Intraoral Pressure and Sound Pressure During Woodwind Performance

INTRAORAL PRESSURE AND SOUND PRESSURE DURING WOODWIND PERFORMANCE

Micah Bowling

Dissertation for the Degree of

DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS

May 2016

APPROVED:

Kathleen Reynolds, Major Professor Mary Karen Clardy, Committee Member Daryl Coad, Committee Member John Holt, Chair of the Division of Instrumental Studies for the College of Music Benjamin Brand, Director of Graduate Studies for the College of Music James Scott, Dean of the College of Music Costas Tsatsoulis, Dean of the Toulouse Graduate School Bowling, Micah. Intraoral pressure and sound pressure during woodwind performance.

Doctor of Musical Arts (Performance), May 2016, 57 pp., 5 tables, 4 figures, references, 15

titles.

For woodwind and brass performers, intraoral pressure is the measure of force exerted

on the surface area of the oral cavity by the air transmitted from the lungs. This pressure is the

combined effect of the volume of air forced into the oral cavity by the breathing apparatus and

the resistance of the embouchure, reed opening, and instrument’s back pressure. Recent

research by Michael Adduci shows that intraoral pressures during oboe performance can

exceed capabilities for corresponding increases in sound output, suggesting a potentially

hazardous situation for the development of soft tissue disorders in the throat and

velopharyngeal insufficiencies. However, considering that oboe back pressure is perhaps the highest among the woodwind instruments, this problem may or may not occur in other woodwinds. There has been no research of this type for the other woodwind instruments.

My study was completed to expand the current research by comparing intraoral pressure (IOP) and sound pressure when performing with a characteristic tone on oboe, clarinet, flute, bassoon, and saxophone.

The expected results should show that, as sound pressure levels increase, intraoral pressure will also increase. The subjects, undergraduate and graduate music majors at the

University of North Texas, performed a series of musical tasks on bassoon, clarinet, flute, oboe, and alto saxophone. The musical tasks cover the standard ranges of each instrument, differences between vibrato and straight-tone, and a variety of musical dynamics. The data was

collected and examined for trends. The specific aims of this study are to (1) determine whether there is a correlation between IOP and sound pressure, (2) shed light on how well each instrument responds to rapid fluctuation, and (3) determine which instruments are most efficient when converting air pressure into sound output.

Results of this study raised concerns shared by previous studies – that woodwind players are potentially causing harm to their oropharynx by inaccurately perceiving intraoral pressure needed to achieve a characteristic sound. Evidence found by this study suggests that while oboists generate high intraoral pressure for relatively little sound output (a fact corroborated by past studies), the same cannot be said for all of the woodwind instruments, particularly the flute.

Micah Bowling

ii TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ...... iv

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ...... v

FOREWORD ...... vi

Chapters

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Statement of Purpose

2. BACKGROUND AND FOUNDATIONAL KNOWLEDGE ...... 7

3. EXPERIMENTAL METHOD ...... 13

Description of Musical Tasks Equipment and Experimental Setup Experimental Procedure Protocol for Data Analysis

4. RESULTS ...... 24

5. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ...... 42

6. CONCLUSIONS ...... 51

7. APPENDIX ...... 54

8. BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 57

iii LIST OF TABLES

1. TABLE 1 Demographic Information ...... 14

2. TABLE 2 Numerical Data from Selected Group Samples ...... 30

3. TABLE 3 Numerical Data from Selected Individual Samples ...... 32

3. TABLE 4 Numerical Data from Selected Multiple Woodwind Performer Samples ...... 34

3. TABLE 5 Vibrato Amplitude Data ...... 46

iv LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

1. FIGURE 1 Musical Task 1 ...... 18

2. FIGURE 2 Musical Task 2 & 3 ...... 19

3. FIGURE 3 Linear Representation of Data ...... 25

4. FIGURE 4 Pearson Correlation Graphs ...... 39

v FOREWORD

My interest in intraoral pressure stemmed from my own personal experiences with nasal leaks during performance. As a woodwind performance major, I sought out information pertaining to nasal leaks in search of a solution to the problem. These searches led me to the topic of intraoral pressure and its effects on performance.

vi CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

In recent research by Michael Adduci, the model for this study, oboe performance was studied to show the trends in the relationship between intraoral pressure and sound pressure levels. His study was designed to create a scientific basis for pedagogical techniques among oboe performers.1

For many years, the study of musical instruments has been an oral tradition in an apprenticeship-like setting. Often, the instructor will try to best describe the results desired from their music students. This common tradition lacks a methodical or scientific basis. The topic of respiration is a key example of this discrepancy. Many instructors tell their students to exhale using the diaphragm muscle, but an anatomical study of the body proves that the diaphragm only acts as an active muscle during the inspiratory process. During forced expiration, the body relies on the use of the muscles of the abdominal wall (rectus abdominus, internal and external obliques, and transversus abdominus muscles) and the internal intercostal muscles. As these muscles contract, there is an increase in abdominal pressure and compensatory decrease in thoracic volume, resulting in air being forced out of the lungs.

Contrary to what is commonly taught, during this entire process of exhalation, the diaphragm serves only in a passive capacity.2

This generalization (“support from the diaphragm”) by performance instructors is not meant to cause confusion for the student or mislead them about the way the body functions; rather, this imprecise description and generalized instruction is a result of the body’s inability to

1 Adduci, M. D. (2011). Dynamic Measurement of Intraoral pressure and Sound Pressure With Laryngoscopic Characterization During Oboe Performance. Denton, Texas. 2 Patton, K., & Thibodeau, G. (2009). Anatomy & Physiology (7th Edition ed.). Mosby.

1 physically distinguish the delicate intricacies of the respiration process. Involuntary respiration activates the autonomic nervous system, the system that controls involuntary actions and reflexes in the body. Several factors outside of the control of consciousness regulate the different variables of ventilation, such as the level of carbon dioxide in the blood (PaCO2), oxygen tension (PaO2), and pH. Respiratory control is achieved through involuntary activation of neural and chemical receptors located throughout the body. This activation signals respiratory centers in the brain to alter breathing patterns accordingly. Although it is true that, to an extent, some breath control is voluntary, it can never be completely regulated by the conscious. Musicians are perhaps more aware of their body than the general population, but this accuracy diminishes greatly as the amount of respiratory pressure increases.

A. J. Payne determined that humans are capable of distinguishing expiration pressures within the magnitude required for speaking. As the expiration pressure increases past the speaking magnitude, however, the ability of humans to accurately distinguish these pressures diminishes as the pressure magnitude target level increased.3 These findings were further supported in a study by A. Anastasio and Bussard, which showed that during oboe performance, oboists were only capable of producing 1 PSI (pounds per square inch), lower than their maximum pressure of 2.5 – 3.5 PSI and substantially lower than the self-estimations of 20-90 PSI made by the oboists prior to performance.4 This concept suggests that performers’ perceptions of their maximal expiration pressures vary greatly from the reality, serving as the

3 Payne, A. J. (1987). Intraoral Air Pressure Discrimination for an Open Versus Closed Tube Pressure System. University of Florida. 4 Anastasio, A. a. (1971). Mouth Air Pressure and Intensity Profiles of the Oboe. Journal of Research in Music Education , 19, 62-76.

2 impetus for Adduci’s study on intraoral pressure and sound pressure level during oboe performance.

The research conducted by Michael Adduci demonstrates that intraoral pressure during oboe performance can exceed the capabilities for corresponding increases in sound output levels (SPL).5 He found that, prior to producing a sound, the oboist would typically build up intraoral pressure (IOP) before releasing the tongue and allowing the reed to vibrate. A similar anomaly was found following the end of each note, with the oboist sustaining pressure past the end of the current sounding note. Additionally, Adduci determined that oboists often increased the intraoral pressure beyond the amount needed to increase the dynamic of each note. He found that performers often created more intraoral pressure than their instrument and reed could handle, leading to the instrument reaching its maximum volume output potential before the performer had achieved his or her maximum potential for intraoral pressure. The performers may not be aware of this situation, causing a consistent excessive force when playing woodwind instruments, particularly in loud dynamics, which may lead to an extraneous amount of stress within the oral cavity.

This excess force can create a potentially hazardous situation. The force can allow for the development of soft tissue disorders of the throat and potential velopharyngeal insufficiencies. Velopharyngeal insufficiency, commonly referred to as a “nasal leak” within the woodwind community, occurs when air escapes out of the nasal passages during performance, which may affect the resulting sound quality. Due to excessive strain, the performer’s soft palate is weakened, thus opening the pathway for air to flow involuntarily into the nasal cavity.

5 Adduci, M. D. (2011). Dynamic Measurement of Intraoral pressure and Sound Pressure With Laryngoscopic Characterization During Oboe Performance. Denton, Texas.

3 Velopharyngeal insufficiency is frequently seen in the clarinet community and many have sought to find remedies for the condition. Dr. Chris Gibson found in his study that common causes of velopharyngeal insufficiency include:

• Intensive, short-term performance experiences such as summer music camp or an All-State group. • Preparation for auditions or important recitals. • Changes in routine such as beginning with a new instructor, or playing again after a vacation. • Equipment changes, such as a different mouthpiece, harder reed strength, or even a different instrument.6

In addition to the clarinet community, Gibson also stated that velopharyngeal insufficiency is frequently found among oboe and bassoon players. A brief mention of intraoral pressure was given as a possible reason for this finding, but there is little scientific evidence substantiating these claims. Another condition that can arise secondary to intraoral pressure when playing a woodwind instrument is a pharyngocele. A pharyngocele is the herniation

(outpouching) of pharyngeal soft tissue caused by extraneous air force.7 This causes the tissue to bulge out of the neck bilaterally while performing. This condition is predominantly seen among trumpet players (Gillespie’s pouches), but has also been reported in some oboe performers. Oboe back pressure is known to be the highest among the woodwind instruments, which is why it might be seen primarily in oboe performers compared to performers on the other woodwind instruments. The lower back pressure observed when playing the other woodwinds may or may not affect the development of pharyngoceles in other woodwind performers.

6 Gibson, C. (2007). Current Trends in Treating the Palate Air Leak (Stress Velopharyngeal Insufficiency). (ClarinetFest) Retrieved August 13, 2015, from Internation Clarinet Association: https://www.clarinet.org/clarinetFestArchive.asp?archive=30 7 Bowdler, D. (1987). Pharyngeal Pouches. In A. Kerr, & J. Groves, Laryngology (5th Edition ed., pp. 264-282). London.

4 The reason that the oboe is known to have the highest amount of back pressure among the woodwind instruments is because the tip opening of the reed is relatively small when compared to the aperture for air flow found in other woodwind instruments. Since the other woodwinds have less back pressure due to less resistance, this theoretically might lead to lower intraoral pressure. The rationale behind expanding current studies is to quantify and clarify the differences in intraoral pressure between each of the woodwind instruments.

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to examine the data and trends in the amount of intraoral pressure and the sound pressure levels produced when performing each of the woodwind instruments. This study was conducted in order to expand the current research suggesting that oboists exhibit an exorbitant amount of intraoral pressure relative to the amount of sound output. This study will examine intraoral pressure as related to sound pressure levels with the other woodwind instruments to determine if there is a corresponding correlation. Specifically, intraoral pressure and sound pressure will be measured on flute, oboe, clarinet, saxophone, and bassoon for pitches performed (1) under various dynamics, (2) with a straight tone, and (3) with vibrato. Sound pressure levels may be a good measure of the physiological strain placed on the performer. Any sustained strain on the performer can lead to various performance- related injuries, as previous research has shown. The goal of this study is to provide a deeper understanding of the forces involved in playing woodwind instruments in order to prevent such injuries. These indicators may reflect varied demands across instrument groups. It is my hope to address the scientific relationship between intraoral pressure and sound pressure levels when

5 playing woodwind instruments and provide pedagogical suggestions for performing with efficiency.

The specific aims of this study are to (1) determine whether there is a correlation between intraoral pressure and sound pressure, (2) shed light on how well each instrument responds to rapid fluctuation, and (3) determine which instrument is most efficient for converting intraoral pressure into sound pressure.

6 CHAPTER 2. BACKGROUND AND FOUNDATIONAL KNOWLEDGE

Intraoral pressure (IOP) is a quantifiable measure of force exerted on the surface area of the oral cavity. This type of pressure is increased by a surge in air volume or by resistance to air flow escaping the oral cavity. Woodwind performers rarely discuss intraoral pressure when speaking colloquially but commonly refer to “back pressure” when attempting to describe the resistance to oral air flow. However, “back pressure” is better defined as the pressure opposing the direction of desired air flow – a pressure which is caused by both the instrument, the reed, and the embouchure of the player.8 This characterization of the forces by woodwind performers is, for all practical purposes, a good description of the perceived resistance created by their instrument. However, intraoral pressure can still be found in performers playing the flute where there is no direct obstruction opposing the direction of air flow to create a measurable back pressure. Additionally, back pressure itself is impossible to easily measure.

This leads to the conclusion that the difference in calculation between intraoral pressure and back pressure also cannot be specifically measured in any meaningful way. In this study, intraoral pressure was measured across all woodwind instruments to study the physical forces associated with common medical problems shown to be caused by high intraoral pressure levels in woodwind performers.

It is important to fundamentally understand the differences in the definitions of force, pressure, and stress. In physics, a force is any interaction that, when unopposed, will change the motion of an object. Intuitively, force can also be described as a “push” or a “pull” on an

8 Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Back Pressure. Retrieved June 20, 2015, from Merriam-Webster.com: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/back pressure

7 object. A force has both magnitude and direction, making it a vector quantity.9 In contrast, pressure is the perpendicular force applied to the surface of an object per unit area over which that force is distributed.10 In other words, pressure describes the volume of air pressing outward on a surface, like the oral cavity, similar to the way air inside a balloon forces the walls of the balloon to stretch outward.

In addition to intraoral pressure, sound pressure levels were also examined in this study in order to demonstrate changes in intraoral pressure based on dynamics. Sounds are produced by pressure waves interacting with the tympanic membrane of the ear. The amplitude of pressure variations measured in the air can be used to determine the relative loudness of the perceived sound. Sound pressure is measured in decibels (dB), which refers to a logarithmic representation of pressure variations.11 Pressure is a simple type of stress, which causes either deformation of solid materials or a change of flow in fluids such as water or air.12 In the oral cavity, mechanical stress can cause deformation of the shape of the oral cavity, leading to numerous medical conditions.

As previously mentioned, this study specifically examines intraoral pressure (IOP) and the consequences to increasing this pressure in woodwind performers. Pressure related to the respiratory tract in humans can be measured in several different regions other than the oral cavity. Measuring lung pressure or subglottic pressure as opposed to intraoral pressure, however, involves invasive procedures beyond the scope of this study. Intraoral pressure is a

9 Cutnell, J., & Johnson, K. (2001). Physics (5th Edition ed.). New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 10 Giancoli, D. G. (2004). Physics: principles with applications. Upper Saddie River, New Jersey: Pearson Education. 11 Sound and Noise: Characteristics of Sound and the Decibel Scale. (n.d.). (Environmental Protection Department: The Government of Hong Kong) Retrieved August 12, 2015, from Environmental Protection Department: http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/noise_education/web/ENG_EPD_HTML/m1/intro_5.html 12 Batchelor, G. (1967). An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics. Cambridge University Press.

8 representation of the pressure created on the internal surface area of the oral cavity and extending into the superior portion of the trachea (above the glottis). It is also the resulting pressure caused by the combined force of the air column beginning in the lungs and extending up the trachea and out of the oral cavity, although these forces are not additive and intraoral pressure is not necessarily the sum of all of these forces. Factors that can affect intraoral pressure include volume of air, strength of the performer’s exhalation, dimensions of the oral cavity and superior trachea, and interference in the aperture of the instrument (reed opening dimensions and cyclic vibratory opening and closing of the reed against the mouthpiece).

Air flow into the instrument through the breathing apparatus used in this study follows

Bernoulli’s principle, characterizing fluid mechanics in physics. Bernoulli’s principle encompasses the idea that the pressure of a stream of fluid is reduced as the speed of the flow is increased.13 With this principle in mind, the concept of intraoral pressure can be described as a result of the change in cross-sectional area along the pathway of air flow. The larger cross- sectional area found in the trachea and oral cavity creates higher air pressure and slower velocity of air. This is in contrast to the smaller cross-sectional area found at the aperture, which leads to lower air pressure and a faster velocity of air creating a funneling effect. This funneling effect is one of the aspects of the creation of intraoral pressure - the combined effect of the volume of air forced into the oral cavity and the resistance of the aperture, reed opening, or equipment back pressure.

The flute is the most unique woodwind instrument in that it does not use either a single or double reed unit that cycles open and closed to create sound. The vibration of the headjoint

13 Mulley, R. (2004). Flow of Industrial Fluids: Theory and Equations. CRC Press.

9 is outside of the oral cavity and aperture, and it does not interfere with the flow of the airstream. This lack of interference creates an open system in which air freely flows out of the aperture into the instrument. The only resistance present in the system is created by the performer’s control of aperture, resulting in the funnel effect previously described. It is possible for a flutist to control the opening of his or her embouchure, directly affecting this resistance present. Smaller aperture created by a more closed embouchure provides more resistance due to a smaller cross-sectional area that leads to lower air pressure. A larger aperture created by a more open embouchure, on the other hand, leads to a larger cross-sectional area and a loss of the funneling effect, because of lower air pressure and slower velocity.

The clarinet and saxophone have more features that interfere with air flow. In single reed instruments, the reed vibrating against the mouthpiece produces the sound. This vibratory process has many factors that can affect the resistance. The vibrations may be altered by the strength (or relative hardness) of the reed. A harder reed is more resistant to vibrating. Many characteristics affect reed strength including density of the cane, flexibility of the cane, and thickness of the reed. Another important factor is the relative distance the reed must travel to vibrate against the mouthpiece. This distance is commonly described as the mouthpiece facing, in which mouthpieces curve away from the reed. Mouthpiece facings vary among mouthpieces, and the choice of mouthpiece facing is a point of personal preference among single reed performers. Mouthpieces with more open facings create a larger distance for the reed to travel, therefore creating more resistance in the vibratory process.

Another element seen in single reed instruments is that the manner in which the reed vibrates can create more resistance to air flow than that found in non-reed instruments, such as

10 the flute. This resistance is the result of vibrations causing the system to cycle between open and closed. When the reed is not in complete contact with the mouthpiece, air freely flows through the opening between the reed and mouthpiece. This is considered an open system; however, when the reed is in complete contact with the mouthpiece, the air is not allowed to exit the oral cavity and flow into the instrument, creating a closed system. In this closed system, pressure is higher because the performer is consistently pushing air toward the aperture.

Without a route for the air to escape, however, the pressure simply increases until the reed moves away from the mouthpiece releasing the air. In The Art of Saxophone Playing, Larry Teal states that as the reed vibrates against the mouthpiece, it spends half of the time in complete contact with the mouthpiece, one fourth of the time traveling away from the mouthpiece, and one fourth of the time traveling toward the mouthpiece.14 This vibratory process that is creating resistance can also be seen in double reed instruments, the oboe and bassoon.

In many ways, double reed instruments produce sound in a similar fashion to single reed instruments, with sound produced by the vibration of the reed; however, in double reed instruments there is no mouthpiece to create a stationary point for the reed to vibrate against.

Rather, there are two separate blades of each reed, and the blades vibrate against each other to create sound. In this system, there is more variability found in the amount of resistance each reed creates. Aspects that create resistance include the strength or relative hardness of the reed cane, the thickness of the blades, and the tip opening (distance between the two blades of the reed).

14 Teal, L. (1963). The Art of Saxophone Playing. Alfred Publishing Co. Inc.

11 Additionally, intraoral pressure may not be the only pressure that plays a role in exhalation. Air pressures throughout the air column can vary greatly, and studies related to speech and singing have measured subglottic pressure, the air pressure present in the trachea below the glottis, instead of intraoral pressure. These studies measured subglottic pressure through invasive processes. One method required the subject to swallow a pressure transducer to place it in the esophagus below the vocal folds. The air pressure in the trachea below the vocal folds can translate to the esophagus for measurement. A second method involved inserting a needle transducer into the subglottal region of the trachea by penetrating through the exterior suface of the neck.15 Another method introduced by Bouhuys calls for anesthetizing the glottis and inserting a catheter tube down the trachea for measurement.16

Though an understanding of subglottic pressure might be beneficial to a complete knowledge of the forces involved in the respiratory process, due to the invasive methods required to measure the subglottic pressure, intraoral pressure was measured in this study because of the nonintrusive methods available.

15 Draper, M., Ladefoged, P., & Whitteridge, D. (1959). Respiratory Muscles in Speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research , 2 (1), 16-27. 16 Bouhuys, A., Proctor, D., & Mead, J.(1966). Kinetic Aspects of Singing. Journal of Applied Physiology,21(2),483-96.

12 CHAPTER 3. EXPERIMENTAL METHODS

Sixteen (16) graduate and undergraduate level woodwind performers at the University of North Texas participated in this study. Three (3) of the sixteen performers were multiple woodwind performers who specialize in playing the five woodwind instruments for various theatre pit orchestras, and these performers were recorded performing on each of the instruments successively. There were a total of twenty-eight (28) performances recorded, thirteen (13) from single instrument performers, and five (5) from each of the three (3) multiple woodwind performers making up the remaining fifteen (15) performances. Table 1 summarizes the relevant demographic data of each performer.

13 TABLE 1 Demographic Information as reported by the performers

Subject ID Gender (M/F) Age Degree sought Major Flute 1 F 29 DMA Performance Flute 2 F 23 MM Performance Flute 3 F 31 DMA Performance Oboe 1 M 22 BM Performance Oboe 2 F 24 MM Performance Clarinet 1 M 23 MM Performance Clarinet 2 M 24 DMA Performance Clarinet 3 F 23 BM Performance/Music Education Saxophone 1 M 22 BM Music Education Saxophone 2 F 18 BM Performance Bassoon 1 M 24 MM Performance Bassoon 2 M 24 BM Education Bassoon 3 M 21 BM Performance

WW 1 Flute F 25 MM Performance WW 1 Oboe F 25 MM Performance WW 1 Clarinet F 25 MM Performance WW 1 Saxophone F 25 MM Performance WW1 Bassoon F 25 MM Performance

WW 2 Flute M 25 DMA Performance WW 2 Oboe M 25 DMA Performance WW 2 Clarinet M 25 DMA Performance WW 2 Saxophone M 25 DMA Performance WW 2 Bassoon M 25 DMA Performance

WW 3 Flute M 56 DMA Performance WW 3 Oboe M 56 DMA Performance WW 3 Clarinet M 56 DMA Performance WW 3 Saxophone M 56 DMA Performance WW 3 Bassoon M 56 DMA Performance

14 TABLE 1 Demographic information continued

Subject ID Instrument Model Mouthpiece or Headjoint Reed Flute 1 Miyazawa 602 Miyazawa X X X Flute 2 Nagahara Nagahara X X X Flute 3 Muramatsu DS Muramatsu X X X Oboe 1 Buffet Greenline Pisoni brass staple Handmade Oboe 2 Loree Royal Chudnow silver staple Handmade Clarinet 1 Buffet R13 Festival Vandoren M30 Rico Reserve Classic 4 Clarinet 2 Buffet R13 Vintage Rico Reserve X0 Vandoren Rue Lepic 3.5+ Clarinet 3 Buffet R13 Nathan Beaty-Zinner Blank Rico GCS Evolution 4 Saxophone 1 Selmer/ Ref. 54 Flamingo Rousseau NC4 Vandoren 3.5 Saxophone 2 Yamaha 875-Ex Rousseau NC4 Rico Reserve 3 Bassoon 1 Fox 601 Heckel Bocal Handmade Bassoon 2 Fox 201 Heckel Bocal Handmade Bassoon 3 Heckel #9921 Heckel Bocal Handmade

WW 1 Flute Yamaha 481 Yamaha X X X WW 1 Oboe Cabart Chudnow Brass Staple Handmade WW 1 Clarinet Buffet R13 Festival Vandoren M13 Lyre Rico Reserve Classic 3.5+ WW 1 Saxophone Yamaha 23 Selmer C Star Vandoren 3 WW1 Bassoon Fox 220 Fox Bocal Handmade

WW 2 Flute Yamaha 684 EC X X X WW 2 Oboe Loree AK Pisoni silver staple Handmade WW 2 Clarinet Buffet R13 Backun Ot Rico GCS 3.5 WW 2 Saxophone Yamaha 875 Rousseau R3 Eastman 3 WW 2 Bassoon Puchner #5839 Fox Bocal Handmade

WW 3 Flute Armstrong Armstrong X X X WW 3 Oboe Signet Jones Jones medium hard WW 3 Clarinet Buffet R13 Vandoren Vandoren 4 WW 3 Saxophone Selmer Mark 6 Rousseau Vandoren 3.5 WW 3 Bassoon Reynolds Reynolds Jones medium hard

15 The performers were asked if they suffered from common respiratory ailments, including allergies, asthma, velopharyngeal insufficiency, or other ailments. Four reported having allergies but only one suffered severe constant allergies with the others noting only seasonal allergies. Three reported having asthma. No subjects reported velopharyngeal insufficiency or other ailments.

Prior to conducting this experiment, the study was approved by the Institutional Review

Board (IRB) at the University of North Texas. The project description and informed consent form approved by the IRB and presented to all subjects is included in the Appendix. The informed consent form was read aloud to all of the subjects and signed before collecting any demographic data and beginning the experiment.

16 DESCRIPTION OF MUSICAL TASKS

Each of the subjects performed several musical exercises. A metronome was used to standardize the length of each sample, and the click of the metronome was recorded along with the intraoral pressure and sound pressure values for accurate data point selection. The tasks were performed at 88 beats per minute. Subjects playing flute, clarinet, oboe, and saxophone performed the tasks at the written pitches D4, G4, C5, and A5. Octave modifications were made for the subjects playing bassoon, with the tasks performed on the written pitches

D2, G2, C3, and A3.

MUSICAL TASKS INCLUDED:

1) dynamic exercise (crescendo – diminuendo) on the written pitches D4, G4, C5, A5

2) straight tone exercise on the written pitches D4, G4, C5, A5

3) vibrato exercise on the written pitches D4, G4, C5, A5

*As mentioned previously, octave modifications were made for the bassoon and all exercises were performed on the written pitches D2, G2, C3, A3.

17 Figures 1 and 2 show the musical examples used for this study.

FIGURE 1 Musical Task 1 - Dynamics

The subjects were instructed to play in the extremes of their dynamic range. The subjects each reached a different maximum and minimum sound pressure level, but all subjects successfully followed the dynamic markings.

18 FIGURE 2 Musical Task 2 & 3 – Straight Tone and Vibrato

In this task, the subjects were instructed to play each pitch at a comfortable dynamic which could be maintained for the duration of the note. The performers were instructed to use free

(unmeasured) vibrato for that portion of the task. Samples of clarinet performance did not include the vibrato tasks as is standard in clarinet performance in the United States.

19 EQUIPMENT AND EXPERIMENTAL SETUP

The experiment was conducted in the Texas Center for Music and Medicine office at the

University of North Texas College of Music room 1007. The room is constructed with tile floor, cement walls, and standard commercial lay-in ceiling panels. The subjects performed the task seated with a music stand in front of them. The chair (Wenger Musician Chair) was placed 24 inches away from the music stand. The dosimeter17 was suspended above the subjects 6 feet and 6 inches from the ground to reduce variation between instruments and performers.

The experiment utilized three channels of data acquisition: measurement of intraoral pressure (IOP), measurement of sound pressure level (SPL), and metronome timing.

Intraoral pressure was measured using a pressure-to-voltage transducer. This transducer was fixed to headgear with Velcro. A small catheter tube was fitted to each subject. The catheter tube was placed inside the oral cavity through the corner of the embouchure. Each performer was given time to experiment with the catheter tube in place prior to recording the performances to allow for proper fitting and to minimize obstruction of the embouchure. While subjects played their instruments, the catheter tube conducted the air pressure inside the subject’s oral cavity to the pressure-to-voltage transducer for measurement. All subjects tolerated this setup without challenge. At this time, the pressure-to-voltage transducer was calibrated to account for the ambient pressure of the room during the performance so that only the increase in intraoral pressure above the atmospheric pressure would be recorded.

Sound pressure levels were measured using a logging dosimeter. The data was recorded in decibels (dB).

17 A noise dosimeter is a specialized sound level meter used to measure sound exposure over time.

20 Each of the three channels was recorded using continuous recording software. The pressure-to-voltage transducer, dosimeter, and standard metronome were connected to a

DATAQ Instruments model DI-720 data acquisition system.18 The DATAQ system was then connected to a Dell desktop computer running the WinDaq/Lite software suite to collect the intraoral pressure and sound pressure data along with the metronome for a standardized accurate time measurement. The DATAQ system and WinDaq/Lite software package recorded

240 samples per second for intraoral pressure (measured in volts19) and sound pressure

(measured in dB). The real-time monitoring of each note allowed for detailed examination of each note, including initiation, propagation, and termination. The raw data recorded by

WinDaq/Lite was exported to Microsoft Excel 2010 and IBM SPSS Statistics 17.0 for analysis.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

After listening to the experimental protocol and privacy policy for the study, the subjects signed an informed consent form approved by the IRB. A short demographic questionnaire was completed. The subjects were then seated and fitted with the pressure-to- voltage transducer catheter tube. The entire experimental process took 5 minutes to complete paperwork, 10 minutes to set up, and 15 minutes for each iteration of the musical exercises.

PROTOCOL FOR DATA ANALYSIS

18 DATAQ Instruments model DI-720 is a device used to collect and translate data from various input channels. This device can utilize up to sixteen different data channels simultaneously. 19 To present the data in a meaningful format, the voltage readings from the pressure transducer were converted to mmHg. For the pressure transducer used in this study, 1 volt is equal to 101.4 mmHg. The formula used for conversion was p = (v-a)*101.4, where v is a voltage event recorded by the pressure transducer, a is the ambient pressure in volts measured during that task, and p is the resultant intraoral pressure for that event, converted from volts to mmHg.

21 Graphical, descriptive, and correlational techniques were employed to show differences across tasks, across instruments, and regarding the relationship between sound pressure and intraoral pressures. The raw data recorded by WinDaq/Lite was exported to Microsoft Excel

2010 and IBM SPSS Statistics 23.0 for analysis. During this study, I have decided to only use data points collected one metronome click prior to the initiation, through propagation of the note, and concluding one metronome click following the termination of the note. Data points between individual notes were excluded. In efforts to exclude outliers, an average was taken of each data point before processing the data. These averages, minimum, maximum, and standard deviations were calculated using data from all samples of like instrument trials. These values were organized into Table 2. The graphs in Figure 3 are examples of individual performer data samples of each musical task. The individual performers presented in the graphs were chosen based on the consistency of the readings for each trial. These performers showcased relatively minimal outlying data points. The data from this study was found to be statistically significant at the 0.01 level, indicating that there is strong evidence suggesting that these relationships are statistically significant.

In order to address the specific aims of this study, the experiment was designed with particular exercises in mind. After the instrumentalists performed the musical tasks outlined earlier, (1) I assessed Pearson Correlation Values, which can reveal or disprove strong associations between two variables, to determine whether there is a significant correlation between Intraoral pressure and sound pressure output. Pearson Correlation Values and how they relate to this study are presented thoroughly in the Discussion section. (2) I evaluated the vibrato musical tasks by comparing how easily each instrument responds to its instrument-

22 specific vibrato. This was assessed by examining intraoral pressure versus the sound pressure level while the performer is using vibrato. (3) I evaluated the overall efficiency of each instrument. A comparison of vibrato versus straight tone will help determine how efficient each instrument is in converting air pressure into sound pressure.

23 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS

This study produced a total of twenty-eight (28) performances of each musical task with successful quantitative data collection in each of the samples. Samples of clarinet performance did not include the vibrato tasks as is standard in clarinet performance in the United States.

Table 2 was created using averages of correlating sample points in time across like instrument performers. Each musical task is labeled in the table with the pitch performed (C). The dynamic exercise is noted at just (C), the straight tone exercise is labeled as Cs and the vibrato exercise is labeled at Cv. Table 3 is a visual representation of data (min, max, mean, std dev) from individual instrument performers (those only performing on one instrument, excluding multiple woodwind performers). Table 4 represents data from the multiple woodwind performer trials.

The graphs in Figure 3 are examples of individual performer data samples of each musical task.

The performers presented in the graphs in Figure 3 were chosen because they showed the most consistent readings for each trial. One performer per instrument is presented in the graphs.

Figure 3 shows the linear representation of the intraoral pressure (IOP) and sound pressure level (SPL) for the pitch C5.

• Blue lines represent the dynamic exercise in Musical Task 1.

• Red lines represent the straight tone exercise in Musical Task 2.

• Green lines represent the vibrato exercise in Musical Task 3.

24 FIGURE 3 Linear Representation of Data Musical Task 1 ------Musical Task 2 ------Flute Intraoral Pressure (IOP in mmHg) Musical Task 3 ------

Flute Sound Pressure Level (SPL in dB)

25 Oboe Intraoral Pressure (IOP in mmHg)

Oboe Sound Pressure Level (SPL in dB)

26 Clarinet Intraoral Pressure (IOP in mmHg)

Clarinet Sound Pressure Level (SPL in dB)

27 Saxophone Intraoral Pressure (IOP in mmHg)

Saxophone Sound Pressure Level (SPL in dB)

28 Bassoon Intraoral Pressure (IOP in mmHg)

Bassoon Sound Pressure Level (SPL in dB)

29 TABLE 2 represents the numerical data associated with group data from each instrument trial.

Descriptive Statistics