings of the two pieces. The mean score for the non-resonant responses was 7.95
compared to the mean o f the resonant responses, which was 4.05. The standard
deviation for the two categories was 3.42. The standard deviation scores were
95
identical due to the fact that the design used was forced-choice. For example, if the
response was not a preference for a resonant tone, the answer had to be non-resonant
(Table 3).
Table 3
Non-resonant versus resonant responses across all subjects
N Minimum Maximum Mean SD
Non-resonant 139 0 12 7.9496 3.4206
Resonant 139 0 12 4.0504 3.4206
Only 28 of the subjects (20%) responded with a preference for non-resonant
choral tone in every case (Table 4). However, out of the total 139 subjects, only 3
subjects (2%) responded with a preference for a resonant choral tone in every case
(Table 5). The rest of the subjects were less consistent in their judgments. Still a
strong trend toward a non-resonant preference is observable (Table 4). Figures 13 and
14 are a representation o f the frequency that the subjects chose the resonant versus the
non-resonant version o f each song.
96
T a b le 4
Frequency o f Non-resonant responses
number o f non Frequency Percent Cumulative

resonant Percent
responses
0 3 2.2 2.2
1 6 4.3 6.5
2 5 3.6 10.1
s
4 2.9 12.9
4 5 3.6 16.5
5 6 4.3 20.9
6 16 11.5 32.4
7 15 10.8 43.2
8 8 5.8 48.9
9 18 12.9 61.9
10 11 7.9 69.8
11 14 10.1 79.9
12 28 20.1 100.0
Total 139 100.0
T ab le 5
Frequency o f Resonant responses
number o f Frequency Percent Cumulative

resonant Percent
responses
0 28 20.1 20.1
1 14 10.1 30.2
2 11 7.9 38.1
j 18 12.9 51.1
4 8 5.8 56.8
5 15 10.8 67.6
6 16 11.5 79.1
7 6 4.3 83.5
8 5 3.6 87.1
9 4 2.9 89.9
10 5 3.6 93.5
11 6 4.3 97.8
12 3 2.2 100.0
Total 139 100.0
Frequency
•Tallis F requency
■Gastoldi F req u e n cy
0
0N-6R 1N-5R 2N-4R 3N-3R 4N-2R 5N -IR 6N-0R
Figure 1 3 . F r e q u e n c y o f r e s o n a n t v e r s u s n o n
re s o n a n t re s p o n s e s to R e n a i s s a n c e e x c e rp ts
30
25
20
O
5 ■B r a h m s F r e q u e n c y
O’ 15
■Bruckner Frequency
10
0
0N -6R IN -5R 2N -4R 3N -3R 4N -2R 5N -IR 6N -0R
F igure 1 4 . F r e q u e n c y o f r e s o n a n t v e r s u s n o n
r e s o n a n t r e s p o n s e s to R o m a n t i c e x c e r p t s
99
Finally, a Paired Samples r-test was used to determine if the differences
between the two preference choices were significant. The result was a two-tailed
significance level o fp < .000 (Table 6). This reveals a significant difference at the
alpha level of .05. There is a basic difference in the choral tone quality that the
subjects preferred for all four musical examples. All groups demonstrated a
preference for non-resonant tone quality.
Table 6
T-Test Results fo r All Subject's Preference fo r a Non-resonant

or a Resonant Choral Tone Quality
Paired Differences
SD
Music Mean SD error t df Sig.
mean 2-tailed
N on-resonant- 3.90 6.84 .58 6.720 138 .000

Resonant
Research Question Two
A One-Way Analysis o f Variance test was used to determine if the subjects in
the three training groups differed significantly in their preference for a resonant or a
non-resonant choral tone quality across all four o f the music examples. The test
revealed a significant difference existed between the three training groups in both the
non-resonant responses and the resonant responses. Table 7 shows the F-ratios for
both resonance and non-resonance responses (the F-ratios are identical because o f the
forced-choice procedure).
Table 7
One-Way A NOVA fo r Training versus Resonance Preference
Factor Source o f Variation Sum o f Mean df F Sig.

Squares Squares
Non Between Groups 219.638 109.819 11.101 .000

resonant Within Groups 1395.009 10.257 136
Resonant Between Groups 219.638 109.819 2 11.101 .000

Within Groups 1395.009 10.257 136
Upon the examination o f a Scheffe post hoc test and the descriptive statistics.
several differences could be observed. The Scheffe post hoc test revealed a significant
difference {p < .000) between the group with choral training and the group with
instrumental training but no choral training (Table 8). There was also a significant
101
Reproduced
with permission
I’able 8
of the copyright owner.
Multiple C'omparisons fo r the Three Training Groups, Non-Resonanl Preferences (Scheffe Test)
Dependent Variable Training (I) Training (J) Mean Standard Sig.

Difference Deviation
(I-J) Error
Further reproduction
Non-Resonant Choral Training Instrumental Training / 2.653a .654 .000

No Choral
No Music Training 2.607“ .669 .001

O
IO
prohibited without p e r m is s io n .
InstrunienlalTraining / Choral Training -2.653“ .654 .000

No Choral
No Music Training -.047 .676 .998
No Music Training Choral Training -2.607“ .669 .001
Instrumental Training / .047 .676 .998

No Choral
Note. “ The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

Reproduced
with permission
Table 9
Multiple C'omparisons fo r the Three Training Groups, Resonant Preferences (Scheffe Test)
Mean Standard
Dependent Training (I) Training (J) Difference Deviation Sig.
Variable (I-J) Error
Resonant Choral 'Training Instrumental Training -2.653a .654 .000

/ No Choral
No Music Training -2.607 s .669 .001

Instrumental Training Choral Training 2.653a .654 .000

/ No Choral
No Music Training .047 .676 .998
No Music Training Choral Training 2.607“ .669 .001
Instrumental Training -.047 .676 .998

/ No Choral
Note. a The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

Reproduced
with permission
Table 10
Descriptive Statistics fo r Three Training Groups Across Non-Resonance Versus Resonance Preference
Resonance Training N Mean sd sd Minimum Maximum

error
Factor
Non-resonant Choral Training 49 9.653 2.521 .360 0 12
Instrumental Training / 47 7.000 3.394 .495 0 12

No Choral
No Music Training 43 7.047 3.651 .557 1 12
Total 139 7.950 3.421 .290 0 12
Resonant Choral Training 49 2.347 2.521 .360 0 12
Instrumental Training / 47 5.000 3.394 .495 0 12

No Choral
No Music Training 43 4.954 3.651 .557 0 11
Total 139 4.050 3.421 .290 0 12

1 2 ---
Mean of non-resonant
Choral Inst. No Music

Figure 15. Mean scores of non-resonant responses by three
training groups
difference (p = .001) between the group with choral training and the group with no
musical training. The difference between the group with instrumental training and the
group with no musical training was not significant (p = .998). The Scheffe post hoc
text for training versus a resonant preference yielded the same results due to the
forced-choice design (Table 9). The mean scores for the non-resonant and resonant
responses revealed that all three training groups preferred the non-resonant version
over the resonant version (Table 10). However, the group with choral training had a
significantly higher mean score (9.653) for a non-resonant preference when compared
to the instrumental group (7.000) or the group with no musical training (7.047) (Figure
15). The standard deviation also revealed a stronger consensus o f opinion for the
choral training group (2.521) than that o f the instrumental training group (3.394) or the
group with no musical training (3.651).
Intensity of Preference
Finally, data were collected on the intensity o f each o f the subjects' preference
choices. Each time they listened to a pairing o f music excerpts they were asked to
mark the performance that they preferred. They were then asked to circle a number on
a Likert type scale from one to five with one representing a weak intensity and five
representing a strong intensity o f preference (Appendix C). When all of the subjects'
scores are examined together the mean score for their intensity ratings was 3.059 out
o f the possible five points. Only a slight difference can be noted in the mean scores of
each o f the three training groups. The choral training group had a mean score o f
3.362. the instrumental training group had a mean score o f 2.88, and the no music
training group had a mean score of 2.842. The overall standard deviation was 0.78
106
while the individual groups were 0.755 for the choral training group. 0.787 tor
instrumental training group, and 0.8 for the no music training group (Table 11)
Table 11
Intensity o f Preference data by subjects
Subject Groups Mean scores Standard

deviations
Choral training 3.362 0.755
Instrumental training 2.880 0.787
No music training 2.842 0.800
All subjects 3.059 0.780
C H A P T E R FIVE
DISCUSSION
Interpretation o f the Results
Research Questions
The first research question was concerned with the choral tone quality that
undergraduate college students (musician and non-musician) preferred. Specifically.
their preference for a choral tone that possessed a strong resonance in the singer's
formant range over a choral tone quality that was produced with the same voices using
a much weaker singer's formant resonance was the subject o f interest. The results of
the paired-samples /-test indicated a significant difference (p < .000) between the
resonant versus non-resonant responses for all o f the subjects. This result indicates
that there is a difference in the tone quality that college students prefer when given the
choice between one with strong resonance in the singer's formant range and one with
weak resonance in the singer's formant range. More specifically, the mean scores
indicate that the subjects preferred the non-resonant example (7.95) to the resonant
example (4.05). This would indicate that all subjects preferred a non-resonant choral
tone quality to a resonant tone quality.
The second research question sought to ascertain whether the training or
musical background o f the subjects influenced their choice in preferred tone quality.
It was hypothesized that the subjects who were trained in singing and experienced in
108
singing in a chorus would react differently from subjects who lacked this training or
background. When the subjects' responses were examined based on their training
level, a difference in the tone quality preference became evident. The study revealed a
significant difference between the choral training group and the instrumental training
group {p < .000) and the choral training group and the group with no music training ip
= .001). The study did not reveal a significant difference between the instrumental
group and the group with no music training (p = .998). When considering these
results, the impact that training has on tone quality preference becomes evident.
However, upon examining the mean scores for each o f the training groups, it becomes
clear that the difference lies more with the degree o f their preference and the
consistency o f their preference. It is interesting to note that each o f the three training
groups preferred a non-resonant rather than a resonant tone quality. Out o f twelve
possible non-resonant responses, the subjects with choral training indicated their
preference for a non-resonant tone quality with a mean score o f 9.653 compared to the
instrumental group's mean score o f 7.0, and the group with no music training's mean
score o f 7.047. When you compare this information with the standard deviation scores
o f (a) choral training (2.521), (b) instrumental training (3.394), and (c) no music
(3.421), an even stronger case is made for consistency of preference. The smaller
standard deviation for the group with choral training indicates that the responses from
this group did not vary as much from the mean as did the responses o f the other two
groups.
109
Problem s w ith the Study
Order effect
As related in the previous chapter, when the paired-samples /-test was used on
the data, a difference was observed in the Bruckner music excerpt but not in the other
three excerpts (Table 1). The fact that a difference was not observed in three out o f
the four music excerpts makes the interpretation o f this as an order effect seem
suspect. The Bruckner excerpt was the only one o f the four that had an instance where
one vocal section was heard without the other three vocal sections. All o f the music
excerpts were homophonic except for two beats o f the Bruckner excerpt where the
basses were heard alone. Except for the Brahms excerpt, which had a slightly
different rhythm in the soprano and tenor voices for one beat, and the mentioned two
beats of the Bruckner excerpt, all o f the pieces were homorhythmic. The two exposed
bass notes in the Bruckner excerpt could have contributed to the difference in the test
for order effect. As the subjects listened to this excerpt over six repetitions, they could
have changed their minds based on the two exposed notes. Three o f the subjects
commented on the bass section. One commented "Sometimes the lower voices were
blaring which affected my decision.*' while another commented that "The basses
seemed to stand out in a way that I disliked." Still one other subject had a positive
reaction to the bass section. This subject stated that he or she "like[d the] powerful
male voice!" (Appendix H). It seems that the two notes that the basses sang alone
drew the attention of the subjects. Since the difference in the singer's formant was
strong in the bass voices, as measured in pre-recording sessions with the Spectra
110
Plus™ software, it could have contributed to the confusion. There still seems to be
much that is not known about human preference o f choral tone quality.
Other Aspects O f The Study
Care should always be taken in interpreting preference when human voices are
used. It is impossible to completely control for all aspects of vocal production when
attempting to alter one specific aspect. Even with instructions to the highly skilled
singers to alter only their resonance, other changes are inevitable. For instance, while
vibrato was present in all o f the recordings, it was impossible to keep the vibrato speed
and amplitude exactly the same. Also, in some cases increasing the resonance altered
the balance and blend in the voices. Some of the imbalance was counteracted by
positioning the singers at different distances from the microphone for the resonant
recordings. However, due to the limited size of the anechoic chamber, this was not
always completely sufficient.
The act o f increasing the resonance in the singer's formant range added volume
to the sound. Although the sound level at the fundamental frequencies was relatively
the same, as can be seen in the combined average spectra contained in Figures 3. 6. 9,
and 12. the increased energy in the upper frequencies, including the singer's formant,
produced a louder perceived volume. Had the overall sound been adjusted to the non
resonant level, so that the intensities were even, the intensity and proportion o f sound
distributed would have given the listener the impression that the sound was o f a lower
volume. Conversely, if the sound level o f the non-resonant version had been adjusted
to equal the intensity o f the resonant version, the perception of the tone quality of the
non-resonant version would have been o f a more sonorous tone. Therefore, for this
111
study, the recordings were used as recorded and the volume or intensity was not
equalized. The subjects were instructed to disregard the volume o f sound as a factor
in their decisions. Based on the comments that the subjects made, most were able to
do this. However, there were seven subjects that admitted this posed a difficulty for
them. Twelve of the free response comments concerned the difficulty of choosing
between the tone quality choices and three comments concerned balance. One subject
felt that the soprano section was under pitch. Finally, two comments were directed
toward vocal production (Appendix H).
The act o f singing is an extremely complex process. When all of the aspects of
vocal production are combined with the correct pronunciation o f text and with the
aspect o f singing in an ensemble, the amount o f variables is enormous. The difficulty
in controlling all o f the variables in singing is why some researchers have used
synthesized voices in their experiments (Bemdtsson, 1995: Karlsson. 1992; Sundberg.
1988a; Temstrom. 1989a). However, the natural quality o f the sound, especially when
the vocal production involves text, becomes an issue with artificial voices. This
researcher felt that to answer the research questions involved with this study, it was
necessary to have human subjects evaluating human voices.
Implications for Music
Researchers have found that a choral singer who is also an experienced solo
singer will lower the energy level in the singer's formant range when switching from a
solo singing mode to a choral singing mode (Ekholm, 1998: Goodwin. 1977; Rossing.
1985a: Temstrom. 1989a). This study dealt with only one aspect o f choral tone
quality. That aspect was the amount o f resonance in the singer's formant range. This
112
study has shown that subjects with (a) choral training, (b) instrumental training but no
choral training, and (c) no music training all prefer a choral tone quality with less
singer's formant resonance to one with a strong singer's formant resonance. Further,
the subjects with choral training prefer a choral tone quality with less resonance more
often than did subjects from the other two groups. This seems to indicate that
although though training and experience in choral music seems to increase ones
preference for a choral tone with less resonance, the training is not the sole
determining factor in the preference decision. It would appear that a general
preference for a choral tone quality with less resonance compared to one with strong
resonance is present to varying degrees in most o f the present sample and perhaps in
the population.
Recommendations for Future Research
Measurement Tools
The spectrographic software has an enormous potential for aiding research into
choral tone quality as well as research into choral conducting. The software can aid
researchers in investigating vowel tuning by looking more closely at the first two
formant frequencies in relation to the overall choral tone. It can aid researchers with
investigation into the impact vowels have on intonation. Also, research into the
posture of the singer and its effect on choral tone and intonation can be aided with
spectrographic equipment. Even more possibilities for research into choral tone will
exist accomplished when improvements in the software enable the location o f
individual voices out of a conglomerate choral sound and identify their component
partials.
113
Spectrographic equipment also has the potential to benefit research into choral
conducting. For instance, the effect that a specific gesture has on the choral sound
could be measured objectively through the use of spectrographic software. Also, the
effect of a conductor’s posture on the choral tone or intonation could be measured
using spectrographic tools.
Future Research Implied Bv This Study
This study dealt with only one aspect o f choral tone quality (singer's formant
resonance), in a recording by one particular group o f singers and using subjects
representing three training areas. Future studies could include subjects with other
training backgrounds. For example, voice majors who have limited choral experience
could be compared to voice students with extensive choral experience. Professional
conductors could be compared to singers or student conductors. Future studies could
use different singers in order to see if the individual voices in this study influenced the
preferences. Other studies could include choruses o f various sizes to ascertain if the
number of voices has an impact o f preference decisions.
This study involved music from the Renaissance and the Romantic periods.
Future studies could include performance practice as a factor by investigating any
difference in tone quality preference between stylistic periods. Future investigations
could also include different styles o f choral music.
Resonance investigations could be done within the context o f a larger choral
excerpt. These studies could investigate whether added resonance within certain
portions of a text increases the communication o f meaning to the listener. Still, more
114
research into choral resonance could investigate if intonation is improved by
increasing singer's formant resonance.
The choral music field can derive much benefit from acoustical and perceptual
research. While this study indicates only the most basic preferences in choral tone
quality, future research has the potential to more accurately define tonal ideals and
their physical properties. This will allow choral conductors to more clearly formulate
and articulate their tonal ideals for a given piece of music. It will benefit teachers of
future conductors by giving further insight into the components o f choral tone quality
and preferences for those components that they can then convey to their students. Both
conductors and singers can benefit from an increased knowledge o f tonal concepts and
their possible uses in the coloration o f vocal or choral sound.
One component o f a healthy vocal technique is flexibility in tonal production.
As the singers who make up the personnel o f choral ensembles, become more highly
trained, the flexibility and variety o f tonal possibilities for choral tone improve. It is
necessary for the choral conductor to be aware of the many aspects o f good vocal
production and to be aware of how those aspects fit in with his or her choral tonal
ideals. In this manner, research into the practices and preferences o f the choral and
vocal art is a valuable tool for further development o f the profession.
115
A P P E N D IX E S
116
APPENDIX A
International Phonetic A lphabet11
Chart fo r Symbols used in this study
IPA Approximate English

svmbol English Spelling Example
e ay weigh
i ee meet
u 00 glue
a ah father
j y yes
n n no
0 ng ring
a ah Ger. Mann
ae a cat
a Note. This chart is freely based on information from the

International Phonetic Association contained on their
world wide web site (http://www.arts.gla.ac.uk/IPA7ipa.html).
APPENDIX B
Four Music Examples
SOPRANO
yc love m e. keep my com • m in d - m en d
ALTO
ye love m e, keep my com - m in d - m en u ,—
TENOR
love m e. keep my cum - m in d • m e n d .—
BASS
If yc love m e. keep my com - m in d - m e n d .—
Music Example 5 :TaIlas - I f Ye Love Me
S oprano
ra C h ri ste.
A lto
n
C h ri s te .
Tenor
m us C h ri ate.
B ass
m us C h ri
Music Example 6: Gastoldi - Adoramus te
118
Wal nacht du wun
nacht du dcr kuh le
H M fd l ; ---- ' " | j ' ■'
Wal d« nacht du wun dcr kuh Ic
Wal • dcs • nacht du wun • d cr ♦ kuh
Music Example 7 : Brahms - Waldesnacht Op. 62 No. 3
S o p ra n o
La - c u j 1 - ste Do-o fik-ctua eat

i ; P
A lio
La - cue 1 - ate e De-o fa -c tu se a t

P
Tenor
Lo - ous 1 - ate e Do-o fe-otuaeat
B ua
Lo . c m i - ate & De o fe-c lu ae a t
Music Example 8 : Bruckner - Locus isle
11 9
A P P E N D IX C
Q u e stio n n a ir e
120
C horal Tone Q uestionnaire
[reformated to f i t the page]
1. W h a t is y o u r a c a d e m i c le v e l9 F re sh m a n ; S o p h o m o re; J u n io r ; S e n io r ; G ia d u a te ; O th e r
2. W h a t is y o u r m a j o r ? (ex. BS Music Education: Vocal)
major:____ : ________________
3. H o w m a n y to ta l y e a r s o f e x p e r ie n c e , i f a n y . d o y o u h a v e in s i n g in g in a c h o ir ?
( I f th e a n s w e r is 0 o r n o n e th e n a n s w e r a n d g o to q u e s tio n # 7 ) O (n o n e ). 1 -2 . 3 -4 . 5 -6 , 7^
4. P le a s e m a r k t h e s e n te n c e th a t b e s t s ta te s th e h ig h e s t le v e l o f e x p e r ie n c e y o u h a v e s i n g in g in
ch o ru ses:
I have n o e x p e r i e n c e s in g in g in a c h o r u s .
I have v e r y l i t t l e e x p e r ie n c e s i n g in g in a c h o r u s .
1 have s o m e e x p e r i e n c e s i n g in g in a c h o r u s .
I have e x t e n s i v e e x p e r i e n c e s in g in g in a c h o r u s .
5. P le a s e m a r k th e s e n te n c e th a t b e s t s ta te s th e h ig h e s t le v e l o f t r a in in g in c h o r a l m u s ic th a t y o u h a v e :
I have n o t r a i n i n g in c h o r a l m u s ic .
I have v e r y l i t t l e t r a in in g in c h o r a l m u s ic .
1 have s o m e tr a i n i n g in c h o r a l m u s ic .
I have e x t e n s i v e tr a i n i n g in c h o r a l m u s ic .
6. M a r k e a c h o f t h e ty p e s o f c h o ir s , i f a n y , in w h ic h y o u h a v e e x p e r ie n c e s in g in g :
E le m e n ta r y S c h o o l C h o ir
M id d le S c h o o l o r J u n i o r H ig h S c h o o l C h o ir
H ig h S c h o o l C h o ir
C o lle g e C h o ir
C h u r c h o r S y n a g o g u e C h o ir
C o m m u n i t y C h o ir
7. H o w m a n y y e a r s , i f a n y . o f e x p e r i e n c e d o y o u h a v e in s in g in g s o lo ?
O (n o n e ), 1. 2. 3. 4. 5~
8. H o w m a n y y e a r s , i f a n y . h a v e y o u s tu d ie d p r iv a te v o ic e le s s o n s ?
O (n o n e ). I. 2. 3. 4. 5*
9. W h a t, i f a n y . m u s ic a l in s tr u m e n t d o y o u p l a y ? _________________________________
10. H o w m a n y y e a r s o f e x p e r ie n c e d o y o u h a v e in p la y in g a m u s ic a l in s tr u m e n t?
( I f y o u h a v e e x p e r i e n c e o n m o r e th a n o n e i n s tr u m e n t, in c lu d e th e to ta l tim e s p a n . F o r e x a m p le ,
i f y o u b e g a n p ia n o le s s o n s a t a g e 10 a n d q u it a t a g e 12 b u t s ta r te d c la r in e t a t a g e 11 a n d q u it a t
a g e 14. th e n y o u w o u ld c o u n t a g e s 10 t h r o u g h 14 o r 4 y e a r s to ta l.)
0 (n o n e ). I. 2. 3. 4. 5^
P le a s e p u t o n y o u r h e a d p h o n e s a n d t u r n th is fo r m o v e r to th e b a c k p a g e .
121
C h o ral Tone Q uestionnaire page 2
A s th e fo llo w in g p a r a g r a p h o f in s tr u c tio n s a r e r e a d to y o u , a d j u s t th e v o lu m e o n th e c o r d o f y o u r
h e a d p h o n e s t o a c o m f o r t a b l e le v e l.
T h i s s tu d y d e a l s w ith a s p e c if i c e l e m e n t in th e t o n e q u a lity o r s o u n d o f a c h o r u s . Y o u a r e a b o u t to b e
a s k e d to lis te n to 12 s h o r t p a i r s o f r e c o r d e d c h o r a l m u s ic . E a c h e x a m p le is fro m 8 t o 12 s e c o n d s lo n g
a n d b o th m u s ic a l e x a m p le s in e a c h p a i r a r e id e n tic a l. E v e r y e f f o r t h a s b e e n m a d e to e n s u r e th a t th e
o n ly e l e m e n t t h a t c h a n g e s is t h e s p e c if i c e l e m e n t in th e t o n e q u a l i t y o r s o u n d th a t w e a r e in te r e s te d in.
H o w e v e r , a s lig h t d i f f e r e n c e in v o lu m e d id a p p e a r in th e r e c o r d in g . T h e r e f o r e w e w o u l d lik e f o r y o u to
r u l e o u t v o l u m e a s a n e l e m e n t in y o u r p r e f e r e n c e d e c is io n . F o r in s ta n c e , i f o n e e x a m p le is lo u d e r th a n
th e o th e r , d o n ’t c h o o s e it b e c a u s e it is lo u d e r b u t lis te n f o r th e t o n e q u a lity o r s o u n d s u n g b y th e s in g e r s
a n d m a k e y o u r d e c i s i o n b a s e d o n t h a t in s te a d . T h e firs t e x a m p le o f e a c h p a i r w ill b e la b e le d “ A ” a n d
th e s e c o n d e x a m p le w ill b e la b e le d “ B .” Y o u r j o b is to c i r c l e th e le tte r th a t c o r r e s p o n d s w ith th e p a ir
m e m b e r t h a t y o u fe e l h a s t h e t o n e q u a l i t y o r t h e s o u n d th a t y o u l ik e b e s t . T h e n , c ir c le a n u m b e r fro m I
to 5 th a t r e p r e s e n ts t h e i n t e n s i ty o f y o u r p r e f e r e n c e . T h e s c a le is a f iv e - p o in t s c a le w ith I r e p r e s e n tin g
w e a k in te n s ity a n d 5 r e p r e s e n ti n g s t r o n g in te n s ity . F o r e x a m p le , i f in o n e o f th e p a ir s , y o u lik e e x a m p le
" A ” j u s t a little m o r e th a n e x a m p le “ B ” th e n y o u w o u ld c i r c l e “ A ” a n d th e n c ir c le n u m b e r 1, o r 2 o n th e
in te n s ity s c a le . H o w e v e r , i f y o u lik e e x a m p le “ A " a lo t m o r e th a n e x a m p le “ B ” th e n y o u w o u ld c ir c le
"A" a n d th e n c i r c l e n u m b e r 4 o r 5 . O n c e a g a in , p le a s e d o n o t le t th e v o lu m e o r l o u d n e s s o f th e e x a m p le
a f f e c t y o u r j u d g m e n t . A ls o , r e m e m b e r t h a t th e r e a r e n o r ig h t o r w r o n g a n s w e r s , j u s t m a r k th e m u s ic a l
e x a m p le th a t is p e r f o r m e d w ith a s o u n d th a t y o u lik e b e s t.
T h e s tu d y w ill n o w b e g in .
W eak S tr o n g
P a ir 1- A B 1 2 3 4 5
P a ir 2- A B 1 2 3 4 5
P a ir 3- A B 1 2 3 4 5
P a ir 4- A B 1 2 3 4 5
P a ir 5- A B I 2 3 4 5
P a ir 6- A B 1 2 3 4 5
P a ir 7- A B 1 2 3 4 5
P a ir 8- A B 1 2 3 4 5
P a ir 9- A B I 2 3 4 5
P a ir 10- A B 1 2 3 4 5
P a ir 11- A B 1 2 3 4 5
P a ir 12- A B I 2 3 4 5
C o m m e n ts : (More space iv<zsr given in the original document fo r comments. ]

P le a s e tu rn in th is f o r m to th e r e s e a r c h e r a s y o u le a v e .
Thank you fo r completing this research project!
122
APPENDIX D
Average Spectrum Data for Tallis Example
Tallis - " If Ye Love Me "
Difference in
Amplitude
Frequency Relative Amplitude Relative Amplitude Between Resonant
(Hz) resonant (dB) Non-resonant (dB) and Non-Resonant
________________________________________________ Versions (dB)
10.8 -36.7 -36.0 -0.6

16.1 -44.4 -43.1 -1.3
21.5 -47.9 -47.0 -0.9
26.9 -52.1 -51.6 -0.5
32.3 -56.5 -55.9 -0.6
37.7 -61.0 -59.6 -1.4
43.1 -65.0 -64.0 -1.0
48.4 -68.6 -68.6 0.0
53.8 -70.5 -70.0 -0.5
59.2 -68.6 -68.2 -0.5
64.6 -67.2 -67.4 0.2
70.0 -68.5 -69.7 1.2
75.4 -73.1 -73.3 0.2
80.7 -75.6 -75.3 -0.4
86.1 -78.0 -78.4 0.3
91.5 -76.8 -77.7 0.9
96.9 -71.7 -73.1 1.3
102.3 -63.9 -64.5 0.7
107.7 -54.7 -56.0 1.3
113.0 -47.8 -49.6 1.7
118.4 -46.8 -47.5 0.6
123.8 -47.3 -46.3 -1.0
129.2 -44.2 -43.6 -0.5
134.6 -45.8 -45.8 0.0
123
140.0 -47.9 -45.8 -2.1
145.3 -45.4 -44.0 -1.4
150.7 -47.3 -45.9 -1.4
156.1 -50.7 -50.0 -0.7
161.5 -48.7 -48.4 -0.3
166.9 -42.2 -40.7 -1.6
172.3 -36.1 -36.1 0.0
177.6 -35.7 -37.3 1.7
183.0 -41.7 -43.9 2.1
188.4 -50.8 -52.7 1.8
193.8 -57.6 -59.6 2.0
199.2 -57.4 -60.1 2.7
204.6 -54.4 -55.2 0.8
209.9 -52.8 -51.1 -1.7
215.3 -50.1 -50.1 0.0
220.7 -49.3 -49.4 0.1
226.1 -51.1 -49.0 -2.1
231.5 -51.5 -50.0 -1.4
236.9 -48.9 -49.3 0.4
242.2 -45.9 -47.1 1.3
247.6 -43.1 -43.9 0.8
253.0 -39.8 -41.1 1.3
258.4 -38.4 -39.6 1.1
263.8 -39.5 -38.6 -0.9
269.2 -42.1 -39.2 -2.9
274.5 -45.2 -41.1 -4.1
279.9 -45.0 -43.3 -1.7
285.3 -42.9 -44.9 2.1
290.7 -41.6 -44.5 2.9
296.1 -41.5 -42.4 0.9
301.5 -43.3 -42.6 -0.7
306.8 -44.5 -45.2 0.7
312.2 -44.1 -48.1 4.0
317.6 -42.1 -46.8 4.7
323.0 -39.5 -41.7 2.2
328.4 -37.0 -38.4 1.3
333.8 -35.0 -37.2 2.2
339.1 -33.3 -35.7 2.4
344.5 -31.3 -33.4 2.1
349.9 -30.4 -32.3 1.9
355.3 -30.6 -33.0 2.4
360.7 -32.4 -35.7 3.4
366.1 -34.5 -39.1 4.6
371.4 -37.8 -42.0 4.2
376.8 -40.6 -43.5 3.0
382.2 -41.6 -42.3 0.7
1 24
387.6 -41.9 -40.4 -1.5
393.0 -41.6 -40.9 -0.7
398.4 -41.1 -42.7 1.5
403.7 -40.9 -42.8 1.9
409.1 -39.9 -42.2 2.4
414.5 -38.0 -43.1 5.1
419.9 -37.6 -41.7 4.1
425.3 -38.8 -39.0 0.2
430.7 -38.8 -38.2 -0.6
436.0 -38.1 -38.5 0.4
441.4 -38.1 -38.6 0.5
446.8 -38.0 -38.3 0.2
452.2 -36.6 -36.7 0.1
457.6 -37.1 -37.1 0.0
463.0 -39.6 -39.4 -0.2
468.3 -41.9 -40.6 -1.3
473.7 -43.0 -40.4 -2.6
479.1 -41.2 -39.6 -1.6
484.5 -40.1 -39.4 -0.7
489.9 -41.5 -41.6 0.1
495.3 -42.9 -45.2 2.2
500.6 -40.2 -45.9 5.7
506.0 -36.9 -44.6 7.7
511.4 -35.4 -42.9 7.5
516.8 -34.9 -41.3 6.4
522.2 -34.4 -40.7 6.3
527.6 -34.2 -40.5 6.3
532.9 -35.2 -40.3 5.1
538.3 -37.8 -42.3 4.5
543.7 -41.0 -46.0 5.0
549.1 -43.0 -47.2 4.2
554.5 -43.9 -47.1 3.2
559.9 -42.7 -47.7 5.0
565.2 -39.3 -48.9 9.6
570.6 -37.2 -48.0 10.7
576.0 -37.2 -46.0 8.8
581.4 -37.2 -44.6 7.4
586.8 -36.0 -44.2 8.2
592.2 -34.5 -44.4 9.9
597.5 -36.2 -45.3 9.1
602.9 -39.7 -46.3 6.6
608.3 -42.1 -47.1 5.0
613.7 -42.5 -48.6 6.0
619.1 -42.8 -51.4 8.6
624.5 -44.2 -54.4 10.1
629.8 -45.8 -55.2 9.5
125
635.2 -45.7 -54.6 8.9
640.6 -42.7 -51.3 8.6
646.0 -40.2 -46.9 6.7
651.4 -39.1 -45.2 6.1
656.8 -38.9 -44.5 5.7
662.1 -38.3 -43.3 5.1
667.5 -38.0 -43.6 5.6
672.9 -39.2 -43.6 4.4
678.3 -39.7 -42.9 3.2
683.7 -39.5 -42.1 2.6
689.1 -39.9 -41.2 1.3
694.4 -41.1 -41.3 0.2
699.8 -42.4 -41.7 -0.7
705.2 -42.6 -42.0 -0.6
710.6 -42.2 -43.3 1.0
716.0 -42.2 -44.3 2.1
721.4 -42.3 -44.7 2.4
726.7 -42.3 -45.6 3.3
732.1 -42.1 -46.8 4.7
737.5 -42.8 -49.0 6.2
742.9 -45.3 -51.7 6.4
748.3 -46.2 -52.8 6.6
753.7 -43.5 -51.8 8.3
759.0 -41.1 -51.8 10.7
764.4 -40.5 -52.3 11.8
769.8 -41.3 -52.2 10.9
775.2 -41.0 -51.6 10.6
780.6 -40.6 -50.0 9.4
786.0 -39.8 -48.6 8.8
791.3 -39.6 -48.7 9.1
796.7 -40.0 -49.6 9.6
802.1 -39.7 -50.7 11.0
807.5 -40.6 -51.1 10.6
812.9 -42.0 -51.5 9.5
818.3 -42.4 -52.7 10.2
823.6 -43.1 -52.7 9.5
829.0 -43.8 -52.1 8.3
834.4 -43.6 -52.1 8.5
839.8 -43.4 -52.5 9.1
845.2 -43.6 -53.5 9.9
850.6 -42.9 -54.2 11.3
855.9 -42.0 -54.8 12.8
861.3 -41.2 -55.3 14.1
866.7 -40.2 -54.9 14.6
872.1 -39.9 -53.6 13.6
877.5 -41.1 -54.2 13.2
126
882.9 -43.0 -55.2 12.2
888.2 -42.2 -54.6 12.3
893.6 -42.9 -55.2 12.3
899.0 -43.9 -54.7 10.8
904.4 -44.7 -54.5 9.8
909.8 -46.5 -55.2 8.7
915.2 -48.0 -55.5 7.5
920.5 -50.1 -55.4 5.4
925.9 -50.3 -56.5 6.2
931.3 -50.3 -56.6 6.3
936.7 -51.3 -56.8 5.5
942.1 -52.3 -58.3 5.9
947.5 -51.9 -58.3 6.4
952.8 -51.8 -56.7 4.9
958.2 -50.9 -56.2 5.3
963.6 -48.7 -56.2 7.5
969.0 -47.2 -55.7 8.5
974.4 -46.5 -55.0 8.5
979.8 -46.8 -54.1 7.3
985.1 -46.5 -54.4 7.9
990.5 -46.0 -51.6 5.6
995.9 -45.4 -49.1 3.7
1001.3 -44.4 -50.7 6.3
1006.7 -42.6 -51.0 8.4
1012.1 -41.0 -50.8 9.8
1017.4 -40.8 -50.4 9.6
1022.8 -40.8 -49.7 8.9
1028.2 -41.1 -48.9 7.8
1033.6 -42.2 -47.9 5.7
1039.0 -42.4 -47.2 4.8
1044.4 -42.2 -46.9 4.7
1049.7 -42.3 -46.5 4.3
1055.1 -41.5 -45.7 4.2
1060.5 -40.7 -44.6 3.9
1065.9 -40.9 -45.1 4.2
1071.3 -40.7 -46.1 5.4
1076.7 -40.6 -47.4 6.7
1082.0 -41.1 -49.2 8.1
1087.4 -41.0 -52.1 11.1
1092.8 -40.5 -53.9 13.4
1098.2 -40.7 -55.3 14.6
1103.6 -41.4 -56.4 15.1
1109.0 -42.8 -56.1 13.3
1114.3 -45.1 -56.5 11.4
1119.7 -45.5 -57.1 11.6
1125.1 -45.0 -55.7 10.8
127
1130.5 -45.4 -54.9 9.5
1135.9 -44.9 -51.3 6.4
1141.3 -45.4 -49.1 3.6
1146.6 -45.1 -49.4 4.3
1152.0 -43.6 -50.3 6.7
1157.4 -44.8 -50.2 5.4
1162.8 -45.3 -49.5 4.2
1168.2 -44.9 -48.5 3.6
1173.6 -44.2 -48.0 3.9
1178.9 -43.3 -48.8 5.6
1184.3 -42.9 -49.5 6.6
1189.7 -42.4 -49.9 7.5
1195.1 -43.2 -50.5 7.4
1200.5 -44.4 -50.6 6.2
1205.9 -45.9 -50.2 4.2
1211.2 -47.1 -50.0 2.9
1216.6 -47.6 -50.5 2.9
1222.0 -48.2 -51.0 2.8
1227.4 -48.3 -51.8 3.5
1232.8 -47.6 -52.6 4.9
1238.2 -46.8 -54.0 7.2
1243.5 -45.4 -55.7 10.3
1248.9 -45.3 -57.5 12.2
1254.3 -43.8 -58.2 14.4
1259.7 -42.0 -57.7 15.7
1265.1 -41.3 -57.0 15.7
1270.5 -41.9 -56.2 14.3
1275.8 -42.7 -54.9 12.2
1281.2 -43.6 -53.6 10.0
1286.6 -43.7 -53.2 9.5
1292.0 -42.5 -52.8 10.3
1297.4 -41.7 -52.7 11.0
1302.8 -41.8 -52.8 11.1
1308.1 -42.9 -52.0 9.1
1313.5 -43.5 -51.2 7.7
1318.9 -42.1 -50.5 8.4
1324.3 -42.5 -50.3 7.8
1329.7 -43.4 -50.4 7.0
1335.1 -42.2 -50.7 8.5
1340.4 -41.7 -51.0 9.3
1345.8 -42.7 -52.1 9.5
1351.2 -43.9 -52.2 8.3
1356.6 -44.1 -51.5 7.3
1362.0 -44.4 -53.0 8.5
1367.4 -44.2 -52.7 8.6
1372.7 -43.5 -53.2 9.7
128
1378.1 -43.7 -53.9 10.2
1383.5 -45.7 -52.4 6.6
1388.9 -47.0 -53.8 6.8
1394.3 -46.3 -54.5 8.1
1399.7 -44.9 -53.3 8.4
1405.0 -43.6 -52.7 9.2
1410.4 -42.7 -53.3 10.5
1415.8 -43.0 -53.2 10.3
1421.2 -43.3 -54.1 10.8
1426.6 -44.3 -54.3 10.0
1432.0 -44.6 -54.7 10.2
1437.3 -44.8 -53.5 8.7
1442.7 -45.8 -53.2 7.5
1448.1 -45.8 -54.1 8.3
1453.5 -45.7 -54.2 8.4
1458.9 -44.8 -54.4 9.6
1464.3 -44.7 -54.6 9.9
1469.6 -45.9 -55.4 9.4
1475.0 -49.6 -56.2 6.6
1480.4 -51.3 -57.6 6.3
1485.8 -50.2 -59.9 9.7
1491.2 -49.5 -62.5 13.0
1496.6 -49.6 -64.2 14.6
1501.9 -49.8 -64.3 14.5
1507.3 -49.9 -63.1 13.1
1512.7 -50.3 -63.2 12.9
1518.1 -50.6 -64.6 14.0
1523.5 -49.4 -65.0 15.6
1528.9 -48.0 -63.3 15.2
1534.2 -47.3 -63.4 16.0
1539.6 -47.6 -64.2 16.5
1545.0 -48.1 -64.4 16.4
1550.4 -49.1 -62.8 13.7
1555.8 -50.3 -60.6 10.3
1561.2 -50.2 -59.3 9.0
1566.5 -48.5 -59.1 10.6
1571.9 -48.7 -60.4 11.7
1577.3 -50.0 -61.7 11.7
1582.7 -48.6 -61.8 13.2
1588.1 -48.7 -61.5 12.9
1593.5 -49.2 -63.1 13.8
1598.8 -50.3 -63.6 13.3
1604.2 -51.1 -63.1 12.0
1609.6 -51.0 -61.6 10.6
1615.0 -50.1 -61.2 11.0
1620.4 -50.0 -61.0 10.9
129
1625.8 -52.0 -61.8 9.9
1631.1 -52.4 -62.7 10.3
1636.5 -52.4 -62.8 10.4
1641.9 -52.3 -62.5 10.2
1647.3 -51.7 -61.3 9.6
1652.7 -51.4 -58.4 7.0
1658.1 -51.8 -57.5 5.7
1663.4 -51.0 -59.0 8.0
1668.8 -50.1 -62.1 12.0
1674.2 -48.0 -62.1 14.2
1679.6 -48.9 -60.6 11.7
1685.0 -50.3 -59.5 9.1
1690.4 -49.4 -58.5 9.0
1695.7 -48.7 -57.7 9.0
1701.1 -48.8 -57.6 8.8
1706.5 -48.9 -58.1 9.3
1711.9 -48.7 -56.9 8.2
1717.3 -49.5 -56.1 6.6
1722.7 -49.1 -57.0 7.8
1728.0 -49.2 -57.8 8.6
1733.4 -49.7 -56.3 6.6
1738.8 -50.3 -56.2 5.8
1744.2 -48.2 -57.4 9.3
1749.6 -46.8 -57.2 10.5
1755.0 -46.8 -55.5 8.7
1760.3 -46.8 -55.3 8.5
1765.7 -47.0 -55.5 8.5
1771.1 -47.3 -54.8 7.5
1776.5 -47.4 -52.7 5.2
1781.9 -48.2 -53.1 4.9
1787.3 -49.5 -55.1 5.6
1792.6 -50.3 -56.5 6.1
1798.0 -49.2 -57.0 7.8
1803.4 -49.3 -57.0 7.6
1808.8 -51.0 -56.4 5.3
1814.2 -52.0 -56.5 4.6
1819.6 -51.9 -57.3 5.4
1824.9 -52.2 -57.0 4.8
1830.3 -53.6 -57.4 3.9
1835.7 -53.9 -57.3 3.4
1841.1 -54.1 -57.4 3.3
1846.5 -53.7 -58.0 4.3
1851.9 -52.7 -58.1 5.5
1857.2 -51.9 -58.3 6.4
1862.6 -51.9 -59.4 7.5
1868.0 -51.3 -60.2 8.9
1 30
1873.4 -51.2 -60.0 8.8
1878.8 -51.3 -60.2 9.0
1884.2 -51.8 -60.7 8.9
1889.5 -52.1 -62.2 10.0
1894.9 -52.8 -61.8 9.0
1900.3 -54.0 -61.0 7.0
1905.7 -54.3 -62.1 7.8
1911.1 -54.0 -63.7 9.8
1916.5 -53.1 -63.3 10.2
1921.8 -51.5 -62.5 11.1
1927.2 -49.9 -62.7 12.8
1932.6 -50.9 -62.9 12.0
1938.0 -52.0 -62.7 10.7
1943.4 -52.9 -62.2 9.3
1948.8 -53.1 -62.6 9.5
1954.1 -52.5 -64.0 11.5
1959.5 -53.0 -64.7 11.6
1964.9 -53.9 -64.9 11.0
1970.3 -54.3 -65.6 11.3
1975.7 -54.3 -66.3 12.0
1981.1 -55.3 -65.4 10.1
1986.4 -56.5 -64.2 7.8
1991.8 -58.0 -64.5 6.5
1997.2 -58.7 -64.5 5.8
2002.6 -58.0 -61.5 3.5
2008.0 -57.7 -60.2 2.5
2013.4 -57.3 -60.3 3.0
2018.7 -56.8 -60.4 3.7
2024.1 -56.6 -61.2 4.6
2029.5 -56.8 -61.5 4.7
2034.9 -57.2 -60.5 3.2
2040.3 -56.5 -59.9 3.4
2045.7 -55.5 -60.9 5.4
2051.0 -55.3 -61.6 6.3
2056.4 -56.0 -61.9 5.8
2061.8 -56.3 -61.4 5.1
2067.2 -56.8 -60.5 3.7
2072.6 -56.0 -60.3 4.3
2078.0 -54.6 -61.0 6.4
2083.3 -53.7 -58.8 5.0
2088.7 -54.2 -58.1 3.9
2094.1 -54.2 -58.6 4.4
2099.5 -53.2 -58.8 5.7
2104.9 -52.9 -58.7 5.8
2110.3 -53.2 -57.7 4.5
2115.6 -53.2 -57.4 4.2
131
2121.0 -52.2 -56.5 4.3
2126.4 -52.4 -56.7 4.3
2131.8 -52.6 -58.1 5.5
2137.2 -52.3 -58.3 6.0
2142.6 -52.3 -58.0 5.7
2147.9 -52.6 -58.5 5.9
2153.3 -52.7 -60.5 7.8
2158.7 -52.6 -61.9 9.3
2164.1 -52.6 -62.1 9.5
2169.5 -52.8 -63.2 10.4
2174.9 -52.3 -63.4 11.2
2180.2 -51.6 -63.2 11.6
2185.6 -51.6 -63.5 11.9
2191.0 -51.4 -63.4 12.0
2196.4 -52.0 -63.6 11.6
2201.8 -52.7 -64.3 11.7
2207.2 -52.5 -64.3 11.8
2212.5 -52.9 -65.4 12.5
2217.9 -53.8 -66.1 12.3
2223.3 -53.9 -65.3 11.4
2228.7 -53.6 -64.7 11.0
2234.1 -53.2 -64.3 11.1
2239.5 -52.6 -63.7 11.1
2244.8 -53.2 -62.8 9.6
2250.2 -53.7 -62.1 8.4
2255.6 -54.1 -62.0 7.8
2261.0 -54.5 -62.4 7.9
2266.4 -54.4 -62.0 7.5
2271.8 -53.2 -62.1 8.9
2277.1 -52.2 -62.5 10.3
2282.5 -51.8 -63.1 11.3
2287.9 -51.5 -62.4 10.9
2293.3 -50.8 -61.5 10.7
2298.7 -51.1 -61.7 10.6
2304.1 -51.5 -62.8 11.3
2309.4 -51.8 -63.4 11.6
2314.8 -52.5 -63.8 11.3
2320.2 -52.3 -64.2 12.0
2325.6 -52.3 -64.5 12.2
2331.0 -52.7 -64.4 11.6
2336.4 -53.1 -64.2 11.2
2341.7 -53.4 -64.5 11.1
2347.1 -53.2 -64.1 10.9
2352.5 -53.6 -64.2 10.6
2357.9 -53.6 -64.7 11.1
2363.3 -53.8 -64.4 10.6
1 32
2368.7 -53.7 -64.4 10.8
2374.0 -53.8 -65.1 11.4
2379.4 -54.2 -65.0 10.8
2384.8 -53.4 -64.6 11.2
2390.2 -52.4 -64.7 12.3
2395.6 -52.3 -65.1 12.8
2401.0 -51.9 -65.0 13.1
2406.3 -52.6 -64.9 12.4
2411.7 -52.5 -64.6 12.1
2417.1 -51.9 -64.1 12.2
2422.5 -51.9 -64.6 12.7
2427.9 -50.9 -64.6 13.7
2433.3 -49.9 -64.7 14.8
2438.6 -49.5 -64.5 15.0
2444.0 -49.3 -63.5 14.3
2449.4 -48.6 -62.7 14.1
2454.8 -48.3 -61.9 13.6
2460.2 -48.9 -62.3 13.4
2465.6 -48.9 -61.8 12.9
2470.9 -48.7 -60.3 11.6
2476.3 -48.9 -59.9 11.0
2481.7 -49.4 -59.9 10.5
2487.1 -49.8 -60.9 11.1
2492.5 -49.4 -63.0 13.6
2497.9 -49.8 -63.4 13.6
2503.2 -49.6 -63.5 13.9
2508.6 -49.5 -64.2 14.8
2514.0 -49.7 -64.0 14.4
2519.4 -49.8 -64.2 14.4
2524.8 -50.5 -64.3 13.8
2530.2 -50.7 -64.7 14.0
2535.5 -50.2 -65.9 15.7
2540.9 -49.9 -65.1 15.3
2546.3 -49.4 -64.1 14.7
2551.7 -49.4 -64.5 15.1
2557.1 -49.8 -65.0 15.2
2562.5 -50.3 -64.4 14.1
2567.8 -50.2 -64.0 13.8
2573.2 -50.2 -64.1 13.9
2578.6 -50.5 -64.4 13.9
2584.0 -50.4 -64.2 13.8
2589.4 -49.7 -63.9 14.3
2594.8 -49.4 -63.6 14.2
2600.1 -49.7 -63.0 13.3
2605.5 -50.0 -63.3 13.3
2610.9 -50.4 -64.5 14.0
2616.3 -49.8 -64.6 14.7
2621.7 -49.4 -64.0 14.5
2627.1 -48.4 -63.7 15.4
2632.4 -48.0 -63.8 15.8
2637.8 -48.9 -64.5 15.6
2643.2 -48.5 -65.4 16.9
2648.6 -48.2 -66.0 17.8
2654.0 -48.1 -66.2 18.1
2659.4 -48.4 -65.9 17.5
2664.7 -49.0 -65.9 16.9
2670.1 -49.0 -65.0 16.0
2675.5 -49.0 -63.6 14.6
2680.9 -48.8 -62.6 13.7
2686.3 -49.2 -61.9 12.8
2691.7 -49.4 -61.8 12.4
2697.0 -49.7 -62.2 12.5
2702.4 -50.9 -61.8 10.9
2707.8 -50.5 -61.9 11.4
2713.2 -49.8 -61.5 11.7
2718.6 -49.3 -61.2 11.9
2724.0 -49.2 -62.1 13.0
2729.3 -48.7 -62.6 13.9
2734.7 -49.2 -63.2 14.0
2740.1 -49.7 -64.1 14.5
2745.5 -49.3 -62.6 13.3
2750.9 -49.2 -62.0 12.8
2756.3 -48.8 -62.7 14.0
2761.6 -49.0 -63.2 14.2
2767.0 -49.7 -63.3 13.6
2772.4 -50.0 -64.2 14.2
2777.8 -50.0 -65.7 15.7
2783.2 -50.2 -67.3 17.1
2788.5 -49.8 -65.6 15.8
2793.9 -49.4 -64.7 15.4
2799.3 -49.0 -64.8 15.8
2804.7 -49.4 -65.1 15.7
2810.1 -49.9 -64.1 14.3
2815.5 -48.7 -64.6 15.9
2820.8 -48.6 -64.5 15.9
2826.2 -49.1 -62.8 13.7
2831.6 -50.0 -62.0 11.9
2837.0 -50.8 -61.5 10.8
2842.4 -51.8 -62.0 10.2
2847.8 -52.3 -62.5 10.3
2853.1 -51.9 -63.2 11.3
2858.5 -52.1 -63.3 11.2
2863.9 -53.0 -63.8 10.8
2869.3 -52.4 -64.8 12.4
2874.7 -51.7 -64.4 12.8
2880.1 -51.7 -64.4 12.7
2885.4 -52.1 -64.4 12.3
2890.8 -51.8 -64.2 12.3
2896.2 -51.1 -63.5 12.4
2901.6 -50.4 -63.1 12.7
2907.0 -49.1 -63.2 14.1
2912.4 -48.6 -62.8 14.3
2917.7 -48.1 -61.8 13.7
2923.1 -48.1 -61.5 13.4
2928.5 -48.6 -61.8 13.2
2933.9 -48.3 -62.5 14.2
2939.3 -48.6 -63.3 14.7
2944.7 -49.7 -64.0 14.3
2950.0 -49.7 -64.4 14.7
2955.4 -49.8 -64.0 14.3
2960.8 -49.3 -63.6 14.4
2966.2 -49.7 -64.2 14.4
2971.6 -50.5 -65.7 15.2
2977.0 -50.1 -66.3 16.2
2982.3 -50.4 -65.9 15.4
2987.7 -50.1 -65.4 15.3
2993.1 -50.6 -65.1 14.5
2998.5 -50.9 -65.0 14.1
3003.9 -50.6 -65.2 14.6
3009.3 -50.5 -65.0 14.5
3014.6 -51.0 -65.2 14.2
3020.0 -50.9 -65.2 14.3
3025.4 -51.5 -65.9 14.5
3030.8 -51.9 -66.4 14.6
3036.2 -50.8 -66.4 15.6
3041.6 -50.6 -67.1 16.6
3046.9 -51.4 -68.1 16.7
3052.3 -51.6 -67.9 16.3
3057.7 -51.5 -68.2 16.7
3063.1 -52.2 -67.9 15.7
3068.5 -52.7 -67.2 14.6
3073.9 -52.8 -67.1 14.3
3079.2 -52.9 -67.0 14.1
3084.6 -52.3 -66.7 14.4
3090.0 -52.2 -66.4 14.2
3095.4 -52.5 -66.2 13.7
3100.8 -52.9 -65.8 12.9
3106.2 -53.0 -65.5 12.5
135
3111.5 -53.0 -65.9 12.9
3116.9 -52.4 -65.1 12.7
3122.3 -53.4 -64.5 11.1
3127.7 -54.1 -64.8 10.8
3133.1 -54.3 -64.6 10.4
3138.5 -53.7 -64.8 11.0
3143.8 -53.3 -64.8 11.5
3149.2 -53.8 -64.5 10.7
3154.6 -54.2 -64.2 10.0
3160.0 -54.5 -64.4 9.9
3165.4 -54.0 -64.0 9.9
3170.8 -54.2 -63.6 9.4
3176.1 -54.8 -65.1 10.2
3181.5 -54.4 -65.7 11.3
3186.9 -54.4 -65.5 11.1
3192.3 -55.0 -65.9 10.9
3197.7 -54.9 -66.6 11.7
3203.1 -55.0 -67.4 12.4
3208.4 -55.5 -68.6 13.1
3213.8 -55.1 -68.8 13.6
3219.2 -55.3 -68.4 13.1
3224.6 -55.2 -68.5 13.3
3230.0 -56.0 -68.6 12.6
3235.4 -56.3 -68.2 11.9
3240.7 -55.5 -68.5 13.0
3246.1 -55.9 -69.4 13.5
3251.5 -56.9 -69.4 12.5
3256.9 -56.8 -69.7 12.9
3262.3 -56.6 -70.0 13.4
3267.7 -57.2 -70.1 12.9
3273.0 -57.2 -69.7 12.5
3278.4 -57.0 -69.4 12.3
3283.8 -56.7 -69.4 12.7
3289.2 -56.8 -69.4 12.6
3294.6 -57.5 -70.6 13.1
3300.0 -57.4 -70.9 13.5
3305.3 -57.8 -69.8 12.0
3310.7 -57.4 -68.9 11.5
3316.1 -56.5 -69.7 13.2
3321.5 -57.0 -70.0 13.0
3326.9 -57.5 -70.3 12.7
3332.3 -56.9 -71.0 14.1
3337.6 -57.2 -70.6 13.4
3343.0 -57.9 -71.1 13.3
3348.4 -57.9 -72.3 14.4
3353.8 -56.9 -72.2 15.3
136
3359.2 -56.9 -72.5 15.6
3364.6 -56.6 -72.7 16.1
3369.9 -56.9 -73.1 16.2
3375.3 -58.2 -72.5 14.3
3380.7 -58.4 -71.4 13.0
3386.1 -57.9 -72.4 14.6
3391.5 -58.1 -73.0 14.9
3396.9 -58.0 -71.1 13.1
3402.2 -57.5 -70.2 12.7
3407.6 -57.2 -70.8 13.6
3413.0 -57.1 -70.8 13.7
3418.4 -57.6 -71.3 13.8
3423.8 -57.4 -73.3 15.9
3429.2 -57.3 -72.5 15.2
3434.5 -56.9 -72.7 15.8
3439.9 -56.7 -72.7 16.0
3445.3 -55.8 -72.8 17.1
3450.7 -54.7 -72.6 17.9
3456.1 -54.5 -72.1 17.6
3461.5 -55.2 -72.3 17.1
3466.8 -56.1 -71.8 15.7
3472.2 -56.7 -71.2 14.5
3477.6 -56.7 -70.7 14.0
3483.0 -57.1 -70.8 13.7
3488.4 -57.7 -71.4 13.7
3493.8 -58.7 -71.5 12.8
3499.1 -58.9 -71.1 12.3
3504.5 -58.8 -70.3 11.5
3509.9 -58.4 -70.0 11.6
3515.3 -57.7 -70.0 12.3
3520.7 -56.9 -70.1 13.2
3526.1 -56.3 -69.9 13.6
3531.4 -56.5 -69.1 12.6
3536.8 -57.7 -68.5 10.8
3542.2 -58.3 -67.9 9.6
3547.6 -58.4 -67.7 9.3
3553.0 -58.1 -67.8 9.7
3558.4 -57.0 -67.5 10.5
3563.7 -56.9 -67.7 10.8
3569.1 -57.7 -68.1 10.3
3574.5 -57.5 -68.8 11.3
3579.9 -56.8 -68.1 11.3
3585.3 -56.5 -67.4 10.8
3590.7 -56.3 -68.0 11.8
3596.0 -55.8 -67.4 11.6
3601.4 -54.9 -67.2 12.3
137
3606.8 -55.2 -67.3 12.1
3612.2 -55.0 -68.1 13.1
3617.6 -54.8 -69.0 14.2
3623.0 -54.3 -69.1 14.7
3628.3 -53.8 -70.1 16.3
3633.7 -54.3 -69.3 15.0
3639.1 -54.2 -68.8 14.6
3644.5 -53.5 -68.1 14.7
3649.9 -54.2 -68.2 13.9
3655.3 -54.4 -68.7 14.3
3660.6 -54.2 -67.7 13.6
3666.0 -55.1 -67.6 12.5
3671.4 -54.6 -68.2 13.6
3676.8 -54.2 -68.2 14.1
3682.2 -55.0 -67.7 12.8
3687.6 -55.8 -68.8 13.1
3692.9 -55.6 -69.9 14.3
3698.3 -55.1 -70.5 15.4
3703.7 -55.6 -71.8 16.2
3709.1 -56.1 -71.2 15.1
3714.5 -55.6 -70.4 14.8
3719.9 -55.4 -70.6 15.2
3725.2 -55.5 -70.7 15.2
3730.6 -55.6 -70.9 15.3
3736.0 -55.6 -71.3 15.6
3741.4 -55.5 -71.5 16.0
3746.8 -56.0 -72.0 16.0
3752.2 -56.2 -71.9 15.6
3757.5 -56.5 -71.0 14.5
3762.9 -56.6 -70.3 13.7
3768.3 -56.0 -69.4 13.3
3773.7 -56.0 -69.0 13.0
3779.1 -55.5 -69.3 13.8
3784.5 -55.3 -70.4 15.0
3789.8 -55.3 -69.9 14.7
3795.2 -55.6 -69.5 13.9
3800.6 -55.9 -68.6 12.6
3806.0 -55.9 -68.8 12.9
3811.4 -55.5 -68.3 12.7
3816.8 -55.6 -67.6 12.0
3822.1 -55.4 -68.0 12.6
3827.5 -55.9 -68.1 12.2
3832.9 -56.3 -68.0 11.7
3838.3 -55.6 -67.6 11.9
3843.7 -55.7 -67.4 11.7
3849.1 -55.7 -66.7 11.0
138
3854.4 -55.1 -65.4 10.3
3859.8 -55.4 -65.7 10.3
3865.2 -56.2 -66.4 10.2
3870.6 -55.3 -66.4 11.1
3876.0 -54.7 -65.7 11.0
3881.4 -54.9 -64.4 9.6
3886.7 -54.7 -64.5 9.7
3892.1 -54.4 -65.3 10.9
3897.5 -54.0 -65.9 11.9
3902.9 -54.0 -65.7 11.7
3908.3 -54.3 -65.3 11.1
3913.7 -54.7 -65.1 10.4
3919.0 -55.3 -64.9 9.6
3924.4 -56.5 -64.5 7.9
3929.8 -56.9 -64.9 8.0
3935.2 -55.8 -65.4 9.5
3940.6 -55.5 -66.2 10.7
3946.0 -56.7 -67.1 10.5
3951.3 -57.2 -67.5 10.3
3956.7 -56.1 -67.6 11.5
3962.1 -55.4 -67.6 12.2
3967.5 -56.0 -68.0 12.0
3972.9 -56.1 -68.4 12.4
3978.3 -56.3 -68.8 12.5
3983.6 -56.1 -70.2 14.1
3989.0 -56.2 -71.6 15.3
3994.4 -56.5 -71.9 15.4
3999.8 -56.4 -72.2 15.9
4005.2 -56.7 -73.0 16.3
4010.6 -57.9 -72.9 15.0
4015.9 -58.4 -72.9 14.5
4021.3 -58.8 -73.5 14.7
4026.7 -59.1 -74.1 15.0
4032.1 -58.2 -75.5 17.4
4037.5 -58.3 -76.4 18.1
4042.9 -58.6 -75.8 17.2
4048.2 -59.0 -74.7 15.6
4053.6 -59.8 -74.0 14.2
4059.0 -60.7 -74.4 13.8
4064.4 -61.3 -75.5 14.2
4069.8 -61.7 -75.5 13.8
4075.2 -61.1 -75.8 14.7
4080.5 -61.0 -76.6 15.6
4085.9 -61.7 -76.3 14.6
4091.3 -61.0 -76.4 15.4
4096.7 -60.6 -77.8 17.2
139
4102.1 -60.2 -78.0 17.8
4107.5 -60.3 -77.5 17.2
4112.8 -61.3 -77.6 16.2
4118.2 -62.6 -77.4 14.9
4123.6 -62.9 -77.8 14.9
4129.0 -62.7 -78.0 15.3
4134.4 -62.5 -77.9 15.4
4139.8 -63.1 -77.4 14.3
4145.1 -63.3 -77.7 14.4
4150.5 -63.5 -77.2 13.7
4155.9 -62.4 -77.4 14.9
4161.3 -62.1 -78.2 16.1
4166.7 -63.3 -78.2 14.9
4172.1 -63.8 -78.4 14.5
4177.4 -63.6 -76.9 13.3
4182.8 -63.8 -76.0 12.3
4188.2 -63.4 -76.5 13.2
4193.6 -63.2 -76.2 13.0
4199.0 -63.9 -75.9 12.0
4204.4 -64.1 -75.9 11.8
4209.7 -63.9 -76.2 12.3
4215.1 -64.1 -76.5 12.4
4220.5 -64.9 -76.6 11.7
4225.9 -65.0 -75.8 10.8
4231.3 -64.5 -76.4 12.0
4236.7 -65.4 -77.1 11.7
4242.0 -66.5 -76.9 10.4
4247.4 -66.8 -77.7 10.9
4252.8 -66.5 -78.7 12.3
4258.2 -66.8 -78.5 11.8
4263.6 -67.9 -78.3 10.4
4269.0 -68.4 -78.3 9.9
4274.3 -67.9 -78.1 10.2
4279.7 -67.9 -78.2 10.3
4285.1 -68.1 -78.0 9.9
4290.5 -68.4 -79.0 10.5
4295.9 -68.5 -78.0 9.6
4301.3 -68.5 -76.4 7.9
4306.6 -68.6 -75.8 7.2
4312.0 -68.9 -76.1 7.2
4317.4 -68.6 -77.9 9.3
4322.8 -68.2 -78.7 10.5
4328.2 -68.5 -78.2 9.6
4333.6 -68.6 -78.1 9.5
4338.9 -67.8 -79.0 11.2
4344.3 -67.3 -79.7 12.4
140
4349.7 -67.2 -79.7 12.5
4355.1 -66.5 -80.0 13.5
4360.5 -66.3 -81.1 14.8
4365.9 -66.9 -81.5 14.6
4371.2 -67.6 -82.0 14.4
4376.6 -68.0 -81.8 13.8
4382.0 -67.5 -80.7 13.2
4387.4 -67.3 -80.7 13.4
4392.8 -67.5 -81.2 13.7
4398.2 -67.8 -81.8 13.9
4403.5 -68.0 -82.4 14.4
4408.9 -67.8 -82.0 14.3
4414.3 -68.1 -81.6 13.5
4419.7 -68.4 -81.4 13.0
4425.1 -68.7 -80.8 12.1
4430.5 -68.9 -81.8 12.9
4435.8 -68.8 -83.0 14.2
4441.2 -69.4 -82.4 13.1
4446.6 -69.7 -82.1 12.4
4452.0 -70.2 -81.8 11.5
4457.4 -70.8 -82.9 12.1
4462.8 -71.1 -83.1 12.0
4468.1 -71.3 -82.4 11.1
4473.5 -71.8 -81.4 9.7
4478.9 -71.6 -81.5 9.8
4484.3 -71.9 -81.4 9.5
4489.7 -71.2 -81.8 10.6
4495.1 -71.3 -81.5 10.2
4500.4 -71.7 -81.7 10.1
4505.8 -72.0 -81.8 9.9
4511.2 -72.4 -81.9 9.4
4516.6 -72.0 -82.4 10.4
4522.0 -71.4 -83.1 11.7
4527.4 -71.9 -82.4 10.5
4532.7 -70.9 -82.2 11.2
4538.1 -70.6 -82.6 12.1
4543.5 -70.8 -82.2 11.3
4548.9 -70.7 -82.3 11.7
4554.3 -71.3 -82.8 11.4
4559.7 -71.4 -82.7 11.3
4565.0 -70.5 -83.3 12.7
4570.4 -71.0 -83.7 12.7
4575.8 -70.6 -83.9 13.3
4581.2 -70.5 -84.0 13.4
4586.6 -70.6 -83.2 12.7
4592.0 -70.6 -83.8 13.1
141
4597.3 -71.4 -84.2 12.8
4602.7 -71.6 -83.6 11.9
4608.1 -71.5 -83.2 11.7
4613.5 -71.7 -84.4 12.7
4618.9 -71.4 -85.2 13.8
4624.3 -71.1 -85.1 14.0
4629.6 -71.4 -84.6 13.2
4635.0 -72.2 -85.7 13.6
4640.4 -71.6 -86.0 14.3
4645.8 -71.7 -85.3 13.5
4651.2 -73.0 -84.5 11.5
4656.6 -72.6 -85.0 12.4
4661.9 -72.3 -85.4 13.1
4667.3 -72.9 -85.4 12.5
4672.7 -74.2 -85.7 11.5
4678.1 -73.2 -85.8 12.6
4683.5 -72.6 -85.6 13.1
4688.9 -73.1 -84.9 11.8
4694.2 -74.6 -84.9 10.3
4699.6 -73.9 -85.8 11.9
4705.0 -73.4 -86.3 12.9
4710.4 -73.8 -86.8 13.1
4715.8 -74.0 -87.8 13.8
4721.2 -73.6 -87.9 14.3
4726.5 -73.2 -87.2 14.1
4731.9 -73.2 -87.4 14.1
4737.3 -73.7 -87.5 13.8
4742.7 -73.8 -87.5 13.7
4748.1 -74.1 -87.1 13.0
4753.5 -73.9 -86.3 12.4
4758.8 -74.0 -86.6 12.6
4764.2 -74.4 -86.2 11.7
4769.6 -74.4 -86.0 11.6
4775.0 -74.0 -86.7 12.7
4780.4 -73.8 -86.6 12.8
4785.8 -73.6 -85.7 12.1
4791.1 -73.0 -85.6 12.6
4796.5 -72.7 -87.4 14.7
4801.9 -73.3 -87.6 14.3
4807.3 -73.1 -87.3 14.2
4812.7 -73.2 -87.8 14.6
4818.1 -73.7 -87.5 13.7
4823.4 -73.7 -85.8 12.1
4828.8 -73.9 -85.0 11.1
4834.2 -74.2 -86.5 12.3
4839.6 -74.6 -87.3 12.6
142
4845.0 -74.7 -86.3 11.6
4850.4 -74.7 -85.9 11.1
4855.7 -75.6 -86.2 10.7
4861.1 -75.9 -86.7 10.8
4866.5 -76.0 -87.7 11.7
4871.9 -76.8 -87.3 10.5
4877.3 -76.9 -85.6 8.7
4882.7 -75.4 -85.7 10.3
4888.0 -75.4 -86.2 10.8
4893.4 -75.8 -86.7 10.8
4898.8 -75.2 -87.8 12.6
4904.2 -74.1 -87.7 13.6
4909.6 -74.4 -85.9 11.5
4915.0 -74.3 -85.4 11.1
4920.3 -73.7 -86.4 12.7
4925.7 -72.9 -86.0 13.1
4931.1 -72.2 -85.1 13.0
4936.5 -72.6 -85.6 13.0
4941.9 -73.9 -85.5 11.6
4947.3 -75.4 -85.4 10.0
4952.6 -75.4 -84.7 9.3
4958.0 -75.9 -84.2 8.4
4963.4 -76.7 -84.4 7.8
4968.8 -76.4 -84.8 8.4
4974.2 -76.8 -84.7 7.8
4979.6 -76.2 -84.2 8.0
4984.9 -76.9 -84.7 7.8
4990.3 -76.8 -84.5 7.7
4995.7 -76.1 -84.3 8.3
5001.1 -75.7 -85.4 9.7
5006.5 -75.0 -85.8 10.8
5011.9 -74.9 -84.7 9.8
5017.2 -75.4 -84.8 9.4
5022.6 -74.5 -84.8 10.3
5028.0 -73.5 -84.3 10.8
5033.4 -71.7 -84.2 12.5
5038.8 -71.5 -84.4 12.9
5044.2 -71.3 -84.0 12.7
5049.5 -72.0 -84.0 12.0
5054.9 -72.8 -84.4 11.7
5060.3 -71.9 -84.5 12.6
5065.7 -71.2 -84.4 13.2
5071.1 -71.8 -84.4 12.6
5076.5 -73.0 -84.4 11.3
143
APPENDIX E
Average Spectrum Data for Gastoldi Example
Gastoldi - "Adoramus (e, Christe ”
Difference in
Amplitude
Frequency Relative Amplitude Relative Amplitude Between Resonant
(Hz) Resonance (dB) Non-Resonance (dB) and Non-Resonant
___________________________________________________ Versions (dB)
10.8 -36.5 -36.1 -0.4

16.1 -43.3 -43.1 -0.3
21.5 -47.5 -47.0 -0.6
26.9 -51.3 -51.7 0.3
32.3 -55.3 -55.7 0.4
37.7 -59.0 -58.4 -0.6
43.1 -62.0 -62.3 0.2
48.4 -64.3 -65.9 1.6
53.8 -65.6 -67.8 2.2
59.2 -65.5 -66.3 0.8
64.6 -65.7 -65.5 -0.3
70.0 -66.9 -67.4 0.5
75.4 -68.6 -70.5 1.9
80.7 -68.7 -71.5 2.8
86.1 -69.3 -73.0 3.7
91.5 -68.6 -74.5 5.9
96.9 -64.9 -67.5 2.6
102.3 -55.3 -55.4 0.1
107.7 -49.6 -50.9 1.3
113.0 -50.4 -54.0 3.6
118.4 -56.9 -62.3 5.5
123.8 -63.8 -69.8 6.1
1 44
129.2 -62.5 -71.7 9.2
134.6 -57.5 -67.4 9.9
140.0 -53.6 -62.6 9.0
145.3 -52.4 -58.6 6.3
150.7 -51.1 -53.9 2.8
156.1 -43.4 -46.6 3.2
161.5 -38.8 -40.0 1.2
166.9 -39.6 -38.9 -0.7
172.3 -39.4 -41.0 1.6
177.6 -40.6 -43.4 2.8
183.0 -47.9 -50.8 2.8
188.4 -59.4 -60.1 0.7
193.8 -60.9 -58.5 -2.4
199.2 -55.5 -53.7 -1.7
204.6 -50.2 -49.4 -0.7
209.9 -46.4 -46.7 0.3
215.3 -45.5 -45.0 -0.5
220.7 -47.5 -45.5 -2.0
226.1 -49.7 -48.5 -1.2
231.5 -48.7 -50.1 1.4
236.9 -45.2 -47.1 1.9
242.2 -43.2 -43.7 0.6
247.6 -43.6 -41.8 -1.8
253.0 -44.4 -42.2 -2.1
258.4 -45.2 -43.4 -1.8
263.8 -45.4 -44.6 -0.8
269.2 -46.1 -46.9 0.8
274.5 -47.5 -49.1 1.6
279.9 -47.9 -49.2 1.2
285.3 -47.4 -47.0 -0.4
290.7 -45.9 -43.8 -2.1
296.1 -45.0 -43.0 -2.1
301.5 -44.2 -45.2 1.0
306.8 -43.0 -48.9 5.8
312.2 -41.8 -47.4 5.6
317.6 -39.5 -43.3 3.9
323.0 -36.1 -39.2 3.1
328.4 -34.6 -35.7 l.l
333.8 -35.7 -35.8 0.1
339.1 -37.7 -39.2 1.5
344.5 -38.4 -41.2 2.8
349.9 -36.4 -41.9 5.6
355.3 -37.5 -45.6 8.0
360.7 -42.5 -53.2 10.7
366.1 -48.5 -60.5 12.0
371.4 -55.3 -61.7 6.4
145
376.8 -53.4 -56.5 3.0
382.2 -48.0 -49.4 1.4
387.6 -44.6 -43.9 -0.8
393.0 -42.1 -40.4 -1.7
398.4 -39.4 -39.1 -0.3
403.7 -37.7 -38.5 0.8
409.1 -36.8 -37.2 0.3
414.5 -36.2 -36.2 0.0
419.9 -34.9 -35.6 0.7
425.3 -33.6 -35.5 1.8
430.7 -33.7 -34.8 1.2
436.0 -35.2 -34.8 -0.4
441.4 -36.7 -34.6 -2.1
446.8 -36.2 -34.3 -2.0
452.2 -35.7 -34.9 -0.9
457.6 -37.2 -36.2 -1.0
463.0 -39.1 -37.8 -1.4
468.3 -37.9 -37.7 -0.2
473.7 -35.3 -36.3 1.0
479.1 -33.4 -35.4 2.0
484.5 -30.7 -35.0 4.2
489.9 -29.8 -33.9 4.1
495.3 -30.0 -34.5 4.5
500.6 -30.0 -36.1 6.1
506.0 -30.1 -35.5 5.4
511.4 -30.9 -34.8 3.9
516.8 -32.5 -34.3 1.8
522.2 -32.8 -34.3 1.5
527.6 -32.1 -35.2 3.0
532.9 -32.9 -36.4 3.5
538.3 -36.2 -38.4 2.2
543.7 -40.5 -42.0 1.5
549.1 -44.9 -46.5 1.6
554.5 -49.5 -50.6 1.1
559.9 -53.8 -53.4 -0.4
565.2 -55.6 -54.9 -0.6
570.6 -55.9 -55.2 -0.7
576.0 -56.7 -55.1 -1.6
581.4 -57.9 -54.4 -3.5
586.8 -58.0 -54.0 -4.0
592.2 -53.0 -55.5 2.5
597.5 -47.4 -56.8 9.4
602.9 -44.5 -58.0 13.5
608.3 -44.4 -58.4 14.0
613.7 -45.0 -56.7 11.7
619.1 -43.8 -53.9 10.1
146
624.5 -40.8 -50.9 10.1
629.8 -38.1 -47.5 9.4
635.2 -36.8 -45.9 9.1
640.6 -37.0 -45.6 8.6
646.0 -37.7 -44.6 6.9
651.4 -38.0 -43.6 5.5
656.8 -38.8 -43.0 4.2
662.1 -38.3 -42.1 3.8
667.5 -38.7 -42.3 3.6
672.9 -40.3 -42.9 2.5
678.3 -40.1 -43.3 3.2
683.7 -39.8 -44.6 4.8
689.1 -41.1 -46.5 5.3
694.4 -42.6 -49.0 6.5
699.8 -44.0 -50.7 6.7
705.2 -45.1 -51.3 6.2
710.6 -46.0 -52.7 6.7
716.0 -46.1 -53.2 7.1
721.4 -45.0 -51.8 6.8
726.7 -44.4 -51.7 7.3
732.1 -45.1 -51.6 6.5
737.5 -45.8 -51.5 5.7
742.9 -45.6 -52.0 6.4
748.3 -46.4 -51.8 5.4
753.7 -47.4 -51.7 4.2
759.0 -47.1 -51.9 4.7
764.4 -46.4 -52.1 5.7
769.8 -45.9 -52.7 6.8
775.2 -46.8 -53.0 6.2
780.6 -46.9 -52.1 5.2
786.0 -46.2 -51.0 4.9
791.3 -44.8 -50.2 5.5
796.7 -44.2 -50.6 6.4
802.1 -43.3 -51.2 7.9
807.5 -42.0 -50.4 8.3
812.9 -41.5 -48.5 6.9
818.3 -41.9 -47.9 6.0
823.6 -41.9 -48.5 6.6
829.0 -41.6 -49.6 8.0
834.4 -42.7 -50.8 8.2
839.8 -43.1 -52.1 9.0
845.2 -42.1 -52.2 10.1
850.6 -41.7 -52.0 10.3
855.9 -42.5 -51.0 8.5
861.3 -43.9 -49.9 6.0
866.7 -43.9 -50.0 6.1
147
872.1 -44.5 -49.4 4.9
877.5 -43.9 -47.5 3.5
882.9 -42.7 -48.7 6.0
888.2 -43.7 -49.4 5.7
893.6 -46.4 -48.8 2.4
899.0 -48.3 -49.2 0.9
904.4 -47.5 -50.7 3.2
909.8 -46.2 -51.6 5.4
915.2 -46.2 -52.8 6.6
920.5 -47.5 -55.9 8.3
925.9 -50.0 -56.9 6.9
931.3 -50.0 -57.4 7.4
936.7 -48.6 -56.8 8.1
942.1 -46.6 -54.3 7.7
947.5 -44.6 -51.5 6.9
952.8 -43.9 -50.6 6.7
958.2 -43.7 -52.3 8.6
963.6 -42.6 -52.7 10.1
969.0 -42.1 -51.5 9.4
974.4 -41.2 -50.3 9.0
979.8 -40.8 -49.2 8.4
985.1 -41.0 -48.1 7.2
990.5 -41.0 -47.6 6.7
995.9 -40.1 -46.6 6.6
1001.3 -39.7 -46.1 6.4
1006.7 -39.3 -47.0 7.7
1012.1 -39.1 -48.2 9.0
1017.4 -39.3 -48.9 9.5
1022.8 -39.2 -49.7 10.5
1028.2 -39.4 -49.6 10.2
1033.6 -41.3 -49.7 8.4
1039.0 -41.3 -49.8 8.5
1044.4 -39.8 -49.8 10.0
1049.7 -39.6 -50.4 10.8
1055.1 -40.1 -50.9 10.9
1060.5 -40.1 -51.0 10.9
1065.9 -39.6 -51.5 11.9
1071.3 -39.6 -52.2 12.6
1076.7 -40.8 -52.1 11.3
1082.0 -40.2 -52.8 12.6
1087.4 -39.9 -51.9 11.9
1092.8 -39.9 -51.7 11.7
1098.2 -40.6 -53.9 13.3
1103.6 -4U.S -5o .7 15.9
1109.0 -40.9 -58.6 17.6
1114.3 -41.7 -60.1 18.4
148
1119.7 -42.7 -60.8 18.2
1125.1 -44.5 -62.4 17.9
1130.5 -44.3 -62.9 18.6
1135.9 -43.7 -61.5 17.8
1141.3 -44.5 -60.1 15.6
1146.6 -46.9 -60.2 13.2
1152.0 -49.6 -60.0 10.4
1157.4 -51.3 -58.5 7.2
1162.8 -52.6 -57.4 4.8
1168.2 -51.5 -55.9 4.4
1173.6 -49.6 -55.0 5.4
1178.9 -47.6 -54.6 7.0
1184.3 -45.7 -54.8 9.1
1189.7 -44.6 -54.5 9.8
1195.1 -43.4 -53.5 10.1
1200.5 -43.0 -53.6 10.6
1205.9 -44.3 -54.4 10.1
1211.2 -44.8 -55.5 10.7
1216.6 -44.1 -55.9 11.8
1222.0 -43.8 -55.3 11.5
1227.4 -44.6 -55.4 10.7
1232.8 -45.6 -56.1 10.4
1238.2 -46.4 -55.3 8.9
1243.5 -46.5 -54.3 7.8
1248.9 -46.1 -53.8 7.7
1254.3 -45.9 -54.8 8.9
1259.7 -45.4 -54.4 8.9
1265.1 -44.7 -53.5 8.8
1270.5 -43.5 -54.1 10.6
1275.8 -42.5 -55.4 12.9
1281.2 -43.2 -55.8 12.6
1286.6 -44.8 -55.7 10.9
1292.0 -44.9 -55.7 10.8
1297.4 -44.7 -56.1 11.4
1302.8 -44.5 -56.2 11.7
1308.1 -45.0 -55.7 10.7
1313.5 -46.4 -56.1 9.7
1318.9 -47.3 -56.9 9.6
1324.3 -46.3 -56.2 9.8
1329.7 -45.5 -55.8 10.3
1335.1 -45.1 -56.4 11.3
1340.4 -46.0 -56.8 10.8
1345.8 -47.1 -57.3 10.2
1351.2 -48.1 -56.7 8.5
1356.6 -48.9 -56.6 7.7
1362.0 -49.2 -56.5 7.4
149
1367.4 -49.1 -56.8 7.6
1372.7 -49.3 -57.8 8.5
1378.1 -50.3 -59.7 9.5
1383.5 -51.3 -62.2 10.9
1388.9 -51.6 -64.9 13.2
1394.3 -51.6 -67.1 15.6
1399.7 -51.7 -67.6 15.9
1405.0 -52.6 -68.1 15.5
1410.4 -52.9 -69.0 16.2
1415.8 -52.8 -69.1 16.3
1421.2 -51.3 -69.2 17.8
1426.6 -49.1 -69.5 20.4
1432.0 -48.2 -70.0 21.7
1437.3 -47.6 -69.9 22.3
1442.7 -47.8 -68.4 20.6
1448.1 -47.6 -66.6 19.0
1453.5 -47.0 -64.3 17.3
1458.9 -47.1 -62.3 15.2
1464.3 -46.1 -61.2 15.1
1469.6 -45.3 -59.4 14.1
1475.0 -45.4 -58.4 12.9
1480.4 -45.4 -57.8 12.4
1485.8 -43.9 -58.2 14.3
1491.2 -42.6 -58.9 16.2
1496.6 -44.2 -60.0 15.8
1501.9 -45.0 -60.8 15.8
1507.3 -44.7 -58.9 14.1
1512.7 -45.1 -56.8 11.7
1518.1 -46.6 -57.0 10.4
1523.5 -46.4 -57.2 10.8
1528.9 -48.0 -56.9 9.0
1534.2 -47.6 -58.3 10.7
1539.6 -47.4 -58.3 10.9
1545.0 -48.4 -56.8 8.4
1550.4 -47.5 -57.3 9.8
1555.8 -46.3 -57.2 10.9
1561.2 -46.7 -57.4 10.7
1566.5 -47.3 -58.6 11.4
1571.9 -47.2 -58.4 11.1
1577.3 -47.3 -58.9 11.6
1582.7 -46.5 -57.8 11.3
1588.1 -45.8 -57.5 11.6
1593.5 -46.6 -59.1 12.5
1598.8 -47.5 -59.0 11.5
1604.2 -46.6 -58.6 11.9
1609.6 -47.1 -57.6 10.4
150
1615.0 -48.5 -56.8 8.2
1620.4 -49.6 -56.7 7.0
1625.8 -50.3 -56.5 6.3
1631.1 -51.3 -55.3 4.0
1636.5 -52.5 -53.8 1.4
1641.9 -52.2 -51.9 -0.3
1647.3 -52.1 -51.7 -0.5
1652.7 -53.0 -51.5 -1.5
1658.1 -52.8 -50.6 -2.2
1663.4 -50.7 -50.0 -0.6
1668.8 -49.6 -49.0 -0.7
1674.2 -50.4 -48.7 -1.7
1679.6 -50.0 -49.8 -0.2
1685.0 -49.5 -51.0 1.5
1690.4 -49.8 -49.7 -0.1
1695.7 -50.0 -51.1 1.1
1701.1 -50.2 -53.7 3.5
1706.5 -49.9 -54.0 4.0
1711.9 -50.4 -53.5 3.1
1717.3 -50.7 -53.9 3.2
1722.7 -51.5 -55.1 3.6
1728.0 -51.7 -57.3 5.6
1733.4 -51.9 -59.8 7.9
1738.8 -52.0 -62.4 10.4
1744.2 -52.1 -63.5 11.4
1749.6 -52.5 -63.1 10.6
1755.0 -51.9 -62.5 10.6
1760.3 -52.4 -62.2 9.8
1765.7 -52.3 -62.9 10.6
1771.1 -51.0 -63.9 12.9
1776.5 -51.1 -64.6 13.5
1781.9 -52.3 -65.3 13.0
1787.3 -53.8 -65.9 12.1
1792.6 -54.1 -65.7 11.6
1798.0 -55.1 -66.8 11.7
1803.4 -56.4 -68.5 12.2
1808.8 -57.3 -69.6 12.2
1814.2 -57.7 -69.3 11.6
1819.6 -58.0 -68.0 10.0
1824.9 -59.2 -68.7 9.5
1830.3 -60.8 -70.4 9.6
1835.7 -61.3 -70.8 9.5
1841.1 -61.5 -71.7 10.2
1846.5 -62.0 -74.4 12.4
1851.9 -62.7 -75.6 12.9
1857.2 -63.1 -74.8 11.7
151
1862.6 -62.6 -74.1 11.5
1868.0 -62.5 -72.7 10.2
1873.4 -62.0 -71.3 9.3
1878.8 -61.9 -70.5 8.6
1884.2 -61.7 -69.8 8.1
1889.5 -60.7 -69.4 8.8
1894.9 -59.2 -68.8 9.6
1900.3 -58.3 -68.5 10.2
1905.7 -57.4 -68.4 11.0
1911.1 -56.4 -68.9 12.5
1916.5 -55.7 -69.0 13.3
1921.8 -54.6 -68.8 14.2
1927.2 -54.3 -68.4 14.1
1932.6 -55.1 -68.0 12.9
1938.0 -54.9 -68.6 13.7
1943.4 -54.3 -69.0 14.8
1948.8 -54.3 -68.3 14.0
1954.1 -54.1 -67.4 13.3
1959.5 -54.1 -67.3 13.2
1964.9 -54.1 -67.2 13.0
1970.3 -53.1 -66.6 13.6
1975.7 -52.9 -66.4 13.5
1981.1 -54.2 -65.7 11.5
1986.4 -52.8 -66.0 13.2
1991.8 -53.0 -67.3 14.3
1997.2 -54.5 -67.7 13.2
2002.6 -54.8 -68.0 13.2
2008.0 -55.1 -68.0 12.9
2013.4 -55.4 -68.5 13.1
2018.7 -54.8 -68.1 13.3
2024.1 -55.9 -68.9 13.0
2029.5 -55.5 -67.5 12.0
2034.9 -56.2 -67.9 11.8
2040.3 -56.6 -68.2 11.6
2045.7 -56.6 -66.3 9.7
2051.0 -57.0 -65.6 8.6
2056.4 -56.5 -66.1 9.7
2061.8 -56.6 -65.8 9.2
2067.2 -57.1 -65.0 7.9
2072.6 -57.5 -64.5 7.0
2078.0 -58.2 -64.9 6.7
2083.3 -58.0 -65.3 7.2
2088.7 -57.7 -65.4 7.8
2094.1 -56.7 -65.1 8.4
2099.5 -54.9 -65.7 10.8
2104.9 -54.5 -66.5 12.0
152
2110.3 -53.8 -65.3 11.5
2115.6 -52.5 -66.7 14.2
2121.0 -51.7 -67.4 15.7
2126.4 -51.4 -66.9 15.6
2131.8 -51.4 -66.5 15.0
2137.2 -52.0 -65.9 14.0
2142.6 -52.7 -65.6 12.9
2147.9 -53.1 -64.9 11.8
2153.3 -53.2 -65.0 11.7
2158.7 -53.8 -65.1 11.3
2164.1 -53.9 -64.7 10.8
2169.5 -54.6 -65.3 10.7
2174.9 -55.5 -65.6 10.1
2180.2 -56.0 -65.5 9.5
2185.6 -56.3 -66.5 10.2
2191.0 -56.5 -66.3 9.8
2196.4 -56.6 -66.0 9.4
2201.8 -56.3 -66.1 9.8
2207.2 -56.1 -66.7 10.5
2212.5 -56.5 -67.6 11.0
2217.9 -56.0 -67.3 11.3
2223.3 -55.3 -67.3 11.9
2228.7 -55.3 -67.3 12.0
2234.1 -56.1 -65.1 9.0
2239.5 -56.1 -64.5 8.4
2244.8 -55.3 -64.6 9.3
2250.2 -55.3 -65.0 9.7
2255.6 -55.3 -64.6 9.4
2261.0 -55.2 -63.7 8.4
2266.4 -54.8 -62.4 7.5
2271.8 -54.1 -62.1 8.0
2277.1 -53.4 -62.9 9.4
2282.5 -53.8 -61.9 8.1
2287.9 -54.1 -61.4 7.4
2293.3 -53.5 -62.1 8.5
2298.7 -54.8 -62.1 7.3
2304.1 -55.1 -61.4 6.3
2309.4 -54.7 -62.3 7.6
2314.8 -54.5 -61.7 7.2
2320.2 -54.7 -62.3 7.6
2325.6 -54.7 -63.2 8.4
2331.0 -54.7 -63.0 8.3
2336.4 -54.4 -62.8 8.4
2341.7 -54.6 -62.8 8.3
2347.1 -55.7 -62.6 6.9
2352.5 -56.3 -63.2 6.9
153
2357.9 -56.4 -63.6 7.2
2363.3 -55.6 -63.7 8.1
2368.7 -54.8 -63.4 8.6
2374.0 -55.0 -64.2 9.2
2379.4 -56.4 -65.7 9.3
2384.8 -57.0 -65.5 8.5
2390.2 -56.5 -64.6 8.1
2395.6 -56.1 -64.1 8.0
2401.0 -55.1 -65.2 10.2
2406.3 -54.7 -66.5 11.8
2411.7 -54.6 -65.3 10.7
2417.1 -54.3 -65.1 10.8
2422.5 -54.0 -66.2 12.2
2427.9 -54.4 -66.3 12.0
2433.3 -54.3 -66.8 12.5
2438.6 -53.3 -67.0 13.7
2444.0 -53.7 -67.0 13.2
2449.4 -54.0 -68.1 14.1
2454.8 -53.2 -69.3 16.1
2460.2 -53.3 -69.4 16.1
2465.6 -54.0 -69.3 15.3
2470.9 -53.8 -69.2 15.5
2476.3 -54.1 -69.3 15.2
2481.7 -53.9 -69.4 15.5
2487.1 -54.0 -70.1 16.2
2492.5 -53.9 -70.7 16.8
2497.9 -53.4 -69.9 16.6
2503.2 -53.0 -68.8 15.8
2508.6 -52.1 -68.5 16.4
2514.0 -52.2 -67.9 15.7
2519.4 -52.0 -67.4 15.4
2524.8 -52.1 -67.2 15.0
2530.2 -52.5 -67.5 15.0
2535.5 -52.2 -67.8 15.5
2540.9 -51.8 -67.5 15.7
2546.3 -52.6 -67.4 14.8
2551.7 -52.6 -67.5 14.9
2557.1 -52.8 -66.9 14.1
2562.5 -51.8 -67.4 15.7
2567.8 -50.9 -67.5 16.6
2573.2 -50.4 -67.5 17.1
2578.6 -50.7 -66.6 15.9
2584.0 -50.8 -65.6 14.8
2589.4 -50.8 -65.6 14.9
2594.8 -50.7 -65.2 14.4
2600.1 -50.5 -65.7 15.2
154
2605.5 -50.2 -65.2 15.0
2610.9 -50.5 -64.5 14.0
2616.3 -49.6 -63.8 14.2
2621.7 -49.6 -63.4 13.8
2627.1 -49.8 -62.1 12.3
2632.4 -49.2 -61.6 12.4
2637.8 -49.3 -61.5 12.2
2643.2 -49.7 -61.9 12.2
2648.6 -50.4 -62.9 12.5
2654.0 -50.4 -63.4 13.0
2659.4 -50.4 -63.3 12.9
2664.7 -49.8 -64.1 14.3
2670.1 -49.4 -64.4 15.0
2675.5 -49.9 -64.7 14.8
2680.9 -50.5 -64.8 14.3
2686.3 -50.9 -65.1 14.2
2691.7 -51.6 -65.1 13.5
2697.0 -51.8 -64.9 13.2
2702.4 -51.5 -65.2 13.7
2707.8 -51.4 -66.3 14.9
2713.2 -51.4 -66.3 14.8
2718.6 -51.0 -65.9 14.9
2724.0 -50.5 -65.9 15.4
2729.3 -50.0 -66.1 16.1
2734.7 -50.0 -65.9 15.9
2740.1 -50.9 -65.6 14.7
2745.5 -51.0 -65.5 14.5
2750.9 -50.8 -66.0 15.2
2756.3 -50.8 -66.7 15.9
2761.6 -50.7 -66.2 15.4
2767.0 -50.7 -65.6 15.0
2772.4 -50.4 -65.9 15.5
2777.8 -50.7 -65.9 15.2
2783.2 -50.3 -65.7 15.4
2788.5 -50.2 -65.5 15.3
2793.9 -50.1 -65.4 15.3
2799.3 -51.0 -64.7 13.7
2804.7 -50.8 -64.4 13.6
2810.1 -49.8 -64.2 14.4
2815.5 -49.6 -65.1 15.5
2820.8 -49.3 -65.9 16.6
2826.2 -49.2 -66.5 17.2
2831.6 -49.8 -66.0 16.2
2837.0 -50.0 -65.8 15.9
2842.4 -51.0 -66.6 15.7
2847.8 -51.2 -66.9 15.7
155
2853.1 -51.7 -67.3 15.6
2858.5 -51.7 -67.5 15.7
2863.9 -51.5 -66.8 15.2
2869.3 -51.9 -66.2 14.3
2874.7 -52.1 -66.2 14.0
2880.1 -52.7 -66.6 14.0
2885.4 -53.0 -67.7 14.7
2890.8 -53.5 -68.3 14.8
2896.2 -54.1 -67.7 13.6
2901.6 -54.3 -66.6 12.3
2907.0 -54.8 -66.8 12.1
2912.4 -54.8 -67.3 12.5
2917.7 -54.4 -67.3 13.0
2923.1 -54.3 -67.2 12.9
2928.5 -54.1 -66.2 12.1
2933.9 -52.9 -65.4 12.5
2939.3 -52.7 -65.7 13.0
2944.7 -52.7 -65.3 12.6
2950.0 -52.2 -65.1 12.9
2955.4 -52.2 -65.0 12.8
2960.8 -52.5 -64.1 11.6
2966.2 -51.6 -63.8 12.3
2971.6 -50.6 -64.2 13.6
2977.0 -51.2 -64.2 13.0
2982.3 -52.2 -64.5 12.3
2987.7 -51.8 -64.5 12.6
2993.1 -51.4 -65.1 13.7
2998.5 -51.2 -65.8 14.6
3003.9 -51.8 -66.8 15.0
3009.3 -52.0 -66.0 14.0
3014.6 -52.4 -65.3 12.9
3020.0 -53.5 -65.1 11.6
3025.4 -53.1 -65.4 12.4
3030.8 -52.5 -66.2 13.7
3036.2 -52.8 -66.4 13.6
3041.6 -52.9 -65.9 13.1
3046.9 -52.2 -66.4 14.3
3052.3 -51.9 -67.8 15.9
3057.7 -52.1 -67.6 15.5
3063.1 -52.6 -67.5 14.9
3068.5 -53.6 -67.7 14.0
3073.9 -53.4 -67.1 13.7
3079.2 -52.8 -66.5 13.8
3084.6 -52.5 -66.8 14.3
3090.0 -52.4 -67.3 14.9
3095.4 -52.7 -66.7 13.9
156
3100.8 -52.9 -67.2 14.3
3106.2 -53.3 -68.4 15.1
3111.5 -53.6 -68.4 14.8
3116.9 -53.1 -68.9 15.8
3122.3 -53.3 -69.2 15.9
3127.7 -53.1 -68.4 15.3
3133.1 -51.6 -68.8 17.2
3138.5 -52.0 -68.9 17.0
3143.8 -52.3 -68.9 16.6
3149.2 -51.5 -67.8 16.3
3154.6 -51.3 -67.4 16.2
3160.0 -51.1 -68.0 16.9
3165.4 -50.9 -68.0 17.1
3170.8 -51.1 -69.1 18.0
3176.1 -51.3 -69.0 17.7
3181.5 -51.2 -68.0 16.8
3186.9 -51.2 -68.3 17.1
3192.3 -51.0 -69.1 18.0
3197.7 -50.9 -69.8 18.9
3203.1 -51.5 -69.8 18.3
3208.4 -52.4 -68.1 15.7
3213.8 -52.5 -68.2 15.7
3219.2 -52.6 -69.5 16.9
3224.6 -52.4 -70.7 18.3
3230.0 -52.5 -69.6 17.1
3235.4 -52.0 -70.1 18.1
3240.7 -52.5 -71.9 19.4
3246.1 -53.0 -72.1 19.1
3251.5 -52.9 -71.6 18.7
3256.9 -53.4 -72.8 19.4
3262.3 -53.6 -73.3 19.7
3267.7 -53.0 -72.9 20.0
3273.0 -52.5 -72.9 20.5
3278.4 -52.1 -72.2 20.1
3283.8 -52.4 -71.4 19.0
3289.2 -52.1 -71.4 19.3
3294.6 -51.5 -71.4 19.9
3300.0 -51.4 -71.4 20.0
3305.3 -51.7 -72.1 20.4
3310.7 -51.4 -72.8 21.4
3316.1 -51.6 -72.5 20.9
3321.5 -51.8 -72.1 20.2
3326.9 -51.9 -72.3 20.4
3332.3 -51.6 -70.8 19.2
3337.6 -52.1 -70.1 18.0
3343.0 -52.8 -70.5 17.7
157
3348.4 -52.5 -72.8 20.3
3353.8 -52.7 -72.8 20.0
3359.2 -53.5 -71.4 17.9
3364.6 -53.6 -71.0 17.4
3369.9 -53.4 -71.9 18.5
3375.3 -53.2 -72.8 19.6
3380.7 -53.4 -72.9 19.5
3386.1 -53.8 -73.3 19.5
3391.5 -53.5 -74.1 20.6
3396.9 -53.4 -73.0 19.7
3402.2 -53.6 -72.3 18.7
3407.6 -54.0 -72.1 18.1
3413.0 -53.7 -71.8 18.2
3418.4 -53.7 -72.0 18.3
3423.8 -53.8 -73.0 19.1
3429.2 -53.7 -72.3 18.6
3434.5 -53.2 -72.2 18.9
3439.9 -53.8 -72.7 18.9
3445.3 -54.4 -72.8 18.5
3450.7 -55.1 -72.1 17.0
3456.1 -55.1 -71.2 16.1
3461.5 -55.0 -70.5 15.6
3466.8 -55.5 -71.4 15.9
3472.2 -55.6 -71.5 15.9
3477.6 -56.0 -70.8 14.8
3483.0 -56.2 -70.7 14.5
3488.4 -55.4 -71.5 16.1
3493.8 -55.6 -71.8 16.2
3499.1 -56.1 -71.4 15.3
3504.5 -55.6 -71.7 16.1
3509.9 -56.2 -71.1 14.9
3515.3 -55.8 -70.6 14.8
3520.7 -56.1 -71.3 15.2
3526.1 -57.0 -71.7 14.7
3531.4 -56.8 -72.0 15.2
3536.8 -57.3 -71.9 14.6
3542.2 -57.4 -72.2 14.8
3547.6 -57.0 -72.3 15.3
3553.0 -56.8 -71.6 14.8
3558.4 -57.0 -70.8 13.8
3563.7 -57.6 -71.0 13.4
3569.1 -58.4 -71.0 12.7
3574.5 -59.0 -71.2 12.3
3579.9 -59.1 -71.7 12.6
3585.3 -60.1 -70.8 10.7
3590.7 -60.5 -70.4 9.9
15 8
3596.0 -60.5 -70.4 10.0
3601.4 -60.1 -71.0 10.9
3606.8 -59.3 -72.0 12.8
3612.2 -59.1 -71.3 12.2
3617.6 -59.3 -70.2 10.9
3623.0 -58.6 -69.7 11.1
3628.3 -58.5 -69.7 11.2
3633.7 -58.5 -70.0 11.6
3639.1 -58.2 -70.1 11.8
3644.5 -58.3 -69.4 11.1
3649.9 -58.0 -68.9 10.9
3655.3 -58.4 -67.9 9.5
3660.6 -59.0 -67.1 8.0
3666.0 -58.3 -66.7 8.4
3671.4 -57.9 -66.4 8.5
3676.8 -58.0 -66.4 8.5
3682.2 -58.3 -66.9 8.6
3687.6 -57.9 -66.7 8.8
3692.9 -57.8 -65.8 8.0
3698.3 -58.4 -66.6 8.2
3703.7 -57.8 -67.5 9.7
3709.1 -57.3 -67.9 10.7
3714.5 -57.0 -68.1 11.1
3719.9 -56.8 -68.2 11.5
3725.2 -57.0 -69.2 12.2
3730.6 -57.5 -69.0 11.5
3736.0 -57.7 -69.4 11.7
3741.4 -57.4 -70.2 12.7
3746.8 -57.3 -68.9 11.6
3752.2 -57.8 -68.0 10.2
3757.5 -58.0 -67.4 9.4
3762.9 -57.5 -66.4 8.9
3768.3 -57.0 -65.7 8.7
3773.7 -56.4 -65.4 9.0
3779.1 -56.9 -66.6 9.7
3784.5 -58.4 -65.9 7.6
3789.8 -59.1 -65.7 6.6
3795.2 -59.2 -65.8 6.6
3800.6 -59.9 -65.3 5.4
3806.0 -60.0 -65.1 5.2
3811.4 -59.7 -65.1 5.4
3816.8 -58.9 -65.9 6.9
3822.1 -59.1 -66.6 7.5
3827.5 -60.3 -67.5 7.2
3832.9 -61.0 -68.3 7.2
3838.3 -61.2 -67.7 6.5
159
3843.7 -60.9 -67.9 7.1
3849.1 -60.6 -68.1 7.5
3854.4 -60.7 -68.4 7.8
3859.8 -60.5 -68.2 7.7
3865.2 -60.0 -68.8 8.8
3870.6 -60.1 -70.0 9.9
3876.0 -60.5 -70.4 9.9
3881.4 -59.6 -70.6 11.0
3886.7 -59.6 -70.7 11.1
3892.1 -59.5 -71.5 11.9
3897.5 -60.1 -71.6 11.4
3902.9 -60.2 -71.3 11.1
3908.3 -59.9 -70.8 10.9
3913.7 -60.2 -69.8 9.6
3919.0 -60.8 -69.5 8.7
3924.4 -60.3 -70.0 9.7
3929.8 -59.6 -69.4 9.8
3935.2 -59.7 -68.5 8.8
3940.6 -59.7 -66.1 6.4
3946.0 -59.2 -64.7 5.6
3951.3 -59.4 -65.7 6.3
3956.7 -60.1 -67.5 7.4
3962.1 -59.6 -68.8 9.1
3967.5 -59.2 -69.5 10.2
3972.9 -60.0 -68.9 8.8
3978.3 -61.2 -69.2 8.0
3983.6 -60.6 -70.4 9.7
3989.0 -60.0 -70.4 10.4
3994.4 -59.8 -70.2 10.4
3999.8 -59.2 -70.3 11.1
4005.2 -59.0 -70.7 11.7
4010.6 -59.3 -71.9 12.6
4015.9 -60.0 -72.2 12.2
4021.3 -61.0 -72.2 11.1
4026.7 -60.7 -72.5 11.8
4032.1 -61.1 -72.5 11.4
4037.5 -60.9 -71.7 10.7
4042.9 -61.3 -71.2 9.8
4048.2 -61.7 -72.1 10.4
4053.6 -60.6 -72.0 11.4
4059.0 -60.9 -71.5 10.6
4064.4 -61.8 -72.6 10.9
4069.8 -62.0 -73.1 11.1
4075.2 -63.2 -73.3 10.1
4080.5 -64.0 -72.9 8.9
4085.9 -64.1 -73.4 9.3
160
4091.3 -63.8 -74.1 10.3
4096.7 -64.7 -74.4 9.7
4102.1 -65.5 -75.2 9.6
4107.5 -65.0 -75.3 10.3
4112.8 -64.8 -75.5 10.7
4118.2 -65.0 -76.2 11.1
4123.6 -66.2 -76.6 10.4
4129.0 -67.6 -77.2 9.6
4134.4 -68.0 -77.3 9.3
4139.8 -67.5 -76.5 9.0
4145.1 -66.7 -76.7 10.0
4150.5 -66.7 -77.5 10.8
4155.9 -66.5 -77.1 10.5
4161.3 -66.2 -77.9 11.8
4166.7 -67.3 -78.0 10.7
4172.1 -67.9 -77.4 9.5
4177.4 -67.4 -77.5 10.1
4182.8 -67.9 -78.3 10.3
4188.2 -68.7 -78.9 10.3
4193.6 -68.4 -79.5 11.1
4199.0 -68.6 -79.9 11.2
4204.4 -68.5 -79.7 11.2
4209.7 -68.1 -80.7 12.6
4215.1 -68.2 -81.4 13.2
4220.5 -68.7 -80.1 11.3
4225.9 -68.9 -79.0 10.1
4231.3 -69.5 -79.4 9.9
4236.7 -69.6 -79.6 10.0
4242.0 -69.3 -79.3 10.0
4247.4 -69.8 -78.6 8.8
4252.8 -70.0 -78.0 7.9
4258.2 -69.5 -77.4 7.9
4263.6 -69.0 -77.7 8.7
4269.0 -69.8 -78.3 8.5
4274.3 -70.3 -79.1 8.8
4279.7 -70.4 -79.1 8.7
4285.1 -70.1 -79.0 8.9
4290.5 -70.4 -79.8 9.5
4295.9 -70.7 -79.7 9.0
4301.3 -71.5 -79.5 8.0
4306.6 -72.0 -78.9 6.9
4312.0 -71.8 -78.9 7.1
4317.4 -71.5 -79.2 7.7
4322.8 -71.2 -80.1 8.9
4328.2 -71.5 -80.6 9.2
4333.6 -72.5 -80.3 7.8
161
4338.9 -72.7 -80.2 7.5
4344.3 -73.1 -80.4 7.3
4349.7 -73.3 -81.3 7.9
4355.1 -74.0 -81.2 7.1
4360.5 -73.5 -80.6 7.2
4365.9 -72.9 -80.2 7.3
4371.2 -73.2 -80.0 6.9
4376.6 -73.6 -79.4 5.8
4382.0 -73.0 -78.8 5.8
4387.4 -72.7 -79.0 6.3
4392.8 -72.8 -79.1 6.3
4398.2 -72.7 -79.2 6.5
4403.5 -72.1 -79.3 7.2
4408.9 -72.5 -79.0 6.5
4414.3 -72.3 -78.5 6.2
4419.7 -72.7 -78.1 5.4
4425.1 -72.5 -77.9 5.4
4430.5 -71.4 -78.0 6.6
4435.8 -70.9 -78.4 7.5
4441.2 -71.2 -79.6 8.3
4446.6 -72.5 -80.1 7.6
4452.0 -72.0 -79.7 7.7
4457.4 -71.2 -80.4 9.2
4462.8 -71.4 -80.6 9.2
4468.1 -71.5 -79.5 8.0
4473.5 -71.6 -79.2 7.6
4478.9 -71.4 -79.4 8.0
4484.3 -71.3 -80.2 8.9
4489.7 -71.8 -80.1 8.3
4495.1 -72.4 -79.5 7.2
4500.4 -72.9 -79.6 6.7
4505.8 -72.9 -79.5 6.5
4511.2 -72.1 -79.4 7.3
4516.6 -71.9 -79.8 7.9
4522.0 -71.4 -80.2 8.8
4527.4 -71.2 -79.8 8.6
4532.7 -71.4 -79.7 8.4
4538.1 -72.0 -80.3 8.3
4543.5 -72.4 -80.6 8.1
4548.9 -72.6 -80.2 7.6
4554.3 -72.4 -79.6 7.2
4559.7 -72.4 -79.0 6.6
4565.0 -71.6 -80.1 8.6
4570.4 -71.1 -80.7 9.7
4575.8 -71.9 -80.4 8.5
4581.2 -73.1 -80.0 6.9
162
4586.6 -73.4 -80.0 6.6
4592.0 -72.9 -80.5 7.6
4597.3 -73.1 -81.5 8.4
4602.7 -73.5 -82.0 8.5
4608.1 -73.9 -82.4 8.6
4613.5 -74.4 -82.5 8.1
4618.9 -74.6 -81.6 7.0
4624.3 -74.6 -81.8 7.2
4629.6 -74.2 -83.4 9.2
4635.0 -73.7 -84.4 10.8
4640.4 -73.6 -84.3 10.7
4645.8 -73.4 -83.4 10.0
4651.2 -73.7 -83.7 10.0
4656.6 -74.1 -83.8 9.7
4661.9 -74.9 -84.2 9.3
4667.3 -75.7 -84.3 8.7
4672.7 -75.7 -84.0 8.3
4678.1 -75.4 -83.5 8.1
4683.5 -76.3 -83.5 7.2
4688.9 -76.2 -84.0 7.8
4694.2 -75.8 -83.0 7.3
4699.6 -75.5 -82.5 7.0
4705.0 -75.6 -83.7 8.1
4710.4 -75.7 -84.9 9.2
4715.8 -74.8 -84.8 10.1
4721.2 -75.1 -84.8 9.7
4726.5 -75.4 -83.3 7.8
4731.9 -75.0 -82.1 7.1
4737.3 -75.8 -81.5 5.7
4742.7 -75.6 -82.1 6.5
4748.1 -74.2 -83.1 9.0
4753.5 -74.2 -83.8 9.6
4758.8 -74.0 -84.1 10.0
4764.2 -73.6 -83.4 9.8
4769.6 -73.5 -83.8 10.3
4775.0 -74.2 -84.1 9.9
4780.4 -73.6 -84.2 10.6
4785.8 -72.8 -84.2 11.4
4791.1 -73.0 -82.8 9.8
4796.5 -73.4 -82.3 8.8
4801.9 -73.4 -81.1 7.7
4807.3 -73.2 -80.5 7.3
4812.7 -73.4 -80.9 7.5
4818.1 -74.8 -81.9 7.2
4823.4 -75.1 -82.2 7.1
4828.8 -74.3 -82.6 8.3
163
4834.2 -74.0 -82.7 8.7
4839.6 -74.6 -83.2 8.6
4845.0 -75.2 -83.7 8.5
4850.4 -76.4 -84.1 7.7
4855.7 -77.2 -83.6 6.4
4861.1 -76.7 -83.3 6.6
4866.5 -76.9 -83.1 6.2
4871.9 -77.5 -82.8 5.3
4877.3 -76.4 -82.5 6.1
4882.7 -76.7 -82.5 5.9
4888.0 -78.0 -82.8 4.8
4893.4 -78.2 -82.8 4.5
4898.8 -78.2 -82.1 4.0
4904.2 -78.0 -81.9 3.9
4909.6 -77.9 -82.0 4.1
4915.0 -78.2 -81.6 3.4
4920.3 -78.4 -80.7 2.2
4925.7 -78.2 -80.3 2.1
4931.1 -78.4 -81.5 3.1
4936.5 -78.6 -81.8 3.1
4941.9 -78.4 -81.2 2.8
4947.3 -78.7 -80.8 2.1
4952.6 -79.3 -80.9 1.6
4958.0 -78.5 -81.8 3.3
4963.4 -77.9 -82.2 4.3
4968.8 -78.0 -82.5 4.6
4974.2 -78.5 -83.5 5.0
4979.6 -77.7 -83.3 5.6
4984.9 -77.8 -82.2 4.4
4990.3 -78.2 -81.2 3.0
4995.7 -77.6 -81.1 3.4
5001.1 -77.4 -81.0 3.6
16 4
APPENDIX F
Average Spectrum Data for Brahms Example
Brahms "Waldesnacht"
Difference in
Amplitude
Frequency Relative Amplitude Relative Amplitude Between
(Hz) Resonant (dB) Non-resonant (dB) Resonant and
Non-Resonant
_____________ Versions (dB)
10.8 -37.6 -36.4 -1.1

16.1 -44.4 -44.2 -0.3
21.5 -47.2 -47.8 0.6
26.9 -51.0 -51.2 0.2
32.3 -55.8 -55.8 0.1
37.7 -60.5 -60.2 -0.3
43.1 -64.1 -63.8 - 0.2
48.4 -67.5 -67.7 0.2

53.8 -69.1 -69.5 0.4
59.2 -67.1 -67.6 0.5
64.6 -66.7 -66.8 0.2
70.0 -68.5 -69.3 0.8
75.4 -71.3 -72.1 0.8
80.7 -69.6 -68.6 - 1.0
86.1 -64.1 -61.0 -3.0
91.5 -59.6 -57.5 - 2.0
96.9 -57.0 -55.7 - 1.2
102.3 -50.9 -49.9 - 1.0
107.7 -47.5 -46.1 -1.4
113.0 -48.6 -46.6 - 2.0
118.4 -48.8 -45.1 -3.7

123.8 -50.4 -45.0 -5.4
129.2 -51.0 -46.6 -4.4
134.6 -47.0 -45.3 -1.7
140.0 -42.9 -43.0 0.0
165
145.3 -42.1 -43.1 1.0
150.7 -44.1 -46.4 2.2
156.1 -46.8 -43.7 -3.2
161.5 -41.2 -39.7 -1.5
166.9 -37.4 -41.2 3.9
172.3 -40.3 -47.4 7.1
177.6 -46.9 -51.6 4.7
183.0 -49.9 -52.2 2.3
188.4 -52.4 -53.1 0.8
193.8 -53.6 -53.0 -0.7
199.2 -51.4 -50.2 -1.1
204.6 -49.1 -48.3 -0.7
209.9 -46.6 -47.8 1.2
215.3 -44.8 -48.0 3.1
220.7 -45.2 -48.9 3.7
226.1 -46.5 -50.0 3.5
231.5 -46.2 -50.9 4.7
236.9 -44.5 -47.5 3.1
242.2 -42.5 -43.7 1.2
247.6 -42.8 -44.4 1.5
253.0 -44.3 -47.5 3.2
258.4 -44.7 -49.9 5.2
263.8 -44.5 -47.6 3.2
269.2 -43.5 -43.6 0.1
274.5 -42.1 -41.2 -0.9
279.9 -40.7 -41.0 0.4
285.3 -39.1 -40.2 l.l
290.7 -38.3 -41.3 3.0
296.1 -38.9 -42.2 3.3
301.5 -39.8 -41.6 1.8
306.8 -40.2 -41.5 1.3
312.2 -39.3 -41.6 2.4
317.6 -38.9 -39.4 0.5
323.0 -38.7 -37.3 -1.4
328.4 -37.2 -36.8 -0.3
333.8 -34.5 -38.3 3.8
339.1 -33.8 -40.0 6.2
344.5 -34.5 -41.1 6.6
349.9 -37.0 -41.8 4.8
355.3 -39.2 -42.3 3.1
360.7 -39.2 -40.6 1.4
366.1 -38.3 -38.5 0.2
371.4 -36.6 -37.7 1.1
376.8 -35.6 -38.3 2.7
382.2 -34.2 -38.7 4.5
387.6 -34.9 -38.6 3.7
393.0 -36.7 -39.4 2.7
398.4 -36.7 -39.8 3.1
403.7 -37.5 -41.7 4.2
409.1 -38.7 -43.2 4.6
414.5 -39.2 -44.1 4.8
419.9 -38.4 -43.8 5.4
425.3 -37.2 -43.0 5.8
430.7 -36.5 -42.6 6.2
436.0 -36.6 -42.4 5.7
441.4 -37.0 -43.1 6.1
446.8 -37.0 -43.6 6.7
452.2 -37.5 -43.0 5.5
457.6 -38.3 -44.1 5.8
463.0 -39.3 -46.5 7.2
468.3 -40.3 -48.6 8.3
473.7 -41.5 -50.4 9.0
479.1 -43.8 -51.9 8.1
484.5 -47.9 -53.7 5.8
489.9 -49.6 -57.4 7.8
495.3 -49.0 -61.2 12.2
500.6 -49.7 -62.9 13.2
506.0 -50.5 -63.6 13.0
511.4 -49.4 -62.7 13.3
516.8 -48.9 -59.2 10.3
522.2 -47.8 -56.0 8.2
527.6 -47.8 -53.5 5.6
532.9 -47.1 -51.7 4.7
538.3 -44.5 -50.5 6.0
543.7 -43.5 -49.2 5.7
549.1 -44.2 -48.7 4.5
554.5 -43.7 -49.1 5.4
559.9 -42.7 -48.9 6.1
565.2 -41.5 -48.5 7.0
570.6 -42.3 -47.9 5.6
576.0 -42.6 -47.4 4.8
581.4 -43.4 -47.5 4.1
586.8 -43.5 -47.3 3.8
592.2 -44.6 -48.1 3.5
597.5 -47.5 -49.2 1.7
602.9 -47.1 -49.5 2.4
608.3 -46.1 -50.3 4.2
613.7 -45.5 -51.1 5.6
619.1 -46.0 -52.0 5.9
624.5 -45.3 -51.6 6.3
629.8 -41.8 -50.4 8.6
635.2 -39.9 -50.2 10.4
167
640.6 -38.2 -50.9 12.7
646.0 -36.6 -49.7 13.0
651.4 -37.5 -48.9 11.4
656.8 -39.9 -49.7 9.7
662.1 -41.0 -49.5 8.4
667.5 -40.2 -49.4 9.2
672.9 -40.1 -50.4 10.3
678.3 -41.9 -52.0 10.1
683.7 -43.9 -51.9 8.0
689.1 -45.5 -53.9 8.5
694.4 -46.7 -55.5 8.8
699.8 -46.8 -55.7 8.9
705.2 -46.2 -56.8 10.5
710.6 -47.8 -58.6 10.8
716.0 -49.6 -59.6 10.0
721.4 -50.7 -60.4 9.7
726.7 -51.3 -60.2 8.9
732.1 -49.9 -61.1 11.2
737.5 -50.3 -61.1 10.8
742.9 -51.5 -60.0 8.5
748.3 -51.1 -59.7 8.6
753.7 -49.7 -60.5 10.8
759.0 -49.2 -60.3 11.0
764.4 -48.6 -58.7 10.1
769.8 -47.6 -58.0 10.3
775.2 -48.9 -57.1 8.2
780.6 -50.0 -57.7 7.7
786.0 -47.1 -57.7 10.6
791.3 -45.6 -57.4 11.8
796.7 -45.8 -57.0 11.2
802.1 -47.2 -55.9 8.7
807.5 -49.1 -54.3 5.2
812.9 -51.0 -55.0 4.1
818.3 -52.2 -58.5 6.3
823.6 -51.5 -59.0 7.5
829.0 -49.3 -56.1 6.8
834.4 -47.9 -54.8 6.8
839.8 -48.2 -55.1 6.9
845.2 -47.8 -54.2 6.5
850.6 -47.9 -53.1 5.2
855.9 -47.7 -52.9 5.2
861.3 -46.4 -51.5 5.0
866.7 -46.6 -50.4 3.8
872.1 -47.2 -50.8 3.6
877.5 -46.8 -50.9 4.1
882.9 -46.2 -52.4 6.3
168
888.2 -46.8 -53.4 6.6
893.6 -46.1 -53.5 7.4
899.0 -46.0 -54.9 8.9
904.4 -47.1 -54.9 7.8
909.8 -48.1 -55.1 7.0
915.2 -48.3 -56.6 8.3
920.5 -49.2 -57.4 8.2
925.9 -49.8 -59.4 9.6
931.3 -50.2 -60.8 10.6
936.7 -51.7 -61.8 10.2
942.1 -51.5 -63.1 11.6
947.5 -50.7 -63.1 12.4
952.8 -51.2 -61.9 10.7
958.2 -51.8 -61.7 10.0
963.6 -51.8 -62.4 10.6
969.0 -52.5 -62.6 10.1
974.4 -53.2 -60.8 7.7
979.8 -53.1 -60.2 7.1
985.1 -52.1 -61.3 9.2
990.5 -52.7 -62.7 10.0
995.9 -54.0 -63.2 9.2
1001.3 -53.1 -62.5 9.4
1006.7 -52.0 -62.3 10.4
1012.1 -50.8 -61.5 10.6
1017.4 -50.0 -60.6 10.6
1022.8 -48.9 -59.9 11.0
1028.2 -47.3 -58.9 11.6
1033.6 -46.0 -58.2 12.2
1039.0 -45.0 -58.6 13.6
1044.4 -45.6 -58.1 12.5
1049.7 -48.6 -56.9 8.3
1055.1 -47.8 -56.6 8.8
1060.5 -45.5 -56.8 11.3
1065.9 -46.0 -55.9 9.9
1071.3 -45.6 -54.9 9.3
1076.7 -42.7 -53.2 10.5
1082.0 -43.3 -52.3 9.1
1087.4 -45.0 -52.6 7.6
1092.8 -46.7 -54.1 7.4
1098.2 -46.8 -54.3 7.5
1103.6 -45.8 -54.4 8.6
1109.0 -45.6 -54.0 8.4
1114.3 -44.9 -53.3 8.4
1119.7 -45.5 -54.9 9.4
1125.1 -44.6 -57.5 12.8
1130.5 -44.8 -58.9 14.1
169
1135.9 -45.9 -58.6 12.7
1141.3 -48.0 -59.5 11.6
1146.6 -47.2 -61.0 13.8
1152.0 -47.0 -59.6 12.6
1157.4 -48.4 -59.2 10.8
1162.8 -49.5 -59.2 9.7
1168.2 -48.1 -58.8 10.7
1173.6 -47.1 -57.5 10.4
1178.9 -49.1 -58.0 8.9
1184.3 -49.5 -59.4 9.9
1189.7 -49.6 -60.4 10.8
1195.1 -50.7 -59.8 9.1
1200.5 -50.9 -58.9 8.0
1205.9 -50.7 -58.8 8.0
1211.2 -50.0 -60.0 10.0
1216.6 -49.8 -60.1 10.3
1222.0 -50.8 -59.4 8.6
1227.4 -52.5 -60.5 8.0
1232.8 -52.0 -62.0 10.0
1238.2 -51.4 -61.5 10.1
1243.5 -51.7 -61.1 9.4
1248.9 -50.3 -61.7 11.4
1254.3 -49.9 -63.1 13.2
1259.7 -49.7 -63.8 14.1
1265.1 -49.2 -62.7 13.5
1270.5 -48.3 -63.1 14.8
1275.8 -47.3 -61.2 14.0
1281.2 -46.1 -59.4 13.3
1286.6 -45.0 -60.6 15.6
1292.0 -45.0 -62.8 17.8
1297.4 -46.3 -62.3 16.1
1302.8 -45.4 -62.4 17.0
1308.1 -43.9 -61.5 17.5
1313.5 -44.1 -60.4 16.3
1318.9 -45.7 -60.1 14.5
1324.3 -46.1 -59.6 13.5
1329.7 -45.3 -59.1 13.7
1335.1 -45.9 -60.2 14.3
1340.4 -46.9 -60.1 13.2
1345.8 -46.8 -58.6 11.9
1351.2 -46.2 -57.9 11.7
1356.6 -46.7 -60.2 13.5
1362.0 -47.6 -61.3 13.7
1367.4 -49.2 -59.4 10.2
1372.7 -49.9 -57.9 8.0
1378.1 -48.9 -57.5 8.6
170
1383.5 -49.1 -58.8 9.8
1388.9 -50.9 -61.2 10.4
1394.3 -52.3 -63.1 10.7
1399.7 -52.7 -64.0 11.3
1405.0 -53.2 -65.0 11.8
1410.4 -54.4 -64.9 10.6
1415.8 -54.3 -63.7 9.3
1421.2 -53.5 -61.5 8.1
1426.6 -53.7 -61.3 7.7
1432.0 -54.4 -61.0 6.7
1437.3 -53.5 -58.4 4.8
1442.7 -53.9 -58.7 4.8
1448.1 -53.8 -59.9 6.1
1453.5 -53.8 -58.6 4.8
1458.9 -51.6 -59.9 8.4
1464.3 -49.8 -61.9 12.1
1469.6 -48.4 -61.3 12.9
1475.0 -48.0 -61.9 13.9
1480.4 -48.4 -62.2 13.8
1485.8 -47.3 -60.9 13.6
1491.2 -46.4 -59.6 13.1
1496.6 -46.5 -61.1 14.6
1501.9 -46.6 -60.1 13.4
1507.3 -45.8 -58.1 12.3
1512.7 -45.2 -57.5 12.4
1518.1 -45.0 -56.8 11.8
1523.5 -45.5 -56.9 11.4
1528.9 -46.6 -59.4 12.8
1534.2 -46.9 -60.0 13.1
1539.6 -47.1 -58.6 11.5
1545.0 -47.6 -57.9 10.3
1550.4 -47.0 -58.7 11.7
1555.8 -46.0 -60.4 14.3
1561.2 -46.0 -62.5 16.6
1566.5 -47.1 -64.6 17.5
1571.9 -48.9 -66.2 17.3
1577.3 -49.3 -66.1 16.8
1582.7 -48.4 -64.9 16.5
1588.1 -49.0 -64.1 15.1
1593.5 -49.4 -63.3 13.8
1598.8 -49.4 -63.0 13.6
1604.2 -49.5 -63.6 14.1
1609.6 -49.7 -63.0 13.3
1615.0 -49.4 -61.9 12.4
1620.4 -49.8 -60.4 10.5
1625.8 -50.7 -59.5 8.8
171
1631.1 -51.6 -58.8 7.2
1636.5 -51.1 -58.2 7.1
1641.9 -51.1 -58.0 6.9
1647.3 -51.0 -57.1 6.1
1652.7 -50.8 -57.4 6.6
1658.1 -51.4 -58.2 6.8
1663.4 -51.2 -59.8 8.5
1668.8 -52.5 -60.1 7.5
1674.2 -53.3 -60.1 6.8
1679.6 -52.6 -60.2 7.6
1685.0 -52.0 -59.9 7.9
1690.4 -51.7 -60.0 8.3
1695.7 -50.0 -60.6 10.5
1701.1 -49.9 -60.8 10.9
1706.5 -50.3 -59.8 9.5
1711.9 -49.6 -59.5 9.9
1717.3 -49.8 -60.1 10.3
1722.7 -50.7 -61.5 10.8
1728.0 -49.4 -61.6 12.2
1733.4 -50.3 -61.9 11.6
1738.8 -50.4 -62.6 12.2
1744.2 -50.1 -63.2 13.2
1749.6 -51.7 -63.2 11.5
1755.0 -53.9 -64.4 10.4
1760.3 -54.3 -65.9 11.7
1765.7 -53.9 -66.1 12.2
1771.1 -53.3 -66.4 13.2
1776.5 -53.2 -66.1 12.9
1781.9 -54.1 -65.2 11.2
1787.3 -54.0 -64.7 10.7
1792.6 -53.8 -64.3 10.5
1798.0 -54.4 -64.8 10.4
1803.4 -53.9 -64.3 10.4
1808.8 -53.0 -65.7 12.7
1814.2 -52.3 -65.6 13.3
1819.6 -53.2 -64.8 11.5
1824.9 -53.8 -64.3 10.6
1830.3 -54.0 -63.8 9.9
1835.7 -55.3 -63.4 8.1
1841.1 -55.3 -63.5 8.3
1846.5 -55.1 -64.1 9.0
1851.9 -55.3 -64.7 9.3
1857.2 -55.7 -64.2 8.5
1862.6 -55.7 -64.7 9.0
1868.0 -55.7 -65.3 9.6
1873.4 -55.1 -65.5 10.4
172
1878.8 -55.6 -65.6 10.1
1884.2 -55.7 -65.1 9.4
1889.5 -55.4 -64.5 9.1
1894.9 -56.7 -64.2 7.6
1900.3 -56.2 -64.3 8.1
1905.7 -56.5 -63.8 7.3
1911.1 -58.0 -63.3 5.3
1916.5 -58.2 -62.5 4.3
1921.8 -58.0 -62.3 4.3
1927.2 -57.9 -63.3 5.4
1932.6 -58.9 -63.7 4.8
1938.0 -59.8 -62.7 2.9
1943.4 -60.1 -62.5 2.4
1948.8 -61.4 -63.7 2.3
1954.1 -62.1 -63.6 1.5
1959.5 -61.1 -62.4 1.3
1964.9 -61.6 -62.0 0.3
1970.3 -61.4 -62.2 0.8
1975.7 -59.8 -63.1 3.4
1981.1 -58.5 -64.2 5.7
1986.4 -57.9 -64.9 7.1
1991.8 -58.7 -65.3 6.6
1997.2 -58.8 -64.7 5.9
2002.6 -59.5 -64.5 5.0
2008.0 -60.1 -64.4 4.4
2013.4 -59.9 -64.8 4.9
2018.7 -59.5 -65.7 6.2
2024.1 -60.7 -66.3 5.5
2029.5 -58.3 -67.4 9.1
2034.9 -57.4 -68.2 10.8
2040.3 -57.4 -69.5 12.1
2045.7 -56.4 -70.0 13.6
2051.0 -56.5 -69.4 12.9
2056.4 -56.8 -68.3 11.5
2061.8 -55.8 -68.3 12.5
2067.2 -55.7 -68.4 12.7
2072.6 -56.1 -69.3 13.2
2078.0 -56.6 -68.9 12.3
2083.3 -56.7 -69.4 12.7
2088.7 -57.2 -71.9 14.7
2094.1 -58.3 -70.1 11.8
2099.5 -60.0 -70.4 10.4
2104.9 -60.3 -71.5 11.2
2110.3 -58.7 -70.2 11.5
2115.6 -58.0 -69.9 11.9
2121.0 -59.1 -69.3 10.3
2126.4 -58.7 -69.2 10.4
2131.8 -57.4 -67.4 10.0
2137.2 -57.1 -66.8 9.6
2142.6 -55.2 -67.1 11.9
2147.9 -54.5 -66.9 12.4
2153.3 -54.9 -66.3 11.4
2158.7 -54.2 -65.9 11.7
2164.1 -54.2 -65.9 11.6
2169.5 -54.9 -65.2 10.3
2174.9 -54.1 -64.8 10.7
2180.2 -53.9 -65.4 11.4
2185.6 -54.3 -64.3 10.0
2191.0 -53.9 -63.8 9.9
2196.4 -53.6 -64.8 11.2
2201.8 -53.5 -66.0 12.6
2207.2 -53.6 -67.1 13.5
2212.5 -53.4 -68.7 15.4
2217.9 -54.1 -69.5 15.4
2223.3 -54.3 -69.8 15.4
2228.7 -54.6 -69.7 15.1
2234.1 -54.9 -68.6 13.8
2239.5 -54.5 -68.7 14.1
2244.8 -54.4 -69.0 14.6
2250.2 -54.2 -68.5 14.3
2255.6 -54.2 -68.3 14.1
2261.0 -54.4 -67.6 13.2
2266.4 -54.9 -66.7 11.9
2271.8 -56.2 -68.3 12.1
2277.1 -55.3 -68.6 13.3
2282.5 -54.0 -68.0 14.0
2287.9 -54.8 -68.2 13.5
2293.3 -55.2 -67.0 11.8
2298.7 -55.2 -66.3 11.1
2304.1 -55.7 -67.5 11.8
2309.4 -56.3 -68.9 12.6
2314.8 -57.1 -68.7 11.5
2320.2 -57.5 -68.9 11.5
2325.6 -57.2 -68.3 11.1
2331.0 -57.4 -69.0 11.6
2336.4 -56.6 -69.1 12.6
2341.7 -55.8 -69.3 13.6
2347.1 -55.0 -69.7 14.7
2352.5 -54.8 -70.2 15.4
2357.9 -54.7 -69.6 14.9
2363.3 -54.2 -69.8 15.5
2368.7 -54.6 -69.9 15.3
17 4
2374.0 -55.2 -69.9 14.7
2379.4 -56.1 -70.8 14.7
2384.8 -57.8 -70.3 12.5
2390.2 -58.0 -69.6 11.5
2395.6 -56.4 -68.9 12.5
2401.0 -56.0 -68.9 13.0
2406.3 -56.3 -68.3 12.1
2411.7 -56.4 -67.3 11.0
2417.1 -56.9 -67.0 10.1
2422.5 -58.3 -67.0 8.6
2427.9 -58.0 -65.7 7.8
2433.3 -57.7 -64.9 7.2
2438.6 -57.3 -65.9 8.6
2444.0 -57.3 -68.2 10.9
2449.4 -56.5 -67.4 10.8
2454.8 -56.6 -66.6 10.0
2460.2 -56.0 -66.7 10.8
2465.6 -55.7 -67.3 11.7
2470.9 -55.0 -68.6 13.7
2476.3 -54.4 -68.9 14.5
2481.7 -53.8 -68.8 15.0
2487.1 -53.3 -69.8 16.4
2492.5 -53.7 -69.4 15.7
2497.9 -54.2 -68.8 14.6
2503.2 -53.9 -69.2 15.3
2508.6 -52.9 -68.9 16.0
2514.0 -53.1 -68.8 15.6
2519.4 -52.9 -68.8 15.8
2524.8 -52.1 -69.5 17.4
2530.2 -52.0 -69.6 17.6
2535.5 -51.2 -68.6 17.4
2540.9 -50.5 -68.7 18.2
2546.3 -50.8 -69.4 18.7
2551.7 -50.7 -69.2 18.5
2557.1 -50.9 -69.0 18.1
2562.5 -51.0 -69.6 18.6
2567.8 -50.7 -69.9 19.3
2573.2 -49.9 -70.2 20.3
2578.6 -49.9 -70.3 20.3
2584.0 -50.7 -69.9 19.2
2589.4 -50.9 -69.5 18.6
2594.8 -50.5 -70.0 19.5
2600.1 -51.2 -69.6 18.4
2605.5 -51.6 -70.3 18.7
2610.9 -51.8 -70.7 19.0
2616.3 -51.5 -70.1 18.6
175
2621.7 -51.2 -69.7 18.4
2627.1 -51.8 -68.9 17.1
2632.4 -51.4 -68.0 16.6
2637.8 -51.6 -66.7 15.1
2643.2 -51.2 -66.9 15.7
2648.6 -50.3 -67.5 17.2
2654.0 -50.5 -66.9 16.4
2659.4 -51.2 -67.0 15.7
2664.7 -52.3 -68.2 15.9
2670.1 -52.4 -68.4 16.0
2675.5 -51.0 -68.8 17.8
2680.9 -50.0 -67.7 17.7
2686.3 -50.5 -66.9 16.4
2691.7 -51.9 -67.9 16.0
2697.0 -51.7 -69.1 17.4
2702.4 -51.7 -68.0 16.3
2707.8 -51.1 -67.6 16.5
2713.2 -50.4 -67.7 17.4
2718.6 -50.0 -66.8 16.9
2724.0 -50.4 -65.9 15.5
2729.3 -51.5 -66.4 14.9
2734.7 -51.1 -67.2 16.1
2740.1 -50.7 -67.1 16.4
2745.5 -50.5 -67.6 17.1
2750.9 -50.2 -67.7 17.5
2756.3 -50.4 -66.7 16.3
2761.6 -50.3 -66.6 16.3
2767.0 -50.1 -67.3 17.2
2772.4 -50.5 -68.9 18.5
2777.8 -51.2 -70.2 19.0
2783.2 -50.4 -68.8 18.4
2788.5 -49.5 -67.6 18.1
2793.9 -49.6 -69.0 19.4
2799.3 -49.8 -70.0 20.2
2804.7 -49.8 -69.1 19.3
2810.1 -49.9 -69.0 19.2
2815.5 -50.1 -69.7 19.6
2820.8 -50.8 -69.5 18.7
2826.2 -52.0 -68.0 16.0
2831.6 -52.5 -67.6 15.1
2837.0 -51.8 -68.0 16.2
2842.4 -52.3 -68.6 16.3
2847.8 -53.2 -67.3 14.1
2853.1 -53.6 -67.7 14.1
2858.5 -54.4 -68.9 14.5
2863.9 -54.7 -68.4 13.7
176
2869.3 -54.7 -67.6 12.9
2874.7 -55.2 -67.7 12.5
2880.1 -55.5 -66.6 11.1
2885.4 -55.3 -66.9 11.6
2890.8 -54.9 -68.0 13.1
2896.2 -54.7 -67.9 13.3
2901.6 -53.9 -67.8 13.9
2907.0 -54.1 -67.2 13.1
2912.4 -54.2 -66.8 12.6
2917.7 -54.2 -67.1 12.8
2923.1 -52.9 -66.7 13.8
2928.5 -52.5 -66.7 14.2
2933.9 -54.6 -66.8 12.2
2939.3 -54.4 -67.5 13.1
2944.7 -54.4 -68.8 14.4
2950.0 -53.7 -69.3 15.7
2955.4 -53.0 -69.4 16.5
2960.8 -53.2 -69.3 16.1
2966.2 -52.8 -69.1 16.3
2971.6 -52.5 -68.4 15.9
2977.0 -53.5 -67.9 14.4
2982.3 -54.0 -67.8 13.8
2987.7 -54.1 -67.9 13.8
2993.1 -54.8 -68.7 13.9
2998.5 -54.2 -69.3 15.0
3003.9 -53.9 -69.7 15.8
3009.3 -54.1 -69.2 15.1
3014.6 -53.7 -70.0 16.3
3020.0 -54.1 -70.9 16.8
3025.4 -53.3 -70.6 17.3
3030.8 -52.9 -70.9 18.0
3036.2 -53.3 -71.8 18.5
3041.6 -52.3 -72.7 20.4
3046.9 -52.4 -72.9 20.5
3052.3 -53.3 -72.5 19.1
3057.7 -53.7 -71.6 17.9
3063.1 -53.3 -71.9 18.6
3068.5 -52.7 -72.1 19.4
3073.9 -53.7 -72.0 18.3
3079.2 -54.2 -72.0 17.8
3084.6 -53.9 -71.2 17.4
3090.0 -53.8 -71.4 17.6
3095.4 -54.0 -71.8 17.8
3100.8 -54.4 -71.2 16.8
3106.2 -55.3 -71.2 15.9
3111.5 -55.1 -71.4 16.3
177
3116.9 -54.2 -71.7 17.4
3122.3 -54.0 -71.7 17.7
3127.7 -53.3 -70.7 17.4
3133.1 -53.3 -69.2 16.0
3138.5 -53.1 -69.7 16.6
3143.8 -52.1 -70.3 18.2
3149.2 -52.4 -69.9 17.5
3154.6 -52.4 -70.5 18.1
3160.0 -51.8 -70.3 18.5
3165.4 -50.8 -68.5 17.6
3170.8 -50.3 -69.1 18.8
3176.1 -50.9 -71.1 20.2
3181.5 -50.7 -72.2 21.5
3186.9 -50.0 -71.1 21.1
3192.3 -50.4 -70.3 19.8
3197.7 -51.0 -69.4 18.4
3203.1 -50.3 -68.8 18.4
3208.4 -50.1 -70.3 20.1
3213.8 -50.4 -72.2 21.8
3219.2 -51.5 -72.6 21.1
3224.6 -51.8 -72.8 20.9
3230.0 -51.1 -72.6 21.5
3235.4 -51.6 -72.2 20.6
3240.7 -52.2 -72.2 20.0
3246.1 -51.1 -72.8 21.6
3251.5 -50.9 -73.4 22.5
3256.9 -51.4 -73.9 22.5
3262.3 -51.9 -73.9 22.0
3267.7 -52.3 -73.6 21.3
3273.0 -52.3 -72.8 20.5
3278.4 -51.9 -73.4 21.6
3283.8 -52.0 -73.5 21.4
3289.2 -51.6 -72.6 21.0
3294.6 -51.7 -72.8 21.1
3300.0 -52.3 -73.2 20.9
3305.3 -52.5 -73.6 21.1
3310.7 -52.4 -73.9 21.5
3316.1 -53.0 -73.6 20.6
3321.5 -52.8 -73.5 20.7
3326.9 -52.3 -73.7 21.4
*> *>
-51.6 -73.8 22.2
3337.6 -51.3 -73.5 22.2
3343.0 -49.9 -73.2 23.3
3348.4 -49.8 -73.5 23.7
3353.8 -49.2 -73.5 24.2
3359.2 -49.4 -72.2 22.8
178
3364.6 -49.6 -71.3 21.7
3369.9 -49.6 -71.3 21.7
3375.3 -49.1 -71.3 22.2
3380.7 -48.5 -71.0 22.6
3386.1 -48.7 -70.2 21.6
3391.5 -48.8 -70.1 21.3
3396.9 -47.9 -69.9 22.0
3402.2 -47.7 -69.3 21.6
3407.6 -49.0 -68.9 19.8
3413.0 -49.5 -69.8 20.3
3418.4 -48.1 -69.9 21.7
3423.8 -48.1 -69.6 21.5
3429.2 -48.9 -69.7 20.8
3434.5 -48.1 -71.0 22.9
3439.9 -47.5 -72.5 25.0
3445.3 -48.4 -72.3 23.9
3450.7 -50.0 -71.7 21.7
3456.1 -50.9 -72.3 21.5
3461.5 -50.5 -72.5 22.0
3466.8 -51.6 -72.3 20.7
3472.2 -52.8 -72.8 20.0
3477.6 -53.3 -73.7 20.4
3483.0 -54.1 -73.5 19.4
3488.4 -54.3 -72.4 18.1
3493.8 -54.3 -72.0 17.7
3499.1 -54.2 -73.7 19.6
3504.5 -54.4 -74.8 20.4
3509.9 -55.6 -74.1 18.5
3515.3 -56.5 -73.6 17.1
3520.7 -56.9 -74.1 17.2
3526.1 -56.8 -73.9 17.1
3531.4 -57.3 -72.9 15.6
3536.8 -57.4 -72.9 15.6
3542.2 -57.6 -73.3 15.7
3547.6 -58.4 -73.1 14.7
3553.0 -58.4 -72.7 14.3
3558.4 -57.9 -73.0 15.0
3563.7 -58.4 -73.7 15.4
3569.1 -58.6 -73.4 14.8
3574.5 -58.6 -73.8 15.2
3579.9 -58.2 -73.4 15.1
3585.3 -57.4 -72.6 15.2
3590.7 -57.6 -72.7 15.1
3596.0 -58.1 -72.1 14.0
3601.4 -57.6 -71.4 13.8
3606.8 -57.0 -71.2 14.3
179
3612.2 -57.1 -70.7 13.6
3617.6 -58.1 -70.3 12.2
3623.0 -57.1 -70.7 13.5
3628.3 -55.4 -72.2 16.8
3633.7 -54.7 -71.4 16.6
3639.1 -55.0 -70.7 15.7
3644.5 -56.5 -70.5 14.1
3649.9 -57.4 -70.5 13.1
3655.3 -56.2 -70.7 14.5
3660.6 -55.7 -72.1 16.3
3666.0 -55.4 -74.2 18.8
3671.4 -55.4 -73.4 17.9
3676.8 -55.7 -73.1 17.4
3682.2 -55.4 -73.0 17.6
3687.6 -56.2 -72.9 16.8
3692.9 -57.2 -73.8 16.5
3698.3 -57.6 -74.4 16.8
3703.7 -57.6 -74.0 16.4
3709.1 -58.0 -73.3 15.3
3714.5 -57.6 -73.4 15.8
3719.9 -57.6 -73.0 15.5
3725.2 -57.5 -73.3 15.8
3730.6 -57.4 -74.3 16.9
3736.0 -57.2 -74.9 17.6
3741.4 -57.7 -74.8 17.1
3746.8 -57.5 -75.0 17.5
3752.2 -57.9 -76.0 18.1
3757.5 -57.5 -76.2 18.7
3762.9 -56.9 -75.2 18.4
3768.3 -57.3 -74.3 17.0
3773.7 -56.7 -74.6 17.9
3779.1 -56.5 -74.5 17.9
3784.5 -56.9 -73.6 16.7
3789.8 -57.8 -74.0 16.3
3795.2 -58.6 -75.5 16.9
3800.6 -58.0 -76.4 18.4
3806.0 -59.1 -75.9 16.8
3811.4 -59.6 -76.6 17.0
3816.8 -58.0 -77.3 19.3
3822.1 -58.3 -77.6 19.2
3827.5 -58.2 -76.1 17.9
3832.9 -58.6 -76.1 17.5
3838.3 -58.6 -76.9 18.4
3843.7 -58.9 -76.9 17.9
3849.1 -59.8 -77.0 17.2
3854.4 -59.8 -75.9 16.1
180
3859.8 -60.3 -75.6 15.3
3865.2 -60.5 -76.6 16.1
3870.6 -60.0 -77.3 17.2
3876.0 -59.4 -76.8 17.4
3881.4 -59.8 -76.5 16.7
3886.7 -59.9 -76.5 16.6
3892.1 -60.1 -76.7 16.6
3897.5 -59.6 -77.4 17.8
3902.9 -58.7 -76.8 18.2
3908.3 -58.0 -76.4 18.4
3913.7 -59.1 -77.1 18.0
3919.0 -59.6 -78.5 18.9
3924.4 -59.2 -79.3 20.2
3929.8 -58.5 -78.3 19.8
3935.2 -58.4 -76.9 18.5
3940.6 -58.6 -76.8 18.2
3946.0 -59.5 -77.3 17.7
3951.3 -59.6 -77.3 17.7
3956.7 -60.1 -77.3 17.2
3962.1 -61.0 -78.7 17.7
3967.5 -61.4 -78.7 17.3
3972.9 -60.3 -77.1 16.7
3978.3 -60.1 -75.5 15.4
3983.6 -61.2 -75.6 14.4
3989.0 -62.0 -75.3 13.4
3994.4 -61.4 -75.6 14.2
3999.8 -61.1 -75.8 14.8
4005.2 -61.1 -75.9 14.8
4010.6 -60.5 -76.6 16.1
4015.9 -60.6 -75.5 14.9
4021.3 -60.9 -74.9 14.0
4026.7 -60.2 -74.8 14.6
4032.1 -59.1 -74.1 15.0
4037.5 -59.6 -74.6 15.0
4042.9 -59.7 -75.5 15.8
4048.2 -60.1 -75.5 15.4
4053.6 -61.5 -75.5 13.9
4059.0 -61.5 -75.0 13.5
4064.4 -61.0 -74.4 13.4
4069.8 -61.6 -73.8 12.2
4075.2 -62.8 -73.4 10.6
4080.5 -63.1 -74.6 11.5
4085.9 -62.4 -76.9 14.5
4091.3 -62.9 -77.7 14.9
4096.7 -62.7 -77.3 14.6
4102.1 -62.2 -76.5 14.3
181
4107.5 -62.6 -77.8 15.1
4112.8 -62.1 -78.6 16.5
4118.2 -62.2 -77.2 15.1
4123.6 -62.3 -77.5 15.2
4129.0 -61.9 -77.4 15.5
4134.4 -61.5 -77.6 16.0
4139.8 -61.1 -77.9 16.8
4145.1 -62.4 -78.1 15.6
4150.5 -63.9 -78.6 14.7
4155.9 -62.8 -79.1 16.2
4161.3 -63.0 -79.4 16.4
4166.7 -64.2 -80.1 15.9
4172.1 -64.1 -81.2 17.1
4177.4 -63.7 -81.8 18.0
4182.8 -63.7 -80.2 16.5
4188.2 -64.1 -79.8 15.7
4193.6 -64.1 -79.9 15.8
4199.0 -64.1 -80.3 16.2
4204.4 -64.0 -80.1 16.1
4209.7 -64.3 -80.0 15.7
4215.1 -64.7 -79.8 15.1
4220.5 -66.1 -79.2 13.1
4225.9 -66.9 -79.2 12.3
4231.3 -65.8 -79.9 14.0
4236.7 -66.4 -79.4 13.0
4242.0 -68.0 -79.0 11.0
4247.4 -67.9 -78.7 10.8
4252.8 -69.0 -78.7 9.7
4258.2 -68.1 -78.4 10.4
4263.6 -67.5 -77.9 10.4
4269.0 -67.8 -78.3 10.5
4274.3 -68.0 -78.3 10.2
4279.7 -68.4 -78.5 10.1
4285.1 -68.6 -79.4 10.8
4290.5 -68.7 -78.9 10.1
4295.9 -70.2 -79.1 8.9
4301.3 -69.9 -78.5 8.5
4306.6 -69.1 -78.0 8.8
4312.0 -69.8 -78.6 8.7
4317.4 -70.3 -78.4 8.1
4322.8 -69.4 -77.8 8.3
4328.2 -69.2 -77.2 7.9
4333.6 -70.2 -77.4 7.1
4338.9 -71.5 -78.0 6.5
4344.3 -71.7 -77.9 6.2
4349.7 -70.7 -78.4 7.7
182
4355.1 -70.8 -78.4 7.6
4360.5 -70.2 -77.2 7.0
4365.9 -70.4 -77.6 7.2
4371.2 -71.2 -77.9 6.8
4376.6 -71.1 -77.4 6.3
4382.0 -70.1 -78.0 7.9
4387.4 -70.1 -77.9 7.8
4392.8 -69.8 -78.9 9.1
4398.2 -69.1 -79.1 9.9
4403.5 -69.4 -78.8 9.4
4408.9 -68.4 -79.1 10.7
4414.3 -67.3 -79.9 12.6
4419.7 -68.6 -80.3 11.8
4425.1 -69.0 -81.1 12.1
4430.5 -69.0 -81.5 12.5
4435.8 -68.2 -81.5 13.3
4441.2 -67.7 -81.6 13.9
4446.6 -67.8 -81.8 14.0
4452.0 -68.4 -82.1 13.8
4457.4 -68.3 -81.6 13.3
4462.8 -68.5 -80.3 11.8
4468.1 -68.1 -80.2 12.1
4473.5 -67.9 -81.0 13.1
4478.9 -68.1 -80.9 12.8
4484.3 -68.0 -80.5 12.5
4489.7 -68.8 -81.8 13.1
4495.1 -69.2 -82.6 13.3
4500.4 -68.1 -80.5 12.4
4505.8 -66.9 -80.2 13.3
4511.2 -67.1 -81.4 14.4
4516.6 -67.1 -83.0 15.9
4522.0 -66.3 -83.0 16.7
4527.4 -66.9 -82.1 15.3
4532.7 -68.4 -81.8 13.4
4538.1 -67.9 -82.0 14.1
4543.5 -67.7 -80.7 13.0
4548.9 -68.1 -81.3 13.2
4554.3 -68.1 -82.5 14.4
4559.7 -68.8 -83.0 14.2
4565.0 -69.1 -84.0 14.9
4570.4 -67.6 -83.9 16.2
4575.8 -67.6 -85.0 17.3
4581.2 -68.5 -85.2 16.7
4586.6 -68.4 -85.0 16.6
4592.0 -69.3 -83.8 14.5
4597.3 -70.1 -84.0 14.0
183
4602.7 -69.3 -84.8 15.5
4608.1 -69.3 -84.1 14.8
4613.5 -69.7 -83.2 13.5
4618.9 -70.3 -81.8 11.5
4624.3 -71.6 -81.6 10.1
4629.6 -72.0 -82.3 10.3
4635.0 -71.6 -83.6 12.0
4640.4 -70.9 -84.2 13.3
4645.8 -71.1 -83.6 12.5
4651.2 -71.7 -81.9 10.2
4656.6 -71.8 -82.5 10.7
4661.9 -70.9 -84.1 13.2
4667.3 -70.9 -84.0 13.0
4672.7 -71.8 -84.1 12.3
4678.1 -72.1 -84.4 12.3
4683.5 -71.7 -84.7 13.0
4688.9 -72.0 -84.5 12.6
4694.2 -73.0 -83.4 10.4
4699.6 -73.2 -82.1 8.9
4705.0 -73.0 -81.7 8.7
4710.4 -72.9 -82.4 9.5
4715.8 -73.6 -83.9 10.4
4721.2 -74.2 -84.2 10.0
4726.5 -73.5 -84.1 10.6
4731.9 -75.3 -84.4 9.2
4737.3 -76.0 -84.4 8.4
4742.7 -74.5 -85.0 10.5
4748.1 -76.6 -83.9 7.3
4753.5 -74.9 -83.1 8.2
4758.8 -75.7 -83.4 7.6
4764.2 -77.4 -84.0 6.6
4769.6 -76.7 -84.8 8.0
4775.0 -76.1 -84.7 8.6
4780.4 -76.1 -84.9 8.8
4785.8 -76.1 -85.0 8.9
4791.1 -77.1 -84.9 7.8
4796.5 -76.9 -84.8 8.0
4801.9 -76.4 -84.5 8.1
4807.3 -77.7 -84.6 6.9
4812.7 -77.5 -85.1 7.6
4818.1 -79.0 -85.0 6.1
4823.4 -80.5 -83.4 2.9
4828.8 -79.9 -82.4 2.5
4834.2 -81.1 -83.3 2.3
4839.6 -78.7 -84.1 5.4
4845.0 -77.5 -84.7 7.2
184
4850.4 -79.1 -85.3 6.2
4855.7 -80.6 -84.6 4.0
4861.1 -80.2 -84.0 3.8
4866.5 -80.9 -84.2 3.3
4871.9 -80.2 -83.7 3.5
4877.3 -80.6 -82.4 1.8
4882.7 -81.9 -82.4 0.5
4888.0 -81.3 -85.1 3.8
4893.4 -81.5 -85.8 4.3
4898.8 -81.1 -84.9 3.7
4904.2 -81.0 -84.5 3.5
4909.6 -81.0 -85.5 4.4
4915.0 -80.6 -86.3 5.8
4920.3 -79.8 -85.8 6.0
4925.7 -78.1 -86.2 8.2
4931.1 -78.1 -87.0 8.9
4936.5 -79.0 -86.3 7.3
4941.9 -79.4 -85.3 5.9
4947.3 -79.7 -84.1 4.4
4952.6 -79.5 -82.5 3.0
4958.0 -79.2 -83.4 4.2
4963.4 -78.9 -87.0 8.1
4968.8 -78.4 -88.4 10.0
4974.2 -78.6 -86.1 7.5
4979.6 -78.4 -82.8 4.4
4984.9 -78.8 -83.5 4.7
4990.3 -79.3 -85.7 6.5
4995.7 -78.7 -86.2 7.5
5001.1 -78.1 -86.4 8.3
5006.5 -79.4 -84.9 5.5
5011.9 -81.5 -83.4 1.9
5017.2 -80.9 -84.7 3.7
5022.6 -80.4 -85.7 5.2
5028.0 -81.2 -84.3 3.1
5033.4 -81.3 -82.8 1.5
5038.8 -80.7 -82.5 1.8
5044.2 -80.9 -82.9 1.9
5049.5 -81.4 -83.2 1.9
5054.9 -81.8 -83.7 1.9
5060.3 -82.0 -84.6 2.6
5065.7 -80.6 -85.6 5.0
5071.1 -79.7 -85.8 6.1
5076.5 -80.2 -87.4 7.1
APPENDIX G
Average Spectrum Data for Bruckner Example
Bruckner - "Locus isle "
Difference in
Amplitude
Frequency Relative Amplitude Relative Amplitude Between
(Hz) Resonant Non-Resonant Resonant and
Non-Resonant
Versions
10.8 -37.1 -36.0 - 1.1

16.1 -43.8 -43.4 -0.4
21.5 -47.7 -46.6 -1.1
26.9 -52.0 -51.0 -1.0
32.3 -56.2 -56.5 0.4
37.7 -60.7 -60.4 -0.3
43.1 -64.8 -64.0 -0.8
48.4 -68.1 -67.6 -0.5
53.8 -70.2 -69.8 -0.4
59.2 -68.3 -67.5 -0.8
64.6 -67.6 -66.2 -1.4
70.0 -69.9 -68.2 -1.7
75.4 -73.5 -72.6 -0.9
80.7 -75.9 -75.1 -0.7
86.1 -78.2 -77.8 -0.3
91.5 -77.9 -77.6 -0.4
96.9 -76.7 -75.9 -0.8
102.3 -72.7 -72.7 0.0
107.7 -68.3 -67.2 -1.1
113.0 -63.5 -56.9 -6.6
118.4 -56.5 -48.6 -7.8
123.8 -45.9 -41.9 -3.9
129.2 -39.5 -38.4 -1.0
134.6 -40.6 -40.6 0.0
140.0 -46.2 -45.5 -0.7
145.3 -44.1 -45.0 0.9
150.7 -45.5 -47.7 2.2
156.1 -52.8 -54.7 1.8
161.5 -61.6 -61.9 0.3
166.9 -65.6 -61.8 -3.8
172.3 -65.6 -57.5 -8.0
177.6 -60.7 -54.5 -6.2
183.0 -54.6 -53.0 -1.6
188.4 -51.1 -52.4 1.3
193.8 -50.3 -52.3 2.1
199.2 -51.2 -53.0 1.7
204.6 -54.8 -54.2 -0.6
209.9 -55.3 -55.4 0.1
215.3 -53.3 -56.1 2.7
220.7 -52.6 -56.8 4.2
226.1 -53.1 -58.4 5.3
231.5 -55.5 -58.2 2.7
236.9 -57.8 -55.1 -2.6
242.2 -53.9 -50.9 -3.0
247.6 -48.0 -46.7 -1.3
253.0 -41.7 -42.8 1.1
258.4 -37.1 -40.2 3.1
263.8 -36.4 -40.0 3.7
269.2 -39.3 -42.3 3.0
274.5 -43.5 -46.1 2.6
279.9 -46.9 -48.0 1.1
285.3 -46.8 -47.9 1.1
290.7 -45.5 -47.0 1.5
296.1 -43.1 -46.1 3.0
301.5 -42.8 -47.5 4.7
306.8 -42.5 -49.5 7.0
312.2 -40.6 -46.8 6.2
317.6 -38.0 -41.9 3.9
323.0 -36.5 -37.4 1.0
328.4 -35.5 -35.8 0.3
333.8 -35.3 -36.9 1.6
339.1 -35.2 -40.4 5.3
344.5 -36.4 -45.4 9.0
349.9 -39.6 -48.5 8.9
355.3 -43.5 -47.6 4.2
360.7 -45.5 -46.9 1.4
366.1 -44.4 -45.6 1.2
371.4 -41.8 -43.3 1.5
376.8 -39.1 -41.4 2.3
382.2 -36.2 -39.1 2.9
387.6 -32.5 -35.9 3.4
187
393.0 -31.3 -35.9 4.6
398.4 -33.2 -39.2 6.0
403.7 -35.7 -41.5 5.8
409.1 -38.7 -41.7 2.9
414.5 -40.4 -42.1 1.7
419.9 -37.8 -43.2 5.5
425.3 -36.2 -41.9 5.8
430.7 -36.6 -40.6 4.0
436.0 -36.7 -40.7 4.0
441.4 -36.6 -39.9 3.3
446.8 -35.6 -40.8 5.3
452.2 -36.6 -41.8 5.1
457.6 -38.5 -42.4 3.9
463.0 -40.6 -44.3 3.7
468.3 -43.9 -46.5 2.7
473.7 -44.7 -46.5 1.8
479.1 -40.2 -45.3 5.0
484.5 -36.7 -44.8 8.1
489.9 -35.2 -41.5 6.3
495.3 -33.1 -39.0 5.9
500.6 -31.0 -38.6 7.6
506.0 -31.2 -38.5 7.3
511.4 -33.1 -38.3 5.2
516.8 -33.4 -39.1 5.7
522.2 -33.6 -38.3 4.7
527.6 -33.1 -37.0 3.9
532.9 -32.8 -37.5 4.7
538.3 -35.0 -38.2 3.2
543.7 -36.5 -39.6 3.1
549.1 -37.1 -43.6 6.5
554.5 -38.6 -48.1 9.5
559.9 -39.9 -49.8 9.9
565.2 -40.1 -49.7 9.6
570.6 -40.1 -49.9 9.8
576.0 -39.9 -49.6 9.7
581.4 -39.1 -50.2 11.1
586.8 -39.6 -50.1 10.4
592.2 -40.1 -49.6 9.6
597.5 -40.5 -50.7 10.1
602.9 -42.3 -50.9 8.6
608.3 -43.9 -50.0 6.1
613.7 -44.0 -49.9 5.9
619.1 -42.8 -50.9 8.1
624.5 -40.9 -51.1 10.2
629.8 -40.1 -49.6 9.6
635.2 -39.3 -47.6 8.3
188
640.6 -38.3 -45.4 7.1
646.0 -38.3 -44.6 6.3
651.4 -37.6 -43.8 6.2
656.8 -36.8 -42.5 5.7
662.1 -37.4 -42.4 5.0
667.5 -38.3 -43.8 5.5
672.9 -38.8 -45.6 6.7
678.3 -40.3 -48.0 7.6
683.7 -42.6 -51.5 8.9
689.1 -42.9 -55.5 12.6
694.4 -43.4 -59.5 16.1
699.8 -45.3 -61.3 16.0
705.2 -48.1 -60.6 12.6
710.6 -50.8 -59.1 8.3
716.0 -53.5 -57.9 4.4
721.4 -52.6 -57.8 5.2
726.7 -49.6 -58.4 8.8
732.1 -47.2 -57.0 9.8
737.5 -45.2 -54.9 9.6
742.9 -43.2 -53.5 10.3
748.3 -41.9 -53.0 11.1
753.7 -42.6 -53.0 10.4
759.0 -43.7 -53.0 9.3
764.4 -44.3 -53.2 8.8
769.8 -44.1 -51.8 7.7
775.2 -41.9 -51.2 9.3
780.6 -40.6 -50.8 10.2
786.0 -40.8 -51.7 10.9
791.3 -42.3 -53.6 11.3
796.7 -43.2 -54.4 11.2
802.1 -42.8 -55.1 12.3
807.5 -43.1 -54.7 11.6
812.9 -42.9 -54.1 11.2
818.3 -43.3 -53.9 10.7
823.6 -44.4 -54.2 9.9
829.0 -45.3 -54.6 9.3
834.4 -46.6 -54.7 8.1
839.8 -49.9 -56.0 6.1
845.2 -52.5 -55.1 2.6
850.6 -52.4 -53.9 1.5
855.9 -50.6 -54.5 3.9
861.3 -48.3 -55.2 6.9
866.7 -47.5 -54.4 6.9
872.1 -48.4 -54.6 6.1
877.5 -48.0 -56.7 8.7
882.9 -47.6 -56.9 9.3
189
888.2 -49.7 -55.1 5.5
893.6 -46.5 -56.4 9.9
899.0 -45.2 -56.2 11.0
904.4 -45.9 -55.3 9.4
909.8 -45.9 -54.3 8.4
915.2 -46.4 -54.2 7.8
920.5 -47.8 -56.4 8.5
925.9 -47.9 -59.0 11.1
931.3 -48.5 -60.5 12.0
936.7 -48.3 -60.9 12.5
942.1 -47.4 -60.0 12.6
947.5 -46.9 -58.7 11.8
952.8 -46.4 -57.2 10.8
958.2 -46.1 -55.2 9.1
963.6 -46.2 -54.0 7.8
969.0 -46.2 -53.5 7.4
974.4 -47.0 -52.5 5.5
979.8 -46.0 -51.2 5.2
985.1 -44.4 -48.4 4.0
990.5 -42.2 -48.2 5.9
995.9 -40.5 -48.5 8.0
1001.3 -39.6 -48.5 8.9
1006.7 -39.9 -48.4 8.5
1012.1 -40.6 -47.6 7.1
1017.4 -39.9 -47.1 7.2
1022.8 -38.7 -47.7 9.1
1028.2 -38.5 -47.4 8.9
1033.6 -38.3 -46.9 8.5
1039.0 -38.1 -47.9 9.8
1044.4 -37.6 -46.6 9.1
1049.7 -38.6 -46.1 7.5
1055.1 -38.6 -45.5 6.9
1060.5 -38.4 -46.2 7.9
1065.9 -38.8 -48.8 10.1
1071.3 -38.5 -49.1 10.6
1076.7 -39.1 -50.6 11.5
1082.0 -39.8 -51.6 11.8
1087.4 -38.9 -53.6 14.7
1092.8 -38.0 -55.9 17.8
1098.2 -37.9 -57.7 19.8
1103.6 -38.9 -59.1 20.1
1109.0 -41.0 -59.2 18.2
1114.3 -41.9 -57.4 15.5
1119.7 -42.5 -55.8 13.3
1125.1 -44.1 -55.4 11.3
1130.5 -45.2 -56.5 11.2
190
1135.9 -46.4 -57.9 11.5
1141.3 -48.7 -56.9 8.2
1146.6 -49.3 -54.9 5.6
1152.0 -47.9 -55.0 7.1
1157.4 -47.2 -55.2 8.1
1162.8 -45.3 -54.0 8.7
1168.2 -46.2 -53.6 7.3
1173.6 -47.6 -54.7 7.0
1178.9 -48.5 -56.0 7.5
1184.3 -48.0 -55.4 7.4
1189.7 -47.4 -54.9 7.5
1195.1 -47.6 -55.1 7.5
1200.5 -48.5 -55.1 6.7
1205.9 -49.4 -54.4 5.0
1211.2 -49.2 -55.0 5.8
1216.6 -49.7 -56.4 6.7
1222.0 -50.6 -57.2 6.6
1227.4 -51.3 -57.5 6.2
1232.8 -50.8 -58.4 7.5
1238.2 -50.8 -60.5 9.7
1243.5 -50.6 -62.5 11.9
1248.9 -50.1 -63.0 13.0
1254.3 -49.1 -62.5 13.3
1259.7 -48.6 -62.1 13.5
1265.1 -48.8 -62.2 13.3
1270.5 -48.2 -61.5 13.3
1275.8 -46.8 -60.2 13.3
1281.2 -46.5 -58.6 12.1
1286.6 -47.3 -57.0 9.7
1292.0 -46.8 -56.7 9.9
1297.4 -45.5 -56.1 10.6
1302.8 -44.8 -55.4 10.6
1308.1 -44.5 -54.5 10.0
1313.5 -44.4 -53.9 9.5
1318.9 -45.7 -54.9 9.3
1324.3 -46.8 -54.1 7.3
1329.7 -46.4 -54.8 8.3
1335.1 -45.7 -57.2 11.5
1340.4 -45.5 -58.9 13.4
1345.8 -47.1 -60.1 13.0
1351.2 -49.0 -60.3 11.3
1356.6 -49.8 -62.0 12.2
1362.0 -50.4 -64.6 14.1
1367.4 -51.2 -64.5 13.3
1372.7 -51.8 -64.3 12.5
1378.1 -52.2 -65.3 13.1
191
1383.5 -53.6 -66.1 12.6
1388.9 -54.7 -66.0 11.3
1394.3 -54.3 -66.4 12.1
1399.7 -53.4 -67.2 13.8
1405.0 -52.1 -66.8 14.7
1410.4 -51.9 -65.6 13.8
1415.8 -51.8 -64.2 12.4
1421.2 -51.0 -61.0 10.0
1426.6 -50.7 -59.3 8.6
1432.0 -49.3 -59.3 9.9
1437.3 -48.7 -60.1 11.4
1442.7 -48.4 -61.3 12.8
1448.1 -48.7 -62.1 13.5
1453.5 -48.8 -62.7 13.9
1458.9 -49.6 -61.6 12.0
1464.3 -51.7 -60.3 8.7
1469.6 -52.0 -60.8 8.8
1475.0 -52.0 -61.6 9.6
1480.4 -51.1 -61.2 10.1
1485.8 -51.6 -61.5 9.9
1491.2 -52.2 -61.9 9.7
1496.6 -51.2 -61.4 10.2
1501.9 -51.3 -61.1 9.8
1507.3 -50.4 -61.5 11.0
1512.7 -49.4 -61.6 12.2
1518.1 -50.1 -62.2 12.1
1523.5 -51.0 -63.2 12.2
1528.9 -50.9 -63.8 12.9
1534.2 -50.2 -64.5 14.3
1539.6 -48.9 -64.8 16.0
1545.0 -46.5 -63.7 17.2
1550.4 -45.4 -63.2 17.8
1555.8 -45.5 -64.1 18.5
1561.2 -45.1 -64.8 19.7
1566.5 -45.4 -64.9 19.6
1571.9 -45.7 -65.5 19.8
1577.3 -45.8 -65.7 19.9
1582.7 -46.4 -63.6 17.2
1588.1 -46.8 -62.8 16.0
1593.5 -46.7 -62.7 15.9
1598.8 -48.1 -61.0 12.9
1604.2 -49.0 -59.8 10.8
1609.6 -47.7 -59.4 11.6
1615.0 -49.4 -60.2 10.8
1620.4 -51.1 -60.4 9.3
1625.8 -50.1 -57.8 7.7
192
1631.1 -49.1 -57.9 8.8
1636.5 -50.5 -60.2 9.7
1641.9 -51.5 -61.4 9.9
1647.3 -50.6 -60.6 10.0
1652.7 -52.2 -61.1 8.9
1658.1 -51.8 -60.6 8.7
1663.4 -51.2 -60.8 9.7
1668.8 -51.7 -59.3 7.6
1674.2 -50.3 -59.8 9.5
1679.6 -49.5 -61.6 12.1
1685.0 -49.6 -61.3 11.7
1690.4 -50.8 -60.8 10.0
1695.7 -50.6 -61.3 10.7
1701.1 -49.7 -62.3 12.6
1706.5 -50.3 -62.6 12.3
1711.9 -50.0 -62.4 12.4
1717.3 -50.4 -61.9 11.5
1722.7 -50.8 -62.3 11.6
1728.0 -50.5 -63.9 13.4
1733.4 -51.6 -66.1 14.6
1738.8 -51.0 -67.6 16.6
1744.2 -51.0 -69.6 18.6
1749.6 -50.4 -67.8 17.5
1755.0 -49.1 -67.0 17.9
1760.3 -49.1 -69.5 20.4
1765.7 -49.5 -67.7 18.2
1771.1 -49.9 -63.2 13.3
1776.5 -50.1 -62.4 12.4
1781.9 -50.9 -63.9 13.0
1787.3 -50.7 -66.2 15.5
1792.6 -50.8 -69.0 18.2
1798.0 -51.0 -71.7 20.7
1803.4 -49.4 -73.2 23.8
1808.8 -48.2 -73.4 25.2
1814.2 -48.7 -73.5 24.9
1819.6 -49.9 -73.4 23.6
1824.9 -50.6 -74.1 23.5
1830.3 -51.0 -75.5 24.5
1835.7 -51.1 -75.3 24.3
1841.1 -50.8 -73.4 22.6
1846.5 -51.7 -71.3 19.5
1851.9 -52.1 -69.0 16.9
1857.2 -52.2 -67.8 15.6
1862.6 -52.9 -67.7 14.8
1868.0 -54.3 -68.9 14.6
1873.4 -56.0 -70.6 14.7
193
1878.8 -56.2 -69.2 12.9
1884.2 -55.9 -67.3 11.4
1889.5 -55.1 -67.6 12.5
1894.9 -54.7 -67.7 13.1
1900.3 -54.8 -66.2 11.4
1905.7 -55.7 -66.9 11.3
1911.1 -57.1 -66.4 9.3
1916.5 -56.8 -65.9 9.1
1921.8 -55.7 -65.9 10.2
1927.2 -56.1 -64.9 8.8
1932.6 -56.6 -64.4 7.8
1938.0 -56.5 -64.6 8.1
1943.4 -55.6 -65.1 9.5
1948.8 -55.0 -65.1 10.1
1954.1 -54.9 -65.8 10.9
1959.5 -55.0 -66.3 11.2
1964.9 -54.6 -67.7 13.1
1970.3 -54.1 -67.1 13.0
1975.7 -53.9 -66.0 12.1
1981.1 -53.4 -66.7 13.3
1986.4 -53.6 -67.2 13.6
1991.8 -54.4 -68.5 14.1
1997.2 -54.0 -68.3 14.3
2002.6 -54.1 -68.5 14.4
2008.0 -54.3 -67.6 13.3
2013.4 -54.3 -67.4 13.1
2018.7 -54.8 -69.1 14.3
2024.1 -55.0 -71.4 16.4
2029.5 -54.6 -69.9 15.3
2034.9 -54.3 -69.1 14.8
2040.3 -54.5 -71.3 16.8
2045.7 -55.2 -74.1 18.9
2051.0 -56.0 -73.4 17.4
2056.4 -55.7 -71.6 15.9
2061.8 -54.2 -70.8 16.6
2067.2 -54.3 -69.9 15.6
2072.6 -54.8 -69.8 15.0
2078.0 -54.3 -70.3 15.9
2083.3 -54.3 -71.1 16.7
2088.7 -56.4 -70.6 14.2
2094.1 -59.1 -70.1 11.0
2099.5 -58.8 -68.5 9.7
2104.9 -57.4 -68.5 11.1
2110.3 -57.9 -69.6 11.7
2115.6 -57.9 -70.6 12.7
2121.0 -58.2 -69.7 11.5
194
2126.4 -58.0 -70.2 12.2
2131.8 -57.0 -70.5 13.5
2137.2 -57.2 -70.3 13.1
2142.6 -57.1 -70.3 13.2
2147.9 -56.7 -70.2 13.5
2153.3 -56.8 -70.5 13.8
2158.7 -56.8 -70.3 13.5
2164.1 -56.0 -70.1 14.1
2169.5 -54.1 -70.7 16.6
2174.9 -53.1 -69.8 16.8
2180.2 -53.9 -68.8 14.9
2185.6 -54.1 -69.0 15.0
2191.0 -53.4 -69.1 15.7
2196.4 -53.6 -67.9 14.3
2201.8 -53.2 -67.3 14.1
2207.2 -52.6 -66.6 14.0
2212.5 -52.1 -66.8 14.7
2217.9 -52.8 -66.8 14.0
2223.3 -51.9 -66.0 14.2
2228.7 -51.7 -66.9 15.2
2234.1 -52.4 -68.6 16.2
2239.5 -51.9 -69.2 17.3
2244.8 -52.0 -69.4 17.4
2250.2 -51.8 -68.6 16.8
2255.6 -52.2 -68.7 16.5
2261.0 -53.3 -68.9 15.6
2266.4 -54.3 -68.7 14.4
2271.8 -55.2 -68.7 13.5
2277.1 -56.4 -68.9 12.5
2282.5 -56.5 -68.7 12.2
2287.9 -56.3 -67.9 11.6
2293.3 -55.7 -67.5 11.8
2298.7 -55.8 -67.2 11.4
2304.1 -57.0 -67.5 10.6
2309.4 -56.7 -67.1 10.4
2314.8 -55.3 -66.9 11.6
2320.2 -54.3 -67.4 13.1
2325.6 -53.8 -68.0 14.3
2331.0 -53.5 -67.9 14.4
2336.4 -52.6 -67.3 14.6
2341.7 -52.2 -67.8 15.5
2347.1 -52.9 -68.9 16.0
2352.5 -52.3 -68.9 16.6
2357.9 -51.9 -68.4 16.5
2363.3 -52.0 -68.7 16.8
2368.7 -51.9 -69.5 17.7
195
2374.0 -52.5 -69.9 17.4
2379.4 -53.7 -70.6 16.9
2384.8 -54.5 -71.2 16.7
2390.2 -54.2 -71.6 17.4
2395.6 -54.2 -72.0 17.8
2401.0 -55.0 -72.5 17.5
2406.3 -55.1 -72.1 17.1
2411.7 -55.5 -72.5 17.1
2417.1 -57.4 -71.8 14.4
2422.5 -57.6 -71.0 13.4
2427.9 -57.9 -70.8 12.9
2433.3 -58.0 -70.6 12.7
2438.6 -57.3 -70.7 13.4
2444.0 -57.2 -70.5 13.3
2449.4 -56.4 -70.3 13.9
2454.8 -55.5 -71.5 16.0
2460.2 -54.3 -71.5 17.2
2465.6 -53.9 -70.8 16.9
2470.9 -53.4 -70.3 17.0
2476.3 -52.8 -69.8 16.9
2481.7 -52.5 -70.3 17.9
2487.1 -52.2 -70.8 18.6
2492.5 -52.0 -71.6 19.5
2497.9 -51.3 -72.8 21.5
2503.2 -51.0 -72.7 21.7
2508.6 -51.8 -72.5 20.7
2514.0 -52.2 -71.3 19.1
2519.4 -51.6 -70.6 19.0
2524.8 -51.9 -69.8 17.9
2530.2 -53.2 -70.5 17.3
2535.5 -53.5 -70.6 17.2
2540.9 -53.6 -70.9 17.3
2546.3 -53.1 -69.8 16.7
2551.7 -53.0 -69.0 16.0
2557.1 -53.2 -69.3 16.1
2562.5 -53.2 -69.0 15.8
2567.8 -52.9 -69.0 16.1
2573.2 -52.3 -68.7 16.3
2578.6 -52.4 -68.5 16.1
2584.0 -51.6 -67.6 16.0
2589.4 -50.9 -67.6 16.7
2594.8 -50.9 -67.5 16.6
2600.1 -50.1 -66.9 16.8
2605.5 -49.3 -66.4 17.1
2610.9 -49.2 -67.4 18.3
2616.3 -49.9 -68.7 18.9
196
2621.7 -49.7 -67.9 18.2
2627.1 -49.7 -67.3 17.6
2632.4 -49.8 -67.3 17.6
2637.8 -50.2 -67.7 17.5
2643.2 -50.3 -68.0 17.8
2648.6 -50.7 -67.4 16.8
2654.0 -51.3 -67.9 16.6
2659.4 -51.0 -68.5 17.5
2664.7 -50.6 -68.2 17.6
2670.1 -51.3 -67.4 16.2
2675.5 -51.0 -67.1 16.1
2680.9 -51.5 -67.7 16.2
2686.3 -51.8 -68.6 16.9
2691.7 -51.1 -68.1 17.0
2697.0 -50.8 -67.2 16.5
2702.4 -50.8 -67.7 16.8
2707.8 -50.2 -68.0 17.8
2713.2 -49.8 -67.9 18.0
2718.6 -49.7 -68.9 19.2
2724.0 -49.7 -69.3 19.6
2729.3 -49.7 -69.5 19.9
2734.7 -49.3 -70.2 20.9
2740.1 -49.3 -71.1 21.8
2745.5 -49.7 -71.8 22.1
2750.9 -50.2 -72.5 22.2
2756.3 -50.3 -72.1 21.8
2761.6 -49.9 -71.9 21.9
2767.0 -49.8 -72.2 22.4
2772.4 -49.9 -72.8 22.9
2777.8 -50.1 -72.3 22.1
2783.2 -50.9 -72.1 21.2
2788.5 -51.6 -72.7 21.1
2793.9 -52.1 -72.8 20.7
2799.3 -52.5 -71.9 19.4
2804.7 -52.2 -71.5 19.3
2810.1 -52.2 -71.4 19.2
2815.5 -52.9 -70.7 17.8
2820.8 -53.3 -70.7 17.4
2826.2 -54.0 -70.7 16.7
2831.6 -53.5 -70.5 17.0
2837.0 -52.5 -70.4 17.9
2842.4 -52.0 -70.5 18.5
2847.8 -52.1 -71.5 19.4
2853.1 -51.5 -70.8 19.3
2858.5 -51.5 -69.5 18.0
2863.9 -51.6 -69.7 18.1
19 7
2869.3 -51.7 -69.8 18.2
2874.7 -51.5 -69.1 17.6
2880.1 -52.3 -68.3 16.1
2885.4 -51.2 -67.3 16.1
2890.8 -50.7 -67.0 16.3
2896.2 -50.5 -68.4 17.9
2901.6 -51.0 -69.2 18.2
2907.0 -51.6 -68.4 16.9
2912.4 -51.4 -68.2 16.8
2917.7 -51.6 -68.6 17.1
2923.1 -51.9 -68.5 16.5
2928.5 -51.8 -68.8 17.0
2933.9 -51.7 -69.4 17.7
2939.3 -51.5 -69.7 18.2
2944.7 -51.6 -68.8 17.2
2950.0 -52.1 -67.7 15.5
2955.4 -51.7 -67.4 15.7
2960.8 -51.2 -67.0 15.7
2966.2 -50.9 -66.5 15.7
2971.6 -50.7 -65.6 14.9
2977.0 -50.5 -64.1 13.6
2982.3 -50.6 -65.3 14.6
2987.7 -51.5 -67.3 15.8
2993.1 -51.5 -68.2 16.6
2998.5 -51.5 -68.5 17.0
3003.9 -51.7 -68.6 16.9
3009.3 -52.1 -68.9 16.8
3014.6 -52.7 -69.1 16.4
3020.0 -53.2 -69.5 16.4
3025.4 -53.2 -69.7 16.5
3030.8 -53.2 -70.7 17.5
3036.2 -53.2 -71.5 18.2
3041.6 -53.7 -71.1 17.5
3046.9 -54.1 -69.9 15.8
3052.3 -53.7 -69.3 15.6
3057.7 -53.4 -69.8 16.4
3063.1 -53.3 -70.6 17.3
3068.5 -52.9 -70.4 17.5
3073.9 -52.9 -70.9 18.0
3079.2 -53.7 -71.4 17.7
3084.6 -54.5 -71.8 17.3
3090.0 -54.9 -71.6 16.7
3095.4 -55.0 -70.9 15.9
3100.8 -54.9 -71.5 16.6
3106.2 -54.9 -71.7 16.8
3111.5 -54.9 -70.9 16.0
198
3116.9 -54.8 -70.9 16.2
3122.3 -55.0 -72.4 17.4
3127.7 -55.4 -72.9 17.5
3133.1 -55.2 -72.6 17.4
3138.5 -54.9 -73.1 18.2
3143.8 -55.4 -73.8 18.5
3149.2 -55.3 -73.8 18.5
3154.6 -54.8 -74.1 19.3
3160.0 -54.7 -74.0 19.4
3165.4 -54.7 -73.8 19.1
3170.8 -54.5 -73.4 18.9
3176.1 -54.0 -73.5 19.5
3181.5 -54.0 -73.3 19.3
3186.9 -55.0 -72.6 17.5
3192.3 -55.5 -72.2 16.8
3197.7 -55.1 -72.5 17.4
3203.1 -54.5 -72.5 18.0
3208.4 -54.8 -72.8 18.1
3213.8 -54.5 -73.0 18.5
3219.2 -54.8 -73.9 19.0
3224.6 -54.3 -74.0 19.7
3230.0 -53.9 -73.5 19.6
3235.4 -53.9 -73.8 19.9
3240.7 -53.9 -73.3 19.4
3246.1 -53.4 -73.4 20.0
3251.5 -53.6 -74.2 20.5
3256.9 -53.4 -75.5 22.2
3262.3 -53.8 -77.1 23.4
3267.7 -54.1 -78.0 23.8
3273.0 -53.4 -78.5 25.1
3278.4 -53.3 -78.5 25.2
3283.8 -53.8 -79.2 25.4
3289.2 -53.6 -79.3 25.7
3294.6 -53.9 -78.2 24.3
3300.0 -55.0 -78.0 23.0
3305.3 -54.7 -77.1 22.4
3310.7 -54.0 -76.4 22.4
3316.1 -54.5 -76.5 22.0
3321.5 -55.7 -77.7 21.9
3326.9 -56.7 -77.0 20.4
3332.3 -55.8 -77.0 21.2
3337.6 -55.3 -77.1 21.8
3343.0 -55.0 -77.6 22.6
3348.4 -55.7 -77.9 22.2
3353.8 -55.6 -78.6 22.9
3359.2 -56.1 -77.7 21.5
19 9
3364.6 -56.7 -76.7 20.1
3369.9 -55.6 -77.6 22.1
3375.3 -55.5 -78.9 23.4
3380.7 -55.3 -79.6 24.4
3386.1 -55.0 -79.0 24.0
3391.5 -55.1 -78.3 23.2
3396.9 -55.6 -79.0 23.4
3402.2 -55.9 -80.5 24.6
3407.6 -55.0 -79.8 24.7
3413.0 -55.4 -78.5 23.2
3418.4 -55.5 -79.3 23.8
3423.8 -55.2 -79.4 24.2
3429.2 -55.4 -78.7 23.3
3434.5 -55.8 -78.1 22.4
3439.9 -55.7 -76.9 21.2
3445.3 -56.6 -76.7 20.1
3450.7 -56.8 -76.4 19.6
3456.1 -56.2 -76.8 20.5
3461.5 -55.0 -76.5 21.5
3466.8 -54.8 -76.6 21.8
3472.2 -54.6 -77.2 22.5
3477.6 -55.6 -77.4 21.8
3483.0 -57.0 -77.3 20.3
3488.4 -57.0 -77.3 20.3
3493.8 -57.3 -77.2 19.9
3499.1 -57.4 -77.8 20.4
3504.5 -57.1 -76.8 19.7
3509.9 -57.2 -76.3 19.1
3515.3 -57.1 -75.5 18.4
3520.7 -57.6 -74.7 17.1
3526.1 -57.9 -74.5 16.7
3531.4 -58.8 -74.9 16.2
3536.8 -59.4 -74.9 15.5
3542.2 -59.1 -74.6 15.5
3547.6 -59.2 -73.8 14.6
3553.0 -59.1 -73.6 14.5
3558.4 -59.4 -73.5 14.1
3563.7 -60.2 -72.9 12.7
3569.1 -60.4 -72.5 12.1
3574.5 -59.7 -73.1 13.4
3579.9 -58.9 -73.7 14.8
3585.3 -59.3 -74.0 14.7
3590.7 -59.3 -74.4 15.1
3596.0 -59.0 -75.3 16.3
3601.4 -58.8 -75.3 16.5
3606.8 -58.6 -74.6 16.0
200
3612.2 -59.0 -75.1 16.1
3617.6 -59.7 -75.5 15.8
3623.0 -59.0 -74.9 15.9
3628.3 -58.6 -75.2 16.7
3633.7 -58.3 -75.3 17.0
3639.1 -58.2 -75.9 17.7
3644.5 -58.2 -75.8 17.6
3649.9 -58.3 -76.2 17.8
3655.3 -58.4 -77.2 18.8
3660.6 -58.0 -77.1 19.1
3666.0 -57.8 -76.6 18.8
3671.4 -58.7 -77.3 18.6
3676.8 -59.3 -76.9 17.6
3682.2 -58.4 -76.5 18.1
3687.6 -58.4 -76.6 18.2
3692.9 -58.5 -76.1 17.7
3698.3 -58.0 -75.1 17.0
3703.7 -58.3 -74.7 16.4
3709.1 -58.5 -74.5 15.9
3714.5 -58.5 -74.4 16.0
3719.9 -58.3 -74.5 16.2
3725.2 -58.2 -74.4 16.3
3730.6 -58.2 -75.0 16.8
3736.0 -58.2 -76.1 17.9
3741.4 -57.8 -76.6 18.9
3746.8 -57.8 -76.6 18.8
3752.2 -58.0 -77.3 19.2
3757.5 -57.8 -77.2 19.4
3762.9 -57.7 -78.4 20.7
3768.3 -57.8 -78.0 20.2
3773.7 -57.9 -76.9 19.0
3779.1 -57.7 -76.3 18.6
3784.5 -57.9 -76.3 18.4
3789.8 -58.3 -76.8 18.5
3795.2 -58.8 -77.5 18.7
3800.6 -58.9 -77.1 18.2
3806.0 -58.5 -76.8 18.3
3811.4 -58.0 -76.9 18.9
3816.8 -58.2 -75.4 17.2
3822.1 -58.8 -75.1 16.3
3827.5 -59.0 -75.3 16.2
3832.9 -59.1 -75.5 16.4
3838.3 -59.2 -75.2 16.0
3843.7 -58.2 -72.9 14.7
3849.1 -58.2 -72.7 14.5
3854.4 -58.2 -73.2 15.0
201
3859.8 -57.4 -73.6 16.3
3865.2 -57.2 -73.7 16.5
3870.6 -57.7 -73.4 15.7
3876.0 -58.0 -73.2 15.2
3881.4 -58.3 -72.7 14.4
3886.7 -58.4 -72.5 14.1
3892.1 -58.1 -72.6 14.5
3897.5 -58.3 -72.6 14.3
3902.9 -58.4 -72.2 13.9
3908.3 -58.3 -71.8 13.4
3913.7 -57.7 -72.5 14.8
3919.0 -56.6 -72.2 15.6
3924.4 -56.5 -71.1 14.6
3929.8 -58.1 -71.1 13.0
3935.2 -59.1 -70.9 11.8
3940.6 -59.1 -70.8 11.7
3946.0 -59.3 -71.4 12.1
3951.3 -60.3 -71.4 11.1
3956.7 -59.8 -70.6 10.7
3962.1 -60.1 -71.2 11.1
3967.5 -60.0 -72.3 12.4
3972.9 -60.4 -72.6 12.3
3978.3 -60.5 -72.4 11.9
3983.6 -61.1 -72.1 11.0
3989.0 -61.1 -72.1 11.0
3994.4 -60.3 -73.0 12.7
3999.8 -60.8 -73.1 12.2
4005.2 -61.6 -72.8 11.2
4010.6 -62.1 -73.2 11.1
4015.9 -61.9 -73.6 11.8
4021.3 -62.2 -74.7 12.5
4026.7 -62.0 -75.0 13.0
4032.1 -62.3 -74.9 12.6
4037.5 -63.6 -75.6 12.0
4042.9 -64.1 -76.6 12.5
4048.2 -63.1 -76.9 13.7
4053.6 -63.7 -77.0 13.3
4059.0 -65.4 -78.0 12.6
4064.4 -65.0 -77.6 12.6
4069.8 -64.5 -77.7 13.2
4075.2 -65.5 -78.3 12.7
4080.5 -65.5 -79.2 13.7
4085.9 -64.7 -79.5 14.8
4091.3 -65.2 -78.9 13.7
4096.7 -65.8 -78.2 12.4
4102.1 -66.3 -77.3 11.0
202
4107.5 -65.9 -77.1 11.2
4112.8 -65.6 -77.4 11.7
4118.2 -65.8 -77.8 11.9
4123.6 -65.7 -78.1 12.4
4129.0 -66.1 -77.2 11.1
4134.4 -65.8 -76.6 10.8
4139.8 -66.2 -76.2 10.0
4145.1 -66.5 -76.3 9.7
4150.5 -66.3 -77.3 11.0
4155.9 -66.2 -77.6 11.5
4161.3 -66.1 -76.8 10.7
4166.7 -66.8 -76.4 9.6
4172.1 -66.5 -76.4 9.9
4177.4 -65.9 -76.2 10.3
4182.8 -65.6 -76.7 11.1
4188.2 -65.4 -77.8 12.4
4193.6 -65.8 -77.5 11.7
4199.0 -65.2 -77.6 12.4
4204.4 -65.5 -78.2 12.6
4209.7 -66.7 -78.2 11.5
4215.1 -67.2 -78.7 11.5
4220.5 -67.6 -78.5 10.9
4225.9 -67.9 -78.5 10.6
4231.3 -67.6 -78.7 11.1
4236.7 -67.7 -78.7 11.1
4242.0 -68.4 -79.1 10.8
4247.4 -68.5 -79.8 11.3
4252.8 -68.8 -80.9 12.2
4258.2 -68.2 -80.2 12.0
4263.6 -68.3 -79.3 11.0
4269.0 -68.1 -79.3 11.2
4274.3 -68.5 -80.6 12.2
4279.7 -68.6 -81.6 13.0
4285.1 -68.9 -80.8 11.9
4290.5 -68.5 -80.1 11.6
4295.9 -68.7 -80.8 12.1
4301.3 -69.3 -82.0 12.7
4306.6 -68.9 -82.2 13.3
4312.0 -68.9 -81.7 12.9
4317.4 -68.8 -81.8 13.0
4322.8 -68.9 -82.6 13.7
4328.2 -69.2 -82.0 12.9
4333.6 -69.0 -82.2 13.3
4338.9 -69.2 -81.8 12.7
4344.3 -69.7 -80.6 10.9
4349.7 -68.9 -81.5 12.6
203
4355.1 -69.1 -81.9 12.8
4360.5 -69.5 -81.8 12.4
4365.9 -69.6 -80.9 11.2
4371.2 -69.6 -80.0 10.4
4376.6 -69.9 -81.6 11.7
4382.0 -70.1 -81.7 11.6
4387.4 -69.0 -80.4 11.4
4392.8 -68.3 -80.3 12.0
4398.2 -68.4 -80.8 12.4
4403.5 -68.5 -81.7 13.2
4408.9 -68.0 -82.5 14.4
4414.3 -68.0 -80.6 12.7
4419.7 -68.8 -79.6 10.8
4425.1 -69.4 -80.8 11.4
4430.5 -69.7 -81.4 11.7
4435.8 -69.0 -81.5 12.5
4441.2 -69.1 -82.0 13.0
4446.6 -68.8 -81.4 12.5
4452.0 -68.7 -80.4 11.7
4457.4 -70.1 -80.1 10.0
4462.8 -70.4 -80.2 9.7
4468.1 -69.7 -80.8 11.0
4473.5 -70.0 -81.8 11.8
4478.9 -70.4 -81.8 11.4
4484.3 -69.5 -81.1 11.6
4489.7 -69.0 -82.3 13.3
4495.1 -69.5 -82.3 12.8
4500.4 -70.6 -83.2 12.6
4505.8 -70.9 -84.1 13.1
4511.2 -70.7 -82.4 11.7
4516.6 -70.8 -81.2 10.4
4522.0 -71.5 -81.1 9.5
4527.4 -73.2 -81.1 7.9
4532.7 -72.6 -81.2 8.5
4538.1 -71.7 -80.5 8.8
4543.5 -71.1 -80.9 9.8
4548.9 -71.6 -81.6 10.0
4554.3 -72.5 -81.2 8.7
4559.7 -72.9 -81.8 8.9
4565.0 -72.3 -83.0 10.7
4570.4 -71.7 -80.6 8.9
4575.8 -73.4 -79.7 6.4
4581.2 -74.7 -80.4 5.7
4586.6 -74.8 -81.2 6.4
4592.0 -74.7 -81.1 6.4
4597.3 -74.8 -80.8 5.9
204
4602.7 -74.9 -81.4 6.5
4608.1 -75.2 -82.4 7.1
4613.5 -74.9 -82.8 7.9
4618.9 -74.3 -81.7 7.4
4624.3 -74.3 -82.3 8.0
4629.6 -73.9 -84.2 10.3
4635.0 -73.7 -83.4 9.7
4640.4 -74.2 -82.8 8.6
4645.8 -75.1 -83.2 8.1
4651.2 -75.8 -83.4 7.6
4656.6 -75.9 -83.3 7.4
4661.9 -74.8 -83.0 8.2
4667.3 -74.7 -82.2 7.5
4672.7 -75.2 -82.1 6.9
4678.1 -76.4 -80.8 4.3
4683.5 -76.8 -80.6 3.7
4688.9 -75.8 -83.0 7.2
4694.2 -75.3 -84.1 8.8
4699.6 -75.8 -83.0 7.2
4705.0 -76.4 -82.1 5.7
4710.4 -77.4 -82.0 4.6
4715.8 -78.0 -82.8 4.8
4721.2 -78.0 -83.6 5.6
4726.5 -77.1 -81.6 4.5
4731.9 -75.7 -81.4 5.7
4737.3 -74.8 -82.2 7.4
4742.7 -75.6 -83.7 8.1
4748.1 -77.7 -83.8 6.1
4753.5 -78.3 -83.7 5.4
4758.8 -77.0 -84.2 7.2
4764.2 -76.8 -82.1 5.3
4769.6 -77.3 -81.1 3.8
4775.0 -77.0 -82.6 5.5
4780.4 -76.9 -82.3 5.5
4785.8 -75.8 -82.7 6.8
4791.1 -75.5 -84.2 8.7
4796.5 -76.2 -84.2 8.0
4801.9 -76.8 -82.7 5.9
4807.3 -76.3 -82.0 5.6
4812.7 -75.5 -81.6 6.1
4818.1 -75.7 -84.4 8.6
4823.4 -76.3 -86.0 9.7
4828.8 -76.7 -83.2 6.5
4834.2 -78.3 -82.1 3.8
4839.6 -78.8 -82.1 3.2
4845.0 -77.4 -83.8 6.4
205
4850.4 -77.0 -85.1 8.0
4855.7 -77.4 -83.8 6.4
4861.1 -78.3 -83.1 4.7
4866.5 -79.2 -84.3 5.1
4871.9 -78.7 -84.0 5.3
4877.3 -77.5 -84.4 7.0
4882.7 -77.8 -84.1 6.2
4888.0 -78.3 -83.5 5.2
4893.4 -77.8 -83.6 5.7
4898.8 -78.1 -83.2 5.0
4904.2 -78.5 -82.9 4.4
4909.6 -78.6 -83.4 4.9
4915.0 -78.4 -83.7 5.4
4920.3 -78.9 -85.8 6.8
4925.7 -79.1 -87.1 8.0
4931.1 -78.1 -85.5 7.5
4936.5 -78.1 -83.2 5.1
4941.9 -78.1 -82.1 4.1
4947.3 -77.3 -82.1 4.7
4952.6 -77.6 -83.5 5.9
4958.0 -79.6 -85.0 5.3
4963.4 -78.6 -84.9 6.3
4968.8 -77.9 -84.7 6.8
4974.2 -78.2 -83.1 4.9
4979.6 -77.8 -83.2 5.4
4984.9 -77.0 -85.0 8.0
4990.3 -76.9 -85.6 8.6
4995.7 -77.6 -87.1 9.5
5001.1 -77.3 -86.4 9.0
5006.5 -77.7 -86.0 8.3
5011.9 -78.0 -85.7 7.7
5017.2 -78.0 -86.0 8.0
5022.6 -78.1 -84.7 6.6
5028.0 -77.5 -83.5 5.9
5033.4 -77.1 -83.5 6.4
5038.8 -77.6 -83.2 5.6
5044.2 -78.0 -82.4 4.4
5049.5 -78.0 -82.7 4.7
5054.9 -78.1 -84.6 6.6
5060.3 -77.6 -82.9 5.2
5065.7 -77.6 -82.2 4.5
5071.1 -77.9 -83.1 5.2
5076.5 -78.1 -85.0 6.9
206
APPENDIX H
Subject Free Response Comments
hard to tell the difference
I didn’t hear a whole lot o f difference between pairs
It is difficult to separate tone quality and volume
On pair 1 A wasn't so bad but soon it became piercing so the intensity

stays at 5
I liked the examples in the way they were approached. I felt like the tone
was free in the softer singing, hence pushed with being loud.
Once you heard twice or three times the same piece o f music, after some
time is hard to really focus and pay attention to the sound quality or
intensity o f preference.
So many sounded like there no difference whatsoever!
With little experience with vocalists. I feel it is very hard to hear tone
quality.
Other musical contexts o f various dynamic levels would have been

helpful in establishing preference
It seemed like the difference between the recordings was a difference in

passion behind the music and passiveness
soprano flat
I liked the fuller, natural sound as opposed to the crisp sound.
Sometimes the lower voices were blaring which affected my decision.
207
Some of the examples seemed to be equally bad or equally good so there
wasn't much difference.
Volume made the syllables more clear, which tended to steer me towards
that direction despite your warning.
Most of the ones I circled were smoother progressions than the other
ones.
.. .the basses seemed to stand out in a way that I disliked,
pair 5-10 sounded similar
I seem to like the less intense choruses - you could hear the different
voices better
The reason I liked certain ones better is because they sounded like one
voice not 4 or more
I really had a tough time deciphering between the two in each pair.
Personally. I noticed some differences easily and others not so easily.
In the softer recordings, the pronounced "s" sounds were more obvious
and distracting than in the other recording. However, I like the tone in the
softer recording.
I felt the volume did affect me, in that I liked the less intense sound better.
Also, while I might like a passage better on moving tones, on the long
notes either the balance did not sit as well, or the release didn't feel right.
very professionally done
Many o f the pairs sounded very similar and it was hard to choose.
The difference in loud versus soft volume made it hard to decide.
There were volume differences, but actual differences seemed very subtle.
It was sometimes hard to decide which one I liked more.
I had a hard time making a real distinction between the two. I'm not very
good with voice.
The loudness difference does have a tendency to distract my perception of

208
the tone quality. It would be easier to distinguish between pairs if the
volume was equal [tone, loudness seems to distort tone, but it can also
bring out certain parts.]
I'm a big fan o f acoustical environments so it was hard to be specific in

my answers without thinking o f what it might sound like in a Cathedral or
even Opperman.
The music throughout the text sounded the same as in previous samples,
except the samples would be played in opposite order.
Good luck with your project.
Many o f them sounded basically the same so it was harder to decide.
One sounds clearer than the other.
I feel that the volume had direct impact on the timbre used by the
vocalists. It didn't sound like the recording was louder, it sounded like
the singer's sang louder. I also think that the volume has much to do with
the particular phrase that was sung. These two could have been either, I
suppose.
I found that one of the pairs had a smoother sound than the other in each
o f the 12 pairs.
like powerful male voice!
music is boring, sorry
Next time could have a variety o f music cause it all sounds the same.
Now the pitch changed and the voices were added but it was still the
same. I was expecting different types o f music.
How many pairs were there in reality? Sounded like 4 or so. not 12
distinct ones.
REFERENCES
(1998). Spectra Plus (Version 2.32.01) [software]. Campbell, CA:

Sound Technology Inc.
Albert, V. F. (1951). Theoretical and experimental analysis o f networks

o f resonators and their application to the production o f sound by the vocal
tract. Dissertation Abstracts International. 22, (01), 287. (University
Microfilms No. AAG6004429)
Alderson. R. (1979). Complete Handbook o f Voice Training. West

Nyack. NY: Parker Publishing Company. Inc.
Appelman, D. R. (1986). The Science o f Vocal Pedagogy.

Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Arment, H. E. (1960). A study by means of spectrographic analysis of

the brightness and darkness qualities o f vowel tones in women's voices.
Dissertation Abstracts International. 21. (03). 638. (University Microfilms No.
AAG6002989)
Barbereux-Parrv. M. (1941). Vocal Resonance: Its Source and

Command. North Quincy. MA: The Christopher Publishing House.
Bartholomew. W. A. (1934). A physical definition o f "good voice

quality" in the male voice. Journal o f the Acoustical Society o f America, 6, 25-
j j .
Bartholomew. W. T. (1942). Acoustics o f Music. New York: Prentice-

Hall.
Baxter. J. (1996). An Interview with Robert Shaw: Reflections at

Eighty. Choral Journal. 36(9). 9-14.
Berg. R. E.. & Stork. D. G. (1995). The Physics o f Sound. (2 ed.).

Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Inc.
210
Bergmann. L. N. (1944). Music Master o f the Middle West: The Story
ofF. Melius Christiansen and the St. O laf Choir. Minneapolis: University o f
Minnesota Press.
Bemdtsson. G. ( i 995). Systems for synthesizing singing and for

enhancing the acoustics o f music rooms: two aspects o f shaping musical
sounds (reverberation). Dissertation Abstracts International. 58. (01C), 228.
(University Microfilm No. AAGC522486)
Bloothooft, G.. & Plomp, R. (1986). The sound level o f the singer's
formant in professional singing. Journal o f the Acoustical Society o f America,
79. 2028-2033.
Bloothooft. G. (1987). A note on voice quality in professional singing.

Journal o f Research in Singing, 10(2), 3-16.
Bolster. S. C. (1983). The Fixed Formant Theory and its Implications

for Choral Blend and Choral Diction. Choral Journal, 23(6), 27-33.
Boone, D. R. M.. S. C. (1994). The Voice and Voice Therapy. (5 ed.).

Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Boone. R. D. (1991). Is Your Voice Telling On You?: How to fin d and

use your natural voice. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group. Inc.
Boyd. J. (1977). Rehearsal Guide fo r the Choral Director. Champaign:

Mark Foster.
Buehler. J. M. (1989). George Lynn -- The Westminster Connection:

Choral Sound and Choral Composition: A Vocal Approach. Dissertation
Abstracts International. 50. (08A), 2291. (University Microfilms No.
AAG9000417)
Bunch. M. (1982). Dynamics o f the Singing Voice. Wien: Springer-

Verlag.
Burgin. J. C. (1973). Teaching Singing. Metuchen. N. J.: The

Scarecrow Press. Inc.
Butcher. G.. et. al. (Ed.). (1985). The Hymnal 1982. New York: Church
Publishing Incorporated.
Cain. N. (1942). Choral Music and its Practice. New York: M.

Whitmark & Sons.
211
Callaghan. J. (1994). The Implications o f Voice Science for Voice
Pedagogy: The Singer's Formant. The National Association o f Teachers o f
Singing Journal, 50(5), 5-8.
Campbell, M. (1988). The musicians' guide to acoustics. New York:

Schirmer Books.
Christiansen, E. P. (1988). Spectral analysis o f choral singing involving

oral manipulation and maintenance o f vowel intelligibility. (Doctoral
dissertation, Arizona State University. 1988). Dissertation Abstracts
International. 50. (01 A), 14.
Christiansen, F. M. (1932). Ensemble Singing. Music Supervisors

National Conference Yearbook, 25, 121-134.
Christiansen. O. C. (1965). Solo and Ensemble Singing. The NATS

Bulletin, 2/(3). 16-17. 40.
Christy. V. A. (1940). Glee Club and Chorus: A handbook o f

organizing, conducting, and maintaining glee club and choral organizations,
with selected, graded, and classified lists o f octavo music and texts. New York:
G. Schirmer. Inc.
Christy. V. A. (1961). Expressive Singing. Dubuque: Wm. C. Brown

Co. Inc.
Clarke. S. D. (1997). Eph Ehly. All-State Choir Conductor: A Video

Presentation O f His Philosophy And Rehearsal Techniques. (Doctoral
dissertation. Ball State University. 1997) Dissertation Abstracts International.
58. (03A), 627.
Cleveland, T., Sundberg, J. (1983). Acoustic analysis o f three male

voices o f different quality. Speech Transmission Laboratory Quarterly
Progress and Status Report, 4, 27-38.
Coffin. B. (1976). Articulation for Opera. Oratorio, and Recital.

National Assiciation o f Teachers o f Singing Bulletin, 32(3). 26-41.
Coffin, B. (1987). Sounds o f Singing: Principles and applications o f

vocal techniques with chromatic vowel chart. Metuchen. N. J.: The Scarecrow
Press. Inc.
Collins. D. (1999). Teaching Choral Music. (2nd ed.). Englewood

Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Inc.
212
Colness, R. C. (1967). Tone Quality: A Pragmatic Approach for High
School Choirs. American Music Teacher, 17(2), 21-22.
Cook-Koenig, C. A. (1995). Vocal Fatigue In Choral Singing: Causes

And Suggestions For Prevention Voiced By Prominent Choral Directors.
(Doctoral dissertation. The Florida State University). Dissertation Abstracts
International. 56, (03A), 752.
Cooksey, J. M. (1977). A Facet-Factorial Approach to Rating High

School Choral Music Performance. Journal o f Research in Music Education,
25(2), 100-114.
Corbin, L. A. (1982). Vocal pedagogy in the choral rehearsal: the

influence o f selected concepts on choral tone quality, student understanding of
the singing process, and student attitudes toward choir participation. (Doctoral
dissertation. The Ohio State University). Dissertation Abstracts International.
43, (08A), 2485.
Crelin. E. S. (1987). The Human Vocal Tract: Anatomy, Function.

Development, and Evolution. New York: Vantage Press.
Crocker. M. J. (1997). Encyclopedia o f Acoustics. New York: John

Wiley & Sons. Inc.
Crocker, M. J. (Ed.). (1998). Handbook o f Acoustics. New York: John

Wiley & Sons. Inc.
Daniel. M. (1993). Balancing Space and Energy in Choral Voices. The

Music Educators Journal. 29-31.51.
Darrow, G. F. (1975). Four Decades o f Choral Training. Metuchen.

N.J.: The Scarecrow Press, Inc.
David. M. (1995). The New Voice Pedagogy. Landam. MD: The

Davis. J. (1979). Choral Tone. The Choral Journal. 19(9). 14-16.
Davison. A. (1940). Choral Conducting. Cambridge. MA: Harvard

University Press.
Decker. H. A.. & Kirk. Colleen J. (1995). Choral Conducting: Focus

on Communication. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press. Inc.
Decker. W. K. (1976). A Study O f Vocal Pedagogy For The Choral

Rehearsal Based On Theories Presented In Published Literature From 1960 To
213
1970 And On Interviews And Observations O f Selected Choral Conductors.
(Doctoral dissertation. Temple University). Dissertation Abstracts
International. 36. (12A), 7920.
Dejonckere, P. H.. Hirano, Minoru, Sundberg. Johan (Ed.). (1995).

Vibrato. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group. Inc.
Delattre. P. C. (1958). Vowel color and voice quality: an acoustic

articulatory comparison. The National Association o f Teachers oj Singing
Journal, 15{ 1). 4-7.
Denes, P. B.. & Pinson, Elliot N. (1973). The Speech Chain: The
Physics and Biology o f Spoken Language. Garden City: Anchor Press.
Dickreiter, M. (1989). Tonmeister Technology: Recording

environments, sound sources and microphone techniques. New York: Temmer
Enterprises. Inc.
Diercks, L. H. (1962). The Individual in the Choral Situation. The

Choral Journal. 7(4), 25-29.
Dolson. M. B. (1982). A tracking phase vocoder and its use in the

analysis o f ensemble sounds. Dissertation Abstracts International, 44. (01B),
255 (University Microfilms No. AAG8312042)
Draper. D. (1972). The Solo Voice as Applied to Choral Singing. The

Choral Journal, 12{9), 12-14.
Ehmann. W.. & Haasemann. Frauke. (1981). Voice Building fo r Choirs.

Chapel Hill: Hinshaw Music. Inc.
Ehret. W. (1959). The Choral Conductor's Handbook. New York:

Edward B. Marks Music Corporation.
Eisenkramer. H. E. (1949). Techniques in Voice Blending. The Music

Educators Journal, 35(4), 48-49.
Ekholm. E.. Papagiannis. G. C.. & Chagnon. F. P. (1996. June).

Relating Objective Measurements to Expert Evaluation o f Voice Quality in
Western Classical Singing: Critical Perceptual Parameters. Paper presented at
the 25th Annual Symposium: Care o f the Professional Voice and the
International Association o f Phonosurgeons' IVth International Symposium on
Phonosurgery. Philadelphia. PA.
Ekholm. E. (1998). The effect o f choristers' vocal production and

seating arrangement on evaluations o f choral blend and overall choral sound..
214
Emerich. K. A.. Barrody. M. M., Carroll, L. M., & Sataloff. R. T.
(1997). The Singing Voice Specialist. In R. T. Sataloff (Ed.), Professional
Voice: The Science and Art o f Clinical Care (pp. 735-753). San Diego:
Singular Publishing Group, Inc.
Faes, T. G. (1988). Exploring Music Preference: An Empirical Study

O f A Lexicon For Timbre. (Masters thesis. Michigan State University, 1988).
Masters Abstracts International. 27, (01), 6.
Fant, G. (1970). Acoustic Theory o f Speech Production. (2 ed.). The

Hague: Mouton & Co. N. V.
Fields. V. A. (1947). Training the Singing Voice: An analysis o f the

working concepts contained in recent contributions to vocal pedagogy. New
York: King's Crown Press.
Fields, V. A. (1977). Foundations o f the Singer's Art. New York:

Vantage Press.
Fillebrown, T. (1911). Resonance in Singing and Speaking. Boston:

Oliver Ditson Company.
Finn. W. J. (1939). The Art o f the Choral Conductor. (1 ed.). (Vol. 1).
Boston: C. C. Birchard & Co.
Finn. W. J. (1944). The Conductor Raises His Baton. New York:

Harper & Brothers Publishers.
Fowler. C. (Ed.). (1987). Conscience o f a Profession: Howard Swan.

Chapel Hill. NC: Hinshaw Music. Inc.
Fry. D. B. (Ed.). (1976). Acoustic Phonetics: a course o f basic reading.

New York: Cambridge University Press.
Fry\ D. B. (1979). The Physics o f Speech. New York: Cambridge

University Press.
Fuchs. V. (1964). The Art o f Singing and Voice Technique. New York:
London House & Maxwell.
Garretson. R. L. (1998). Conducting Choral Music. (8 ed.). Upper

Saddle River. NJ: Prentice Hall. Inc.
Giardiniere. D. C. (1991). Voice Matching: A Perceptual Study o f

Vocal Matches. Their Affect on Choral Sound, and Procedures o f Inquiry
215
Conducted by Weston Noble. (Doctoral dissertation. New York University).
Dissertation Abstracts International. 52. (12A). 4139.
Goodwin, A. W. (1977). An Acoustical Study o f Individual Voices in

Choral Blend. (Doctoral dissertation. North Texas State University).
Dissertation Abstracts International. 38. (12A), 7201. (University Microfilms
No. AAG7807833)
Goodwin. A. W. (1980). An acoustical study o f individual voices in

choral blend. Journal o f Research in Music Education, 28(2). 119-128.
Gordon. L. (1977). Choral Director's Complete Handbook. West

Nyack, NY: Parker Publishing.
Griffin. P. W. (1988). Clayton Henry Krehbiel: Musician/Educator

(Kansas, Florida). (Doctoral dissertation. The Florida State University. 1988).
Dissertation Abstracts International. 50. (02A). 381.
Gunn, J.. George Henry. (1960). An acoustical analysis o f Quality

Variations in Sung Vowels. Dissertation Abstracts International. 21. (12).
3885. (University Microfilms No. AAG6006874)
Hammar. R. A. (1984). Pragmatic Choral Procedures. Metuchen. N.J.:

The Scarecrow Press. Inc.
Harper, A. H., Jr. (1967). Spectrographic comparison o f certain vowels

to ascertain differences between solo and choral singing, reinforced by aural
comparison. (Doctoral dissertation. Indiana University. 1967). Dissertation
Abstracts International. 28. (12A). 3067.
Harpster. R. W. (1984). Technique in Singing. New York: Schirmer

Books.
Heffeman. C. W. (1982). Choral Music: Technique and Artistry.

Englewood Cliffs. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Inc.
Helmholtz. H. (1954 ). On the Sensations o f Tone as a Physiological

Basis fo r the Theory o f Music. (Alexander J. Ellis. Trans.). New York: Dover.
Helvey. K. W. (1952). A study o f the methods o f choral tone production

o f selected choral directors. Unpublished masters thesis.. University o f
Southern California, Los Angeles.
Henahan. D. (1987). When Vibrato is on Shaky Ground. American

Choral Review. 29(2). 10-12.
216
Hjortsvang. C. (1941). The Amateur Choir Director. New York:
Abingdon Press.
Howerton, G. (1958). Technique and Style in Choral Singing. Boston:

Carl Fischer.
Hylton, J. (1995). Comprehensive Choral Music Education. Englewood

Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Johnson, A. R. (1973). The Christiansen Choral Tradition: F. Melius

Christiansen, Olaf C. Christiansen, and Paul J. Christiansen. Dissertation
Abstracts International. 34. (09A), 6023. (University Microfilms No.
AAG7407389)
Johnston, D. (1996). Cool Edit 96 (Version 96). Phoenix: Syntrillium

Software Corporation.
Johnston. I. (1989). Measured Tones: The Interplay o f Physics and

Music. New York: Adam Hilger.
Jones. A. (1948). Techniques in Choral Conducting. New York: Carl

Fischer.
Jones. A. (1977). Choral Tone Quality and Blend. The School

Musician, Director, & Teacher, 49(2), 64-65.
Jones. J. W. (1957). Tone Production in Choral Art. Choral and Organ

Guide, 10(3), 10-18.
Jordan. J. (1996). Evoking Sound: Fundamentals o f Choral Conducting

and Rehearsing. Chicago: GIA Publications. Inc.
Karlsson. I. (1992). Evaluations o f acoustic differences between male

and females voices: a pilot study. Speech Transmission Laboratory Quarterly
Progress and Status Report. I. 19-31.
Kiefer. P. T. (1999. 4/9/99). Fred Waring's America Collection. [World

Wide Web page]. The Pennsylvania State University. Available:
http://www.libraries.psu.edu/crsweb/speccol/waring.htm [ 1999. 4/17/99].
Killian. J. (1985). Operant Preference for Vocal Balance in Four-Voice

Chorales. Journal o f Research in Music Education, J 3 ( l ). 55-67.
Klein. J. J. (1967). Singing Technique: How to Avoid Vocal Trouble.

Princeton: D. van Nostrand Co.. Inc.
217
Knutson, B. J. (1987). Interviews with selected choral conductors
concerning rationale and practices regarding choral blend. (Doctoral
dissertation. The Florida State University, 1987). Dissertation Abstracts
(ntemational.46. (08A), 2223.
Kohut, D., & Grant, Joe. (1990). Learning to Conduct and Rehearse.
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Kortkamp, I. (1969). The Advanced Choir. Tower, MN: Mohawk

Publishing Company.
Krone. M. T. (1945). The Chorus and Its Conductor. Chicago: Neil A.

Kjos.
Lamb. G. H. (1979). Choral Techniques. Dubuque: William C. Brown

Publishing.
Large. J.. & Iwata, S. (1971). Aerodynamic Study o f Vibrato and

Voluntary 'Straight Tone' Pairs in Singing. Folia Phoniatrica, 23. 50-65.
Larkin, M. H. (1985). The Construction And Validation O f Rating

Scales For The Objective Measurement O f Five Dimensions O f Achievement
In Choral Music Performance. (Doctoral dissertation. Temple University,
1985). Dissertation Abstracts International. 46. (08A). 2223.
Latta. J. A. (1986). Alice Parker: Choral Composer. Arranger And

Teacher. Dissertation Abstracts International. 47. (09A). 3350. (University
Microfilm No. AAG8701541)
Lawson, F. D. (1944). The Human Voice: A Concise Manual on

Training the Speaking and Singing Voice. New York: Harper & Brothers
Publishers.
LeBlanc. A.. Colman. James. McCrary. Jan. (1988). Tempo

Preferences o f Different Age Music Listeners. Journal o f Research in Music
Education. 36(3). 156-168.
Lee. M. (1977). A Voice Teacher Looks at the Choral Scene. The

Choral Journal. 17(1). 5-1.
Lehiste. I. (Ed.). ( 1967). Readings in Acoustics Phonetics. Cambridge:

The M.I.T. Press.
Lyall. J. L. (1970). The greatest o f these is tone quality. The American

Music Teacher. 19(3). 26-27.
218
Madsen. C. K... & Geringer. J. M. (1998). Musicians' Ratings of Good
Versus Bad Vocal and String Performances. Journal o f Research in Music
Education, 46(A). 522-534.
Magill, P. C., & Jacobson, Loren. (1978). A comparison o f the Singing

Formant in the Voices o f Professional and Student Singers. Journal o f
Research in Music Education, 26(A), 456-469.
Manson. J. (1961). Interpretive Choral Singing. Nashville: Broadman

Press.
Mauldin, W. (1989). The Influence O f Gregg Smith On Twentieth

Century Choral Literature As A Composer And Conductor. Dissertation
Abstracts International. 50, (07A), 1843. (University Microfilm No.
AAG8922737)
Mayer. F. C. (1964). The Relationship of Blend and Intonation in the

Choral Art. The Music Educators Journal, 5/(1). 109-110.
McElheran. B. (1966). Conducting Technique. London: Oxford

University Press.
Miller. A. W. (1992). Choral Recordings As History: A Study O f The

Recording Techniques O f Five Choral Organizations. (Doctoral dissertation.
The Florida State University, 1992). Dissertation Abstracts International. 53.
(07A). 2154.
Miller. K. E. (1983). Principles o f Singing. Englewood Cliffs: Printice-

Hall. Inc.
Miller. R. (1986). The Structure o f Singing: System and Art in Vocal

Technique. New York: Schirmer Books.
Miller. R. (1993). Training Tenor Voices. New York: Schirmer Books.
Monahan. B. J. (1978). The Art o f Singing: A Compendium o f Thoughts

on Singing Published Between 1777 and 1927. Metuchen. N. J.: The
Montgomery'. A. P. (1996). Effect of Tempo on Music Preferences o f

Children in Elementary and Middle School. Journal o f Research in Music
Education. 44(2). 134-136.
Moore. R. H.. II. (1995). Aspects O f Choral Ensemble: Definitions And

Applications O f Selected Outstanding University Choral Conductors.
219
(Doctoral dissertation. University O f Missouri, 1995). Dissertation Abstracts
lntemational.57, (02A), 508.
Moravcsik. M. J. (1987). Musical Sound: an introduction to the physics

o f music. New York: Paragon House Publishers.
Morris, P. L. (1951). A study o f the development o f desirable choral

tone with emphasis on the function o f blending. Unpublished masters thesis.
The Ohio State University, Columbus.
Morrow. P. J. (1993). The Influence O f The Robert Shaw Chorale. The

Roger Wagner Chorale And The Gregg Smith Singers On The Professional
Chorus In The United States. Dissertation Abstracts International. 54, (04A).
1144. (University Microfilm No. AAG9324762)
Mountford, F. (1992). Fred Waring And American Choral Singing: His

Career. Philosophy. And Techniques. Dissertation Abstracts International. 53,
(05A). 1319. (University Microfilm No. AAG9226399)
Nawka. T.. Anders, L. C., Cebulla, M.. & Zurakowski, D. (1997). The
Speaker’s Formant in Male Voices. Journal o f Voice, 7/(4). 422-428.
Neidig, K.. & Jennings, John (Ed.). (1967). Choral Director's Guide.
West Nyack, NJ: Parker Publishing.
Nelson. L. M. (1943). F. Melius Christiansen: Study o f his life and

work as a Norwegian-American Contribution to American culture. American
Doctoral Dissertations. W1943. 80. (University Microfilm No. AAG0150134)
Neumann. F. (1987). Authenticity and the Vocal Vibrato. The

American Choral Review, 29(2), 13-17.
Nicholas. L. (1967). The Voice Class. Choral Directors Guide. 39-54.
Overturf. M. S. (1985). Implementing Concepts O f Vocal Sound:

Rehearsal Approaches O f Four Conductors O f Outstanding High School
Choirs. (Doctoral dissertation. The Florida State University. 1985).
Dissertation Abstracts International. 47. (01 A). 115.
Paget. R. S. (1922). Vowel Resonances. In D. B. Fry (Ed.). Acoustic

Phonetics: A course o f basic readings (pp. 95-103). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Palmquist. J. E. (1990). Apparent Time Passage and Music Preference

by Music and Nonmusic Majors. Journal o f Research in Music Education.
3 8 0 ). 206-214.
220
Parker. S. P. (1987). Acoustics Source Book. New York: McGraw-Hill
Book Company.
Peterson. P. W. (1966). Natural Singing and Expressive Conducting.

Winston-Salem, NC: J. F. Blair.
Pierce, E. E. (1988). Julius Herford: His Life, Teaching, And Influence

On The Choral Art In The United States. Dissertation Abstracts International,
50. (05A), 1133. (University Microfilm No. AAG8911678)
Pierce, J. R. (1992). The Science o f Sound. New York: W. H. Freeman

& Co.
Regier. B., Opheim. Vernon H.. & Wise, B. Fred. (1962). The
Individual voice in the Choral Ensemble. The Choral Journal. 2(5), 12-15. 30.
Rhoads. M. D. (1990). Decision-Making In The Choral Rehearsal: A

Study O f Five Outstanding High School Choral Directors Using Stimulated
Recall. (Doctoral dissertation. University O f Oregon, 1990). Dissertation
Abstracts Intemational.51. (08A), 2674.
Roach, D. (1989). Complete Secondary Choral Music Guide. West

Nyack, NY: Parker Publishing.
Robinson. C. R. (1988a). Differentiated Modes O f Choral Performance

Evaluation Using Traditional Procedures And A Continuous Response Digital
Interface Device. (Doctoral dissertation. The Florida State University. 1988).
Dissertation Abstracts Intemational.49. (09A). 2445.
Robinson. R. (1981). John Finley Williamson: His Contribution To

Choral Music. Choral Journal, 22(1). 5-10.
Robinson. R. (1988b). John Finley Willianson; A Centennial

Appreciation. Princeton: Prestige Publications. Inc.
Robinson. R.. & Winold, Allen. (1992). The Choral Experience.

Prospect Heights. IL: Waveland Press.
Roe. P. F. (1983). Choral Music Education. (2nd ed.). Englewood

Cliffs. N. J.: Prentice-Hall. Inc.
Rose. A. (1971). The Singer and the Voice: Vocal Physiology and
Technique fo r Singers. (2 ed.). London: Faber and Faber Limited.
221
Rossing, T.. Sundberg, J.. Temstrom, S. (1985a). Acoustic comparison
o f soprano solo and choir singing. Speech Transmission Laboratory Quarterly
Progress and Status Report, 4. 43-58.
Rossing, T., Sundberg, J., Temstrom, S. (1985b). Voice timbre in solo

and choir singing: is there a difference? Journal o f Research in Singing, 5(2),
1-7.
Rzhevkin, S. N. (1956). Certain Results o f the Analysis o f a Singer's

Voice. Soviet Physics-Acoustics, 2, 215-220.
Sataloff. R. T. (1997). Professional Voice: The Science and Art o f

Clinical Care. (2 ed.). San Diego: Singular Publishing Group. Inc.
Scarbrough. M. L. (1996). Portrait O f A Leading Choral Conductor:

The Life And Work O f Roger Wagner. 1914-1992. Dissertation Abstracts
International. 57. (05A). 1907. (University Microfilm No. AAG9631431)
Schisler. C. (1986). Robert Shaw at Seventy: Tribute to a Titan. The

Choral Journal, 26( April), 15-22.
Schisler, C. H. (1976). A History o f Westminster Choir College.

Dissertation Abstracts International. 37. (1 1A), 6834. (University Microfilm
No. AAG7710948)
Schultz-Coulon, H. J., Battmer. R. D., & Riechers. H. (1979a). Der 3-

kHz-Formant - ein Mass Fur die Tragfahigkeit der Stimme? I. Die untrainierte
Normalstimme. Folia Phoniatrica, 31. 291-301.
Schultz-Coulon, H. J.. Battmer. R. D., & Riechers. H. (1979b). Der 3-

kHz-Formant - ein Mass Fiir die Tragfahigkeit der Stimme? II. Die trainierte
Singstimme. Folia Phoniatrica, 31. 302-313.
Schuman. H.. & Presser, Stanley. (1981). Questions and Answers in

Attitude Surveys: Experiments on Question Form. Wording, and Context. New
York: Academic Press.
Schutte. H. K... & Miller. R. (1985). Intraindividual Parameters o f the

Singer's Formant. Folia Phoniatrica, 37. 31-35.
Seidner. W.. Schutte. H. K... Wendler. J.. Rauhut. A. (1985).

Dependence o f the high singing formant on pitch and vowel in different voice
types. Paper presented at the Stockholm Music Acoustics Conference.
Stockholm: Royal Swedish Academy o f Music.
222
Sengupta, R. (1990). Study on Some Aspects o f the "Singer's Formant"
in North Indian Classical Singing. Journal o f Voice, 4(2), 129-134.
Shanks. J. C. (1983). Treatment o f resonance disorders. In H. Perkins

(Ed.), Voice Disorders (pp. 39-49). New York: ThiemeStratton.
Shaw, J. M. (1997). St. O laf Choir - A Narrative. Northfield: St. Olaf

College.
Shaw. R. (1986). Letters to a Symphony Chorus. The Choral Journal,

2<5(April). 5-10.
Slusher, H. D. (1991). A comparison o f the perspectives o f college

choral directors, voice teachers, and voice students concerning solo and choral
singing. (Doctoral dissertation. The Ohio State University. 1991). Dissertation
Abstracts Intemational.52. (05A), 3349.
Smallman, J.. & Wilcox. E. H. (1933). The Art o f A Cappella Singing.

Philadelphia: Oliver Ditson Company.
Smith, B. J. S., Robert T. (1997). Choral Pedagogy. In R. T. Sataloff

(Ed.), Professional Voice: The Science and Art o f Clinical Care (pp. 759-763).
San Diego: Singular Publishing Group, Inc.
Stanley. D. (1932). The Science o f Voice. (2 ed.). New York: Carl

Fischer.
Stanton. R. (1971). The Dynamic Choral Conductor. Delaware Water

Gap. PA: Shawnee Press.
Strong, W. J. (1992). Music Speech Audio. Provo: Soundprint.
Stutheit. S. A. (1994). Adjudicators', Choral Directors' And Choral

Students' Hierarchies O f Musical Elements Used In The Preparation And
Evaluation O f High School Choral Contest Performance. (Doctoral
dissertation. University O f Missouri. 1994). Dissertation Abstracts
International. 55. (11 A), 3349.
Sundberg, J. (1970a). Formant Structure and Articulation o f Spoken

and Sung Vowels. Folia Phoniatrica, 22. 28-48.
Sundberg, J. (1970b). The level o f the 'singing formant' and the source
spectra o f professional bass singers. Speech Transmission Laboratory-
Quarterly Progress and Status Report. 4. 21-39.
Sundberg. J. (1972a). An articulatory interpretation o f the 'singing
formant'. Speech Transmission Laboratory Quarterly Progress and Status
Report, /, 45-53.
Sundberg, J. (1972b). A perceptual function o f the 'singing formant'.

Speech Transmission Laboratory Quarterly Progress and Status Report, 2-3,
61-63.
Sundberg, J. (1977). The acoustics o f the singing voice. Scientific

American, 236(3), 82-91.
Sundberg, J. (1979). Perception o f singing. Speech Transmission

Laboratory Quarterly Progress and Status Report, I, 1-48.
Sundberg, J. (1982). In tune or not? A study o f fundamental frequency

in music practice. Speech Transmission Laboratory Quarterly Progress and
Status Report, I, 49-78.
Sundberg, J. (1987). The Science o f the Singing Voice. Dekalb:

Northern Illinois University Press.
Sundberg, J., Friberg, A., Fryden, L. (1988a). Musicians' and

nonmusicians' sensitivity to differences in music performance. Speech
Transmission Laboratory Quarterly Progress and Status Report(4), 77-81.
Sundberg, J. (1988b). Vocal Tract Resonance In Singing. National

Association o f Teachers o f Singing Journal, 44( 4), 11-31.
Sundberg, J. (1994). Perceptual Aspects o f Singing. Journal o f Voice,

8(2), 106-122.
Sundberg, J. (1997a). Human Singing Voice. In M. J. Crocker (Ed.).

Encyclopedia o f Acoustics (Vol. 4 ,). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Sundberg, J. (1997b). Music acoustics on the threshold o f the 21st

century., [world wide web site]. Available:
http://www.speech.kth.se/music/threshoId21stNovember 21,1997].
Sundberg, J. (1997c). Vocal Tract Resonance. In R. Sataloff (Ed.),

Professional Voice: The Science and Art o f Clinical Care (pp. 167-184). San
Diego: Singular Publishing Group.
Sundberg, J. (1999). The Perception o f Singing. In D. Deutsch (Ed.),

The Psychology o f Music (2nd ed., pp. 793). San Diego: Academic Press.
224
Sunderman. L. (1952). Some Techniques fo r Choral Success. Rockville
Centre, NY: Belwin Inc.
Sunderman, L. F. (1970). Artistic Singing: Its tone production and

basic understanding. Metuchen, N.J.: The Scarecrow Press, Inc.
Swan. H. (1973). The Development o f a Choral Instrument. In H. A.

Decker. & Herford. J. (Ed.). Choral Conducting: A Symposium . Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Swan. R. (1986). Recollections: Robert Shaw. The Choral Journal.

26( April), 11-14.
Tamte-Horan, M. W. (1989). The Development O f Instructional

Materials For Training Beginning Choral Conducting Students To Evaluate
Tone Quality In High School Choral Music Performance. Dissertation
Abstracts International. 50, (11 A), 3510. (University Microfilm No.
AAG9011046)
Teie, E. W. (1976). A comparative study o f the development o f the

third formant in trained and untrained voices. (Doctoral dissertation. University
of Minnesota. 19761. Dissertation Abstracts International, 37. (10A). 6135.
Temstrom. S.. Sundberg. J. (1988). Intonation precision o f choir

singers. Journal of the Acoustical Society o f America. 84( 1). 59-69.
Temstrom. S. (1989a). Acoustical aspects o f choir singing. Dissertation

Abstracts International. 51. (04C). 609. (University Microfilm No.
AAGC150108)
Temstrom, S., Sundberg, J. (1989b). Formant frequencies o f choir

singers. Journal o f the Acoustical Society o f America. 86(2). 517-522.
Temstrom, S. (1989c). Long-time average spectrum characteristics o f

different choirs in different rooms. Speech Transmission Laboratory Quarterly
Progress and Status Report, 3. 15-31.
Temstrom, S. (1991). Physical and Acoustic Factors that Interact With

the Singer to Produce the Choral Sound. Journal o f Voice. 5(2). 128-143.
Terry. E. (1991). The Choral Conductor's Art. London. Ontario:

Althouse Press.
Thurman. L. (1983). Putting Horses Before Carts: Voices and Choral

Music. The Choral Journal. 28(6). 5-9.
225
of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Titze, I. R. (1994). Principles o f Voice Production. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.
Trevor, B. (1977). The influence o f vibrato upon blend. Dissertation

Abstracts International. 38. (Q6A), 3136. (University Microfilms No.
AAG7726872)
Vennard, W.. & Irwin, James W. (1966). Speech and Song Compared
in Sonagrams. The NATS Bulletin. 23(2), 18-23.
Vennard, W. (1967). Singing: The Mechaniam and the Technic. New

York: Carl Fischer.
Wang, S. (1985). Singing voice: bright timbre, singer's formants and

larynx positions. Paper presented at the Stockholm Music Acoustics
Conference, Stockholm.
Waring, F. (1945a). The Music America Wants. Etude 63, February.

65-66.
Waring, F. (1945b). The 'Vochestra' - A New Musical Combination.

Etude 63 (March), 125.
Waring, F. (1951). Tone Syllables. Delaware Water Gap: Shawnee

Press.
Waring. V. (1997). Fred Waring & the Pennsylvanians. Champaign:

University o f Illinois Press.
Weber, S. T. (1992). An Investigation O f Intensity Differences

Between Vibrato And Straight Tone Singing. (Doctoral dissertation, Arizona
State University, 1992). Dissertation Abstracts International. 53. (03A). 662.
Wehr. D. A. (1971). John Finley Williamson (1887-1964): His life and

contribution to choral music. Dissertation Abstracts International. 32. (10A).
5833. (University Microfilms No. AAG7212878)
White. H. E.. & White, D. H. (1980). Physics and Music: The science
o f musical sound. Philadelphia: Holt. Rinehart and Winston.
Wilcox. J. C. (1943). 'Streight Tone' in Singing. Music Educators

Journal. 32. 62-63.
Witherspoon. H. (1925). Singing: A treatise fo r teachers and students.

New York: G. Schirmer. Inc.
226
Wolf, S. K., Stanley, D., & Sette, W.J. (1935). Quantitative studies on
the singing voice. Journal o f the Acoustical Society o f America, 6, 255-266.
Wyatt, L. D. (1967). Blend in Choral Sound. (Unpublished masters

thesis, North Texas State University, Denton).
Yanagisawa, E., Estill, J., Kmucha, S. T., & Leder, S. B. (1989). The
contribution o f aryepiglottic constriction to "ringing" voice quality - a
videolaryngoscopic study with acoustic analysis. Journal o f Voice, J(4), 342-
350.
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Joseph Kevin Ford was bom in Chickamauga, Georgia. He was
granted the Bachelor o f Science in Music Education (Choral and Instrumental) in 1986
from The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga. In 1992 he received the Master o f
Music Education (Choral) and in 1999, the Doctor of Philosophy in Music Education
(Choral) from The Florida State University. From 1986 until 1991, he taught High
School Chorus and Band and Middle School Band in Rossville, Georgia. From 1992
until 1996, he was the Program Coordinator and Choral Director at Chattanooga State
Technical Community College in Chattanooga, Tennessee. He is a member o f Florida
Music Educators Association, Music Educators National Conference. American
Choral Directors Association, and the International Federation for Choral Music. In
1998 he was the recipient o f the American Choral Directors Association Graduate
Fellowship.
228

The Preference For Strong or Weak Singer's Formant PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Preference For Strong or Weak Singer's Formant PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Preference For Strong or Weak Singer's Formant PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INFORMATION TO USERS

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning

Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced

Bell & Howell Information and Learning

THE PREFERENCE FOR STRONG OR WEAK SINGER’S FORMANT

RESONANCE IN CHORAL TONE QUALITY

JOSEPH KEVIN FORD

A Dissertation submitted to the

Copyright © Joseph Kevin Ford

All rights reserved.

UMI Microform 9942237

This microform edition is protected against unauthorized

defended on June 15, 1999.

Jon R.(Piereol, Dean, School o f Music

I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Jack A. Taylor who served as my

throughout this process is greatly appreciated. I would also like to thank my

both this document and to my education at this institution.

encouragement. Most importantly, I would like to express my immense gratitude to

LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................................... vii

Historical American Perspective....................................................................... 1

Elements of Tone Q uality................................................................................ 6

Choral Directors Preference for Tone Q u ality.............................................. 8

Vocal Pedagogues Preference for Resonance in Solo and Choral T o n e ......22

Voice Sciences Contribution to Resonance in Vocal T o n e ...........................32

Studies of Choral Tone Q uality....................................................................... 51

Research Question O n e ...................................................................................... 95

Research Question T w o ...................................................................................... 101

Intensity o f Preference........................................................................................ 107

Interpretation of the R esults............................................................................. 108

Problems with the S tu d y ................................................................................... 110

Implications for M u sic.........................................................................................112

Recommendations for Future R esearch.............................................................113

APPENDIX A International Phonetic Alphabet c h a rt.................................... 117

APPENDIX B Four Music Exam ples............................................................... 118

APPENDIX C Choral Tone Q uestionnaire.........................................................120

APPENDIX D Average Spectrum Data for Tallis Exam ples......................... 123

APPENDIX E Average Spectrum Data for Gastoldi Exam ples.................... 144

APPENDIX F Average Spectrum Data for Brahms Exam ples......................165

APPENDIX G Average Spectrum Data for Bruckner Exam ples................... 186

APPENDIX H Subject Free Response C om m ents............................................207

BIOGRAPHICAL SK ETC H .......................................................................................... 227

1. Tallis - resonant version - average of right and left channels............................. 79

2. Tallis - non-resonant version - average o f right and left channels...................... 79

3. Tallis - average spectrum ........................................................................................ 80

4. Gastoldi - resonant version - average o f right and left channels......................... 80

5. Gastoldi - non-resonant version - average o f right and left channels..................81

6. Gastoldi - average spectrum ................................................................................... 81

7. Brahms - resonant version -average o f right and left channels...........................83

8. Brahms - non-resonant version - average o f right and left channels...................83

9. Brahms - average spectrum ..................................................................................... 84

10. Bruckner - resonant version - average o f right and left channels......................... 84

11. Bruckner - non-resonant version - average o f right and left channels................ 85

12. Bruckner - average spectrum ................................................................................... 85

14. Frequency of resonant versus non-resonant responses..........................................99

15. Mean scores o f non-resonant responses by three training groups........................ 105

1. Total RMS Power for Each Music Example and D ifferences...........................76

2. T-Test Results for Order E ffect............................................................................ 92

3. Non-resonant Versus Resonant Responses Across All Subjects.......................96

4. Frequency o f Non-resonant Responses................................................................ 97