What question did this study set out to answer?

This study aims to examine the biomechanical differences between vibrato and non-vibrato singing in professional singers.

May 14, 2026

Biomechanic characterization of singing with and without vibrato using high-speed videolaryngoscopy and electroglottography

Key Points

This study aims to examine the biomechanical differences between vibrato and non-vibrato singing in professional singers.
Ten professional singers sustained the vowel [i:] in three segments: non-vibrato, vibrato, and non-vibrato again.
Data were collected using acoustic recordings, electroglottography, and high-speed videoendoscopy.
Parameters such as glottal area waveforms and fundamental frequency trajectories were analyzed.
Mean fundamental frequency was stable across vibrato and non-vibrato conditions with no significant differences in open quotient or closing quotient.
Vibrato resulted in reduced Cepstral Peak Prominence and increased Sound Pressure Level, with SPL varying inversely with fundamental frequency modulation.
Cricothyroid muscle involvement was suggested by upward and abductive movements of the cuneiform tubercle at fundamental frequency maxima.

Abstract

This study investigated the biomechanics of vibrato and non-vibrato phonation in professional singers, focusing on vocal fold oscillation and arytenoid cartilage movements. Ten vocally healthy professional singers sustained the vowel i: in three segments: non-vibrato, vibrato, and non-vibrato again, each about two seconds. Data were collected via acoustic recordings, electroglottography (EGG), and transnasal high-speed videoendoscopy (HSV). Glottal area waveforms (GAWs) were analyzed, and fundamental frequency (f0) trajectories calculated. Vibrato and non-vibrato were compared across parameters. Arytenoid cartilage motion was tracked in 3-D from HSV sequences. Mean f0 was stable across conditions, with no significant differences in open quotient (OQ) or closing quotient (ClQ) between vibrato and non-vibrato. During vibrato, most singers showed higher OQ at f0 minima versus maxima. Vibrato showed reduced Cepstral Peak Prominence (CPP) and increased Sound Pressure Level (SPL), with SPL varying inversely with f0 modulation. Cuneiform tubercle tracking revealed vertical and horizontal movements correlated with f0. Vibrato did not significantly change glottal parameters. Upward and abductive cuneiform tubercle movements during f0 maxima suggest cricothyroid muscle involvement, supporting that vibrato is under muscular control.

Mark Helpful

Bookmark

Relay