Talk:Vocal fry register/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Vocal fry/laryngealisation/creaky voice/speech disorder

I'm a speech pathologist. If vocal fry is prevalent in someone's voice, we may consider it to be a symptom of a bigger disorder, it depends on the circumstances of the presentation. Also I think this article should be integrated into the creaky voice article as 'vocal fry register' is too specific an item. Having these articles separate unnecessarily disperses the information people need. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.71.57.30 (talk) 18:47, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Audio

It would be good to have an audio example of the Vietnamese pronunciation of a syllable with this creaky voice. Badagnani 21:25, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

It would be good to have any audio examples on this page. Binksternet 08:44, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
4 years later... come on guys! I would love to hear some samples as well. -220.245.253.81 (talk) 05:30, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
The recording is bad. The man did not only add a creaky voice, but he lowered his voice. This is futile for comparison. And please, no one needs a sample of annoying Vietnamese gibberish, especially considering that it doesn't have anything to do with the social phenomenon of vocal fry. --92.75.216.181 (talk) 08:41, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Frogman

Is Clarence "Frogman" Henry's croaking voice on the last third of his hit song "Ain't Got No Home" an example of creaky voice? If so, it should be mentioned. Binksternet 08:44, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Moved talk

Earlier talk entries on "Creaky voice" page copied over to this page. Binksternet (talk) 11:49, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

What does this mean???

"Singers often lose their low notes or never learn to produce them because of the excessive tension of the laryngeal muscles and of the support mechanism that leads to too much breath pressure." And how does it have to do with glottal fry? 76.172.71.118 (talk) 05:11, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I think it is pretty clear in the article that voice teachers use vocal fry exercizes sometimes to help their students develop or regain their lower notes.Nrswanson (talk) 00:22, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Fry considered harmful: clarify if it's what "teachers say", or cite research to support it

This statement needs some clarification. "the vocal fry register may be extended...most vocal pedagogues discourage...it may cause damage to the vocal cords. ...teachers discourage...vocal fry register...may cause the singer to lose ...upper notes"

Certainly there are teachers who say that. Perhaps I read too much into it, but the way its phrased, and the lack of any cite beyond general opinion, implies that's it's a generally accepted truth, to my mind. It's not, and I don't think anyone can cite any real research to support that frequent wisdom. If a citation to support it can be added (not so much 'this teacher said', or an anecdote, but some actual controlled study of singers who practice it and use it, versus those who don't), and/or a cite of the opposite opinion - this would be useful to us confused singers. Tsimbler (talk) 01:51, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually I think one can say that since 4 giants in vocal pedagogical research all say that: Appelman, Greene, McKinney, and Vennard. Also Greene's laryngeoscope studies revealed some evidence to support this view.Nrswanson (talk) 15:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

While those teachers are experts, there are other teachers that say it is not harmful (or people wouldn't do it). I don't have a cite, but, then again, neither do you. As long as this is under debate, it is POV to state this without proper in-text attribution (that is, mention at least one person who says this). Using "most teachers" is just using weasel words. Either cite it properly (and give the opposing opinion if it can also be cited), or it will be deleted. — trlkly 05:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Actually it is cited if you notice. I cited both McKinney (who actually quotes Vennard and Appelman on that topic in his book) and Greene at the end of the paragraph. I have never come across an opposing view so frankly I never knew and still don't necessarily believe that it even exists.Nrswanson (talk)
New York Times article on vocal fry quotes experts who say that it's a normal part of developing language.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/28/science/young-women-often-trendsetters-in-vocal-patterns.html They’re, Like, Way Ahead of the Linguistic Currrrve By DOUGLAS QUENQUA, February 27, 2012 --Nbauman (talk) 21:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
I wouldn't go as far as asserting that it's a normal part of speech development. Clearly the article is about a current sociological trend among a particular social group in a particular culture. It's certainly not reflective upon language development in cultures outside of the United States. Further, these studies may not even be an accurate reflection on the majority of female teens in the US (language trends after all can be highly regional). Regardless, the study has nothing to do with examining vocal fry from a physiological health perspective which was the point of this particular conversation.03:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
The NYT science section is a WP:RS. They quoted not just the authors of the paper, but several uninvolved linguists. It was also reported in the news section of [Science], which is an even more reliable WP:RS, among many other reports. The Science article does quote a linguist saying that it's unlikely to be harmful. All of this coverage, particularly in science-oriented publications, is enough to establish WP:WEIGHT to justify placing it in the article. --Nbauman (talk) 18:36, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

In singing

Shouldn't there be a mention of the use in Death Metal? Zazaban (talk) 06:25, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll second that.67.82.181.237 (talk) 18:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
It's in the article now by the look of things. -220.245.253.81 (talk) 05:32, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

"Vocal fry is also used in metal music, usually in combination with air from the diaphragm" What does that mean? Is it an example of the myth that the diaphragm is used to expel air while singing? The diaphragm is used to inhale, it's role in exhalation, if any, is purely regulatory. Contraction of th eidaphragm cannot expel air. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.19.201.199 (talk) 17:47, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

"Within" -> "in"

This article suffers from a glut of "within". Change 70% of occurrences to "in" or something. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.70.28.68 (talk) 14:15, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Mean frequency fact

I have removed the "fact" concerning the mean frequency of the vocal fry register. No one found a citation in 16 months. Furthermore, I quickly googled it, and I believe I have the found the article at hand. It would seem that the person who originally quoted this fact did not realize that the mean frequency was only for the 10 adult males with harsh voices involved in the study. Therefore, this data has no place in this article.

Ungeniusman (talk) 05:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

"Speech disorder"

The claim that vocal fry is a speech disorder appears to be supported only by one author. Unless some consensus amongst speech pathologists can be demonstrated, I think this claim should be removed. Attys (talk) 14:43, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Low or high??

The opening paragraph say it is the lowest. The menu to the right says it is the highest.
Is the reader confused at this point?
Yep. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.238.167.214 (talk) 13:47, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Social Implications

This section does not present any informative objective facts, instead it report uninformed, unqualified opinions. The exception seems to be there study reported by Time magazine which maybe should be explained better. I propose either it be deleted entirely, or retitled to "Social Stigma" Thrilway (talk) 17:20, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Hmm... In what way are the journalists in The Washington Post and the entire panel (which includes well respected professionals) on Terry Gross's NPR show Fresh Air propagating ill informed opinions. Both news sources are recognized for exhibiting the highest caliber of reporting and are read/listened to widely both nationally and internationally. Just because this is a somewhat subjective application of viewing vocal fry doesn't mean wikipedia can not report on it. For example Capital punishment debate in the United States covers a topic with a range of opinions (a subjective topic) in an objective way. This article can do the same by presenting a balance of sources in the attempt to achieve a neutral point of view (see WP:NPOV). Simply removing the content on the other hand would be censorship and would violate policy (see WP:CENSOR). Further, this topic is notable as it's been covered in multiple major tertiary news sources. It's now part of the public consciousness on this topic and should not be ignored. In other words, if you are not happy with the current structure of this part of the article please improve it but not remove it. Best. 4meter4 (talk) 00:50, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
I read this section of the article and also felt like it could be improved. Not that the sources already cited aren't credible. I looked this up because This American Life just did a segment on it. I would like to see included that women are often attacked for using vocal fry, while men who do it are not attacked. I even felt like this section had this problem. Lena Key (talk) 05:49, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
This American Life is not a credible source. It's gee-whiz entertainment program. And with respect to vocal fry, one of its staff reporters (Chace) has an axe to grind. Let's not let radio talk-shows decide who's an expert. Chace is widely reviled for her speaking style, and it goes far beyond her vocal fry. She appears to be completely oblivious as to why so many people can't stand to listen to her bizarre affectations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.19.201.199 (talk) 18:13, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Naomi Wolf Qoute

While Wolf has a relevant quote here and it is that more relevant because she is a very active feminist, she is also highly regarded as a kook. I'm very tempted to remove the quote unless other quotes can be used to balance it. Beach drifter (talk) 04:28, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Vocal fry register. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:28, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Glottal cycle

Where's the Glottal cycle? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.2.142.50 (talk) 20:03, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vocal_fry_register/Archive_2&oldid=1052845592"