Response to Revit Revit’s point about the more sparse sampling of vowel spectra for females is well taken. I can make two comments in response to his remarks. One is that it is my impression that the reduced intelligibility in telephone speech arises primarily from difficulty with consonants rather than with vowels and, ... Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor  |   November 01, 1993
Response to Revit
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Kenneth N. Stevens
    Cambridge, MA
Article Information
Speech, Voice & Prosodic Disorders / Speech, Voice & Prosody / Letters to the Editor
Letter to the Editor   |   November 01, 1993
Response to Revit
American Journal of Audiology, November 1993, Vol. 2, 68-b-69. doi:10.1044/1059-0889.0203.68c
 
American Journal of Audiology, November 1993, Vol. 2, 68-b-69. doi:10.1044/1059-0889.0203.68c
Revit’s point about the more sparse sampling of vowel spectra for females is well taken. I can make two comments in response to his remarks. One is that it is my impression that the reduced intelligibility in telephone speech arises primarily from difficulty with consonants rather than with vowels and, in particular, obstruent consonants for which frication noise spectra contribute to intelligibility. Thus any reduction in the representation of vowel spectra may not have a large influence on intelligibility. The second comment concerns the auditory representation of vowels. There has been some discussion in the literature that synchrony of auditory-nerve firing can be a factor in the auditory representation of vowels. If this claim is true, then it becomes less clear that a higher fundamental frequency will lead to a significant reduction in the precision with which vowels can be discriminated at the level of the auditory nerve.
First Page Preview
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview ×
View Large
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire American Journal of Audiology content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access