Analysis of Voice Signals Change by Voice Modulation Program

 
 
 
  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • PDF
  • Abstract


    Background/Objectives: Voice modulation is used in various fields. Especially, it is widely used in entertainment program for voice tampering to give viewers fun, and voice tampering to guarantee the victim 's identity in news. However, in recent years, voice tampering has been exploited for crime. As the information and communication technology in the information society has developed rapidly, the crime using voice modulation is increasing.

    Methods/Statistical analysis: Therefore, in this paper, the change of voice signal is analyzed by analyzing both normal voice and modulated voice. For this purpose, general voice was collected using the same place, time, microphone, etc., and a modulated voice was collected by applying a voice modulation program. In addition, various voice analysis parameters such as spectrum, formant, intensity, pitch, pulse, jitter, shimmer, DoVB, and NHR were applied to the study.

    Findings: Experimental results show that the difference between the normal voice and the modulated voice is caused by various voice signal analysis parameters due to voice modulation. Especially, in the modulated voice, the spectrum, pitch, and DoVB values were decreased as compared with the general voice. In addition, jitter, shimmer, and NHR values resulted in a result that the modulated voice was higher than the normal voice. There was no significant difference in strength, formant and pulse measurements. Based on the results of this study, it is possible to reflect the changed voice analysis parameters by the voice modulation program.

    Improvements/Applications: Voice modulation is useful in various aspects such as fun and identification. However, it has been recently exploited in the same way as voice phishing. Therefore, in this paper, we measured the voice analysis parameters that are changed by the voice modulation program. Based on this, we compared and analyzed the general voice and the modulated voice and extracted the pattern of the voice signal changed by the voice modulation.

     


  • Keywords


    Voice analysis, Voice modulation, Praat, Voice phishing, Voice parameter.

  • References


      [1] Aronovitch, C. (1976). The voice of personality: Judgments and therelation to voice quality and sex of speaker. Journal of SocialPsychology, 99(2), 207-220.

      [2] Brandt. D. (1979). On liking social performance with socialcompetence: Some relations between communicative style and attributions of interpersonal effectiveness. HumanCommunication Research, 5(3), 223-237.

      [3] Bruckert, L., Liénard, J. S., Lacroix, A., Kreutzer, M., & Leboucher,G. (2006). Women use voice parameters to assess men’scharacteristics. Proceedings of the 2006 Conference of theBiological Sciences, 83-89.

      [4] Buller, D., & Aune, R. (1988). The effects of vocalics and nonverbalsensitivity on compliance. Human Communication Research, 14,301-332.

      [5] Collins, S., & Missing, C. (2003). Vocal and visual attractiveness arerelated in women. Animal Behaviour, 65(5), 997-998.

      [6] Ford, W., & Wolvin, A. (1993). The differential impact of a basiccommunication course on perceived communication competensiesin class, work, and social context. Communication Education, 42,215-223.

      [7] Jones, B., Feinberg, D., Debruine, L., Little, A., & Vukovic, J. (2008).Integrating cues of social interest and voice pitch in men’spreferences for women’s voices. Biology Letters, 2(4), 192-194.

      [8] Mehrabian, A. (1969). Some referents and measures of nonverbalbehavior. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 1,213-217.

      [9] Mehrabian, A., & Williams, M. (1969). Nonverbal concomitants ofperceived and intended persuasiveness. Journal of Personality andSocial Psychology, 13, 37-58.

      [10] Miyake, K., & Zuckerman, M. (1993). Beyond personalityimpressions: effects of physical and vocal attractiveness on falseconsensus social comparison, affiliation, and assumed andperceived similarity. Journal of Personality, 61(3), 411-437.

      [11] Smith, C., Finnegan, E., Karnell, M., & Michael, P. (2005). Resonantvoice: Spectral and nasendoscopic analysis. Journal of Voice,19(4), 607-622.

      [12] Street, R., Blady, R., & Lee, R. (1984). Evaluative responses tocommunicatiors: The effects of voice rate, sex, and interactioncontext. Western Journal of Voice Communication, 48(1), 14-27.

      [13] Collins, S., & Missing, C. (2003). Vocal and visual attractiveness arerelated in women. Animal Behaviour, 65(5), 997-998.

      [14] Caroline H., & Bradley E. (1996). Generating and manipulating emotional synthetic speech on a personal computer. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 3(2), 105-125.

      [15] R.Carlson, B.Granström, & I.Karlsson. (1991). Experiments with voice modelling in speech synthesis.Speech Communication, 10, 481–489.

      [16] D.W.Massaro & E.L.Ferguson. (1993). Cognitive style and perception: The relationship between category width and speech perception, categorization, and discrimination.American Journal of Psychology, 106, 25–49.


 

View

Download

Article ID: 19369
 
DOI: 10.14419/ijet.v7i3.34.19369




Copyright © 2012-2015 Science Publishing Corporation Inc. All rights reserved.