The effect of bone conduction microphone placement on intensity

and spectrum of transmitted speech items

Phuong K. Trana) and Tomasz R. Letowski
U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Human Research and Engineering Directorate, Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Maryland 21005

Maranda E. McBride
North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, Department of Management,
School of Business and Economics, Greensboro, North Carolina 27411

(Received 22 October 2012; revised 11 April 2013; accepted 15 April 2013)

Speech signals can be converted into electrical audio signals using either conventional air conduction
(AC) microphone or a contact bone conduction (BC) microphone. The goal of this study was to
investigate the effects of the location of a BC microphone on the intensity and frequency spectrum
of the recorded speech. Twelve locations, 11 on the talkers head and 1 on the collar bone, were
investigated. The speech sounds were three vowels (/u/, /a/, /i/) and two consonants (/m/, / /).
The sounds were produced by 12 talkers. Each sound was recorded simultaneously with two BC
microphones and an AC microphone. Analyzed spectral data showed that the BC recordings made
at the forehead of the talker were the most similar to the AC recordings, whereas the collar bone
recordings were most different. Comparison of the spectral data with speech intelligibility data
collected in another study revealed a strong negative relationship between BC speech intelligibility
and the degree of deviation of the BC speech spectrum from the AC spectrum. In addition, the head
locations that resulted in the highest speech intelligibility were associated with the lowest output
signals among all tested locations. Implications of these findings for BC communication are discussed.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.4803870]
PACS number(s): 43.38.Si, 43.60.Dh, 43.66.Wv [SAF] Pages: 39003908

I. INTRODUCTION Watson (1937) also reported that BC speech is heard best

with occluded ears and when the listeners mouth is closed
Bone conduction technology has advanced significantly
with upper and lower teeth lightly touching each other.
in recent years and has become mature enough to be used in
Studies in BC speech communication conducted to date
radio communication. Bone conduction (BC) vibrators and
have focused primarily on BC vibrators and reception of BC
BC contact microphones have become available as commu-
speech while only very few recent studies addressed BC
nication interfaces in both civilian and military communica-
microphones and talkers head vibrations during speech pro-
tion systems. BC has several advantages over air conduction
duction. Some analogies between both modes of BC activity
(AC) speech communication interfaces including minimal
can be drawn; however, differences in location of the vibra-
signal interference caused by environmental noise, uncom-
tion source and the main axis of the acting force between
promised auditory awareness of the environment, ability to
reception and emission of BC speech make both transmis-
communicate over a network with ears open, use with or
sion processes quite different.
without hearing protectors, and inconspicuous wearing of
Extensive studies of optimum BC vibrator placement on
the BC system under a cap, helmet, or hair.
the head have been conducted by McBride and colleagues
Some insight about the potential of BC for radio com-
(McBride et al., 2005; McBride et al., 2008a; McBride et al.,
munication can be gleaned from reports about medical appli-
2008b). In their studies, they selected 11 points on the head
cations of BC for speech audiometry. Several authors
and mapped the head in terms of sensitivity to vibratory vowel
reported a high correlation between AC and BC speech
sounds and pure tones in the range of 125 Hz to 8000 Hz. The
reception thresholds (Carhart and Hayes, 1949; Goetzinger
authors concluded that after averaging responses across all
and Proud, 1955; Srinivasan, 1974; Edgerton et al., 1977;
test signals, the most sensitive locations were the mandibular
Leghayi and Karimi, 1998). A similar correlation between
condyle (on the cheek in front of the ear, hereafter referred to
speech discrimination for phonetically balanced words and
in the text as condyle) and the mastoid process (behind the
spondees delivered by AC and BC pathways was also
ear, hereafter referred to in the text as mastoid). Other lateral
reported (Watson, 1937; Robinson and Kasden, 1977; Dolan
locations such as the jaw-angle bone and the bone just above
and Morris, 1990). Unfortunately, all reported data on
the temple (hereafter referred to in the text as temple) were
BC speech audiometry were obtained at a single vibrator
also good locations. The worst locations were the chin and all
location (mastoid) except for Watsons study (forehead).
other points located along the head midline, including the
forehead. The location-related hearing thresholds for vowels
a)
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Electronic mail: and pure tones were in close agreement. The differences
phuong.k.tran.civ@mail.mil between the most and least sensitive locations were in the

3900 J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 133 (6), June 2013 0001-4966/2013/133(6)/3900/9/$30.00

1520 dB range depending on the type of experimental condi-
tions and type of signal. Only in two cases of the vowel /a/
and a 2000 Hz tone were the location-dependent differences
on the order of 10 dB. In another study, Hodges and McBride
(2012) reported that the same gender-related differences in au-
ditory sensitivity exist for AC and BC signals. Prior to these
studies, Studebaker (1962) compared BC sensitivity at the
mastoid, forehead, and vertex and reported that the forehead
and vertex sensitivities were about equal (the vertex was a lit-
tle bit more sensitive at low frequencies while the forehead
was more sensitive at higher frequencies), but both locations
were less sensitive than the mastoid bone by about 10 dB.
Speech intelligibility studies aimed to determine the
optimum BC vibrator location confirmed the condyle and
mastoid to be the best locations also from a speech discrimi-
nation point of view (McBride et al., 2008a; Osafo-Yeboah
et al., 2006; Osafo-Yeboah et al., 2009; Stanley and Walker,
2009). Locations investigated in these studies included the
chin, condyle, forehead, mastoid, temple, and vertex. The
difference between AC and BC speech intelligibility scores
was usually not large. Stanley and Walker (2009) reported
92% and 90% for AC and BC (condyle) speech intelligibility
scores on the Diagnostic Rhyme Test (DRT), respectively.
Even the worst BC location, the vertex, resulted in an 82%
score. All the differences were statistically significant.
Osafo-Yeboah et al. (2006) used the Callsign Acquisition
Test (CAT) and reported 92.5% and 84.9% scores for the
AC and BC condition, respectively, but this difference was
not statistically significant. In another study by a similar
group of authors who used the CAT as well, the BC scores
for the condyle and mastoid locations were in the
99%100% range (Osafo-Yeboah et al., 2009). In both stud-
ies, the same vibrator (Radioear B-71, Sensory Devices,
New Eagle, PA) was used. Similar BC scores in the
98%100% range for the condyle and mastoid locations
were also reported by McBride et al. (2008b) using the
CAT. All speech intelligibility data reported above were
obtained in quiet and for signals adjusted to the same inten-
sity. Similar in character but obviously lower CAT intelligi-
bility scores for AC and BC conditions were reported for
speech communication in noise (Letowski et al., 2004;
Gripper et al., 2007; Tran and Letowski, 2010).
In the case of bone conduction microphones (BCM),
previous efforts in searching for the optimum location were
focused on speech discrimination and sound quality.
McBride et al. (2008c, 2011) compared speech intelligibility
ratings for CAT item recordings made with a BCM placed at
12 different locations and reported the forehead (75.8%) and
temple (72.4%) were the best locations and the collar bone
was the worst (49.8%). These subjective intelligibility rat-
ings were based on a scale from 0% (impossible to under-
stand) to 100% (perfectly clear and very easy to understand).
A similar method was used to rate each recording based on
sound quality. These subjective ratings were from 1 (very
unpleasant or annoying) to 5 (very pleasant). The same
ratings were obtained in a repetition of the study using a
larger number of participants and longer list of CAT items
but only at eight locations (Tran et al., 2008). However,
the best and worst speech discrimination ratings were more
J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 133, No. 6, June 2013
differentiated, e.g., forehead (88.2%) and temple (82.2%)
versus collar bone (40.0%). As in the case of the BC vibrator
studies, the speech sounds recorded at different locations
were presented to the listeners after being adjusted to the
same intensity.
A direct comparison of CAT speech recorded with AC
and BC microphones and transmitted to the listener over a
pair of Thales (Clarksburg, MD) MBITR radios in both quiet
and 100 dB A-weighted noise was conducted by Tran and
Letowski (2010). The listener received the speech signals
through two BC vibrators located at their condyles. The AC
microphone was a noise-canceling boom microphone and
the BCM was a prototype of a new microphone developed
by Sensory Devices (New Eagle, PA) mounted on the left
mastoid of the talker. The authors reported similar AC
(99.3%) and BC (98.9%) speech discrimination scores in
quiet, and slightly more differentiated scores in noise: AC
(98.5%) and BC (95.2%). Zimpfer and Buck (2008) and
Buck and Zimpfer (2011) made comparative AC and BC
microphone recordings for vowel sounds. The authors
reported 64% correct vowel identifications for the BCM and
alluded to better scores obtained with the AC microphone;
however, they only discussed the phoneme recognition
errors made for BC recordings in their papers. In a report by
Acker-Mills et al. (2005), the authors measured the speech
intelligibility of an AC and BC microphone with the DRT.
The results also showed that BCM recordings were less
intelligible compared to AC microphone recordings in both
quiet and 106 dB A-weighted noise environments.
The purpose of this study was to measure and analyze
the differences in BCM output for several speech sounds
registered at different locations on the head. The motivation
for the study was the expectation that the signal intensity and
signal spectrum differences between various locations of
BCM on the head may lead to a better understanding of the
overall differences in speech discrimination scores and spe-
cific phonemic errors made by listeners for specific BCM
locations.
II. METHOD
A. Participants
Twelve talkers, five males and seven females, with ages
ranging from 2060 yr participated in this study. All partici-
pants were native American English speakers and had no
signs of speech pathology. The participants were recruited
from a list of volunteers from previous studies.
B. Head locations
Twelve locations were selected for inclusion in the
study: 11 locations were on the head and 1 location was on
the collar bone. Head locations were the right and left mas-
toid, chin angle, chin, forehead, Fz, vertex, Pz, inion, a loca-
tion on the frontal bone just above the temple (henceforth
referred to as the temple), and condyle. The labels Fz and Pz
are borrowed from electroencephalography location maps,
where the letters F and P are abbreviations for frontal
and parietal lobes, respectively, and z stands for zero,
Tran et al.: Bone microphone location for speech 3901
which indicates the location is on the midline. All lateral loca-
tions except for the left mastoid were located on the right
side. The left mastoid was added to verify the assumption that
the effect of the BCM placement is symmetric along the
heads midline. The above locations were chosen due to their
potential for easy access by communication equipment or
were predicted as providing good speech signals. One addi-
tional location on the frontal bone was chosen as a reference
point for this study. All locations are shown in Fig. 1.
C. Test sounds
Five speech soundsthree vowels /u/, /a/, and /i/ (as in
drew,math, and week, respectively) and two consonants /m/
and / / (as in man and shoes, respectively), were used as
speech signals in this study. These sounds represent a wide
range of frequencies and contained critical phonetic charac-
teristics needed for speech intelligibility of the English
language.
D. Instrumentation
The recordings were made in a sound isolated room at
the U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving
Ground, MD. The noise floor level of the room was 20 dB
A-weighted (Scharine et al., 2004).
The recording equipment included a Bruel and Kjaer
(B&K, Naerum, Denmark) 4133 AC microphone, two
Temco (Tokyo, Japan) HG-17 BC microphones, and a sound
recording system consisting of a Sony (Tokyo, Japan) laptop
computer, 01 dB-Metravib (Limonest, France) Symphonie
signal acquisition system, and dBFA32 (Metravib, Limonest,
France) sound and vibration acquisition and analysis soft-
ware. Of the two BCMs, one served as the main microphone
used at test locations and the other served as the reference
microphone to account for produced speech level variations
3902 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 133, No. 6, June 2013
between recording sessions. A custom-made adjustable
headband was used to hold the reference BCM at the fixed
reference location (close to the center of the forehead; see
Fig. 1) and at a static force of 425 g-force during all record-
ing sessions. A custom-made constant force device (courtesy
of Brigham Young University) was used to maintain the
same force by pressing the other BCM against the head of
the talker during recordings. The 425 g-force is less than the
550 g-force standard for the testing of bone vibrators, but
there is no static force standard for the testing of bone con-
duction microphones, and because a 550 g-force is uncom-
fortable for participants, a lower force was used. In addition,
Toll et al. (2011) reported that changes in static force in the
range of 300550 g-force have minimal impact on BC signal
intensity data. A B&K 2610 amplifier and a B&K 4133
microphone were used to monitor the level of the sounds
produced by the participants.
The BCM HG-17 is a piezoelectric accelerometer with a
relatively flat frequency response across a broad range (within
6 dB from 300 Hz to 6 KHz) and the output level at 1 kHz is
25 dB 6 5 dB (0 dB 1 V/0.5 G, company source).
E. Procedure
Each participant was seated facing the sound level me-
ter. The microphone of the sound level meter was placed
approximately 30 cm in front of the talkers lips and two
BCMs were then placed on the participants head. The par-
ticipant was instructed to pronounce all speech sounds at a
level of approximately 70 dB sound pressure level (SPL).
The talker monitored his or her speech level on the B&K
2610 display. Prior to the formal recording session, several
practice recordings were made to make sure the talker was
comfortable with the recording process.
The speech sounds produced by each talker were simul-
taneously recorded through two BC microphones and one
FIG. 1. (Color online) BC micro-
phone placements.
Tran et al.: Bone microphone location for speech
AC microphone, and subsequently analyzed and used in the
perceptual study. The speech sounds were recorded at one
pre-determined test location at a time. For each location, one
BCM (the movable BCM) was placed on the talker at the
test location and the entire set of five speech sounds was
recorded. The second (reference) BCM was held at one fixed
location on the frontal bone, 1 in. to the left on the midline
of the participants forehead. This microphone served as a
reference microphone to determine and to compensate for
the extent of natural variations in speech production levels
during consecutive BC recordings. The movable BCM was
attached to each test location with thin double sided tape and
pressed down with a force of 425 g-force using the constant
force device. The reference BCM was pressed against the
forehead with the same force provided by the adjustable
headband.
During the recording session, the talker was instructed to
pronounce each sound several times so the best recording could
be selected for data analysis. A total of 1560 sound files were
recorded for the study ([12 BCM locations 1 AC micro-
phone]  5 sounds  2 channels  12 participants 1560).
F. Data comparison and rationale
Data collection and analysis involved the overall sound
level measurements and third-octave band frequency spec-
trum analysis of all AC and BC recorded sounds. For ease of
comparison, the levels of all sounds recorded with the mova-
ble BCM and the AC microphone were adjusted to align
with the reference BC recordings. The sensitivities of BCM
locations were determined based on the differences of sound
levels between the recordings at the test locations and the
reference location. To compare AC and BC spectra, the dif-
ferential spectra were calculated for each sound, BCM loca-
tion, and talker.
Due to the perfect speech intelligibility scores of sounds
recorded with the AC microphone based on an in-house pilot
study in a quiet environment, the AC spectra were used as
benchmarks for spectral comparisons. To compare spectral
properties of BC and AC recordings, the third octave spectra
of all recorded sounds were calculated and analyzed. The
spectra of AC recordings were calculated in dB SPL (refer-
ence 20 l Pa). The spectra of BC recordings were calculated
in dB relative to 1 lVolt reference. In order to easily visual-
ize the relative difference between these two data sets at
each frequency, the BCM data were shifted upward by a
constant number of 15 dB, roughly corresponding to vol-
tages recorded for the BCM.
III. RESULTS
A. Overall levels
1. Head location levels
Figure 2 shows the average differences from the refer-
ence location of mean speech levels recorded at each test loca-
tion and the associated standard error. The data indicate that
the chin, chin angle, and collar bone were the most sensitive
locations among the 12 BCM locations tested and that the
forehead, inion, and temple were the least sensitive locations.
J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 133, No. 6, June 2013
FIG. 2. (Color online) Relative speech levels averaged across talkers and
sounds recorded at 12 BCM locations. Error bars indicate the size of stand-
ard error (95% confidence interval). The 0 dB level corresponds to the level
recorded at the reference BCM location.
A repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) was
used to evaluate statistical differences in the levels of the
BCM signals. The main factors were location (12 levels) and
sound (5 levels). The results of the analysis showed that
there were significant effects of both main factors: BCM
placement (F 42.486, p < 0.001) and sound (F 51.526,
p < 0.001). The interaction between the type of sounds and
locations was also significant (F 8.75, p < 0.001). Pair-
wise comparisons with Bonferroni adjustment between
sound levels recorded at the left and right mastoid indicated
close similarity of both overall levels (p 0.999). Spectral
analysis (Sec. III B) of the left and right mastoid recordings
also showed close similarity between the spectra (62 dB).
This supports the notion of general symmetry of the BC
vibrations observed on both sides of the talkers head.
Differences between speech levels recorded at the indi-
vidual locations on the head (as seen in Fig. 2) have a com-
plex pattern and do not allow for unequivocal grouping of
head locations into clusters that are statistically different from
each other. However, given that the forehead is the best loca-
tion and the collar bone is the worst location for speech dis-
crimination (McBride et al., 2011), location clusters that
produce statistically similar outputs (p > 0.05) mainly involv-
ing these two locations are created and shown in Table I.
2. Speech sound levels
The overall speech levels for five recorded sounds (aver-
aged across all BCM locations) are shown in Fig. 3. The data
show surprisingly similar
levels for all speech sounds except
the / / sound. The / / sound had a significantly lower overall
level than all other sounds (p < 0.01). The differences
between the levels of the four remaining sounds were not
statistically significant (p > 0.99).
The data presented in Figs. 2 and 3 are the average data
per location and per type of sound, respectively. The ANOVA
indicates a strong interaction between the BCM location and
the type of sound used to generate the BCM output. Such
interaction indicates that the BCM output at a given location
depends on the type of sound. The corresponding relationship
between the BCM speech level and microphone location for
Tran et al.: Bone microphone location for speech 3903
TABLE I. Clusters of BCM locations (separated by horizontal lines) gener-
ating similar BC speech level outputs. The clusters are formed surrounding
the worst and the best locations for speech discrimination (collar bone and
forehead, respectively), and as a sequential string of locations generating the
highest to the lowest BCM signal output. Each cluster combines locations
that generate levels that are not statistically different from each other.
Conversely, the outputs from locations belonging to different clusters differ
significantly from each other except for the repeated locations.

Chin
Chin angle

Chin angle
Collar bone

Collar bone FIG. 4. Average speech sound levels as a function of the BCM location for
Fz each of the five speech sounds used in the study.
Vertex
Condyle
speech sounds were also found [i.e., / / (14 dB) and /a/ (7 dB)
Pz
L mastoid
sounds, respectively]. The average range of inter-individual dif-
R mastoid ferences for location was 12.1 dB 6 3.6 dB and for sound was
10.1 dB 6 3.4 dB. The large variation observed at the chin angle
Condyle as well as the chin location could be due to the large variation
Pz between participants in terms of the soft-tissue thickness at those
L mastoid
locations and to occasional changes in participants jaw position.
R mastoid
Forehead
B. BCM spectra
Inion
Pz 1. Effect of the head location on BCM sound spectrum
L mastoid
R mastoid The relative differences in BC and AC spectra of all 5
Forehead speech sounds recorded through the BCM at 6 of the 12 origi-
Inion nal head locations are shown in Fig. 5. The locations selected
Temple include the two locations that resulted in the largest and small-
est BCM signal level in this study (chin and temple, respec-
tively), the two locations that resulted in the most and least
intelligible speech recognition scores reported in the study by
all five sounds used in this study are shown in Fig. 4. Clearly McBride et al. (2011) (forehead and collar bone, respectively),
there is very little effect of sound type in four of the five
and the two most common locations used for BC vibrator
sounds used in this study. The only exception is the / / sound
placement in medical and commercial BC applications (mas-
for which the function has a very different shape. toid and condyle). Spectral analysis of speech sounds recorded
For each location or sound combination, the recorded sound
at the full set of 12 head locations indicated that the differential
level differences between individuals were quite large. The great-
spectra at these six locations were representative of the largest,
est and the smallest range of inter-subject variability with respect typical, and smallest differences across all 12 locations.
to BCM location were observed at chin angle (20 dB) and fore-
head (4 dB), respectively. Similar ranges with respect to the 2. Effect of sound type on BCM sound spectrum
Figure 6 shows the mean BC-AC differential spectra
(averaged across talkers) at six BCM locations for the five
recorded sounds (/a/, /i/, /u/, / /, and /m/). The six locations
are the same as those shown in Fig. 5.

FIG. 3. (Color online) Relative mean speech sound levels averaged across
all talkers and BCM locations. Error bars indicate the size of the standard
error (95% confidence interval).
IV. DISCUSSION
A. Overall levels
The overall levels of stimulation of BCM at various
head locations (Fig. 1) differ by 15 dB and more. This is a
large range of variation across the talkers head. Due to the
position of the vocal system relative to the head, it was
expected that the talkers head vibrations, and subsequently
the levels of BCM recordings, would be larger along the
midline than at the sides of the head; however, this was not
the case. Even though some level differences in the BCM

3904 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 133, No. 6, June 2013 Tran et al.: Bone microphone location for speech

recordings existed between midline and lateral locations,
there was no clear statistical difference between the two
groups of locations (forehead, inion, and Pz versus temple,
mastoid, and condyle). In contrast, the locations close to the
mouth and vocal folds (such as chin, chin angle, and collar
bone) resulted in significantly higher signal levels as com-
pared to the levels recorded at other locations (Table I).
McBride et al. (2011) used the same skull locations for
assessment of intelligibility and quality of BC speech. A com-
parison of their data with signal levels recorded in this study
revealed that skull locations that produce large input signals
for BCMs also produce signals with limited bandwidth that
are not very intelligible. A Spearman rank order correlation
coefficient (q) between the ranks of 12 head locations on sig-
nal level (this study) and signal intelligibility scales (McBride
et al., 2011) of the BC signals is q 0.675 and is highly
significant [t(10) 2.892; p 0.0087]. This comparison
clearly indicates that the locations of BCM on the talkers
head that produce large BCM signals are not necessarily good
for speech communication purposes. A much better solution
seems to be to capture BC speech signals from the location
providing a lower level but more intelligible signals and
amplifying these signals to required levels.
J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 133, No. 6, June 2013
FIG. 5. Relative spectral differences
between BC and AC recordings for
six speech sounds used in this study.
Each panel represents data collected
at a different BCM location on the
talkers head.
An important finding of the overall level comparison is
the very similar overall levels of all sounds at the forehead
location (Fig. 4), a similarity that is in striking contrast with
all other locations. All other locations show similar behavior
on the overall levels with a notable exception of the / / sound.
Since at the forehead location both the reference microphone
and the test microphone were very close to each other, the
reported finding that the / / sound level was exceptionally
well balanced with the levels of other sounds at this location
could be an artifact caused by physical or electrical interaction
between the microphones. However, no trace of such interac-
tion could be found in a follow-up investigation. Therefore,
we concluded that the reported finding is a real phenomenon
indicating that the forehead is a superior location in terms of
overall level balance of all speech sounds used in this study.
Assuming further that the speech sounds used in this study
were a representative sample of all speech sounds, the fore-
head may be the optimal location for proper balance of energy
between all speech sounds when recorded with the BCM
microphone for communication purposes. This is not to say,
however, that all the sounds would be equally intelligible. In
order to address the speech intelligibility issue, the spectra of
all other speech sounds also need to be compared.
Tran et al.: Bone microphone location for speech 3905

B. Effect of the head location on BCM sound spectrum
The spectrum of a specific speech sound recorded with a
BCM depends on the location of the microphone on the talk-
ers head. Relative spectra of all five speech sounds used in
this study at six selected BCM locations are shown in Fig. 5.
The curves in Fig. 5 show the normalized spectral difference
between the BCM recording made at a specific head location
and the reference air microphone recording of the same
sound. If the spectrum of a given sound recorded with the
BCM were identical to the spectrum of the same sound
recorded with the air microphone, the resulting curve would
be a straight line parallel to the abscissa axis (frequency
axis). Assuming that the spectrum of a given sound recorded
with the air microphone is the gold standard for recordings
made with the BCM, the differential spectrum in Fig. 5 with
the most nearly uniform distribution would indicate the best
BCM recording.
Inspection of Fig. 5 shows that the spectra of most
sounds recorded at the forehead, temple, mastoid, and con-
dyle locations are relatively flat. In contrast, spectra recorded
at the collar bone and chin locations are negatively sloped
indicating that the BCM recordings were relatively high in
3906 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 133, No. 6, June 2013
FIG. 6. Relative spectral differences
between BC and AC recordings for
six locations on the talkers head.
The data in each panel were col-
lected for a different speech sound
used in the study.
low frequency energy and lacked high frequency energy in
comparison to the air recordings. Such sound should be
expected to have a darker timbre and be less intelligible than
corresponding sound recorded with the air microphone.
They also should be less intelligible than the same sound
recorded at the other four locations shown in Fig. 5. This
agrees with the results of the study by McBride et al. (2011)
in which recordings made at the collar bone and chin were
judged to be far less intelligible than the recordings made at
all other locations shown in Fig. 5.
The speech recordings made at the forehead location
were judged as the most intelligible in the McBride et al.
(2011) study. The spectra of all speech sounds captured at
this location in this study show a relative boost of sound
energy in the 26 kHz region in comparison to the air record-
ings. This boost may be responsible for the relatively high
speech intelligibility rating of bone-conducted sounds
recorded at the forehead. A smaller boost in the 26 kHz
region was also found at the temple and condyle locations.
These locations also provided good speech intelligibility rat-
ings reported in the McBride et al. (2011) study. Therefore,
it can be assumed that if the differentiate curve of the BCM
and AC microphone spectra is relatively flat at low
Tran et al.: Bone microphone location for speech
frequencies and there is a boost in the 24 kHz region, there
is a good chance that the speech sounds captured with the
BCM will be high in intelligibility.
A common finding in all the BCM recordings is the
relatively low level of the /a/ sound spectrum at middle
frequencies as compared to the level of the same sound spec-
trum recorded with the air microphone. Note that the /a/ sound
is produced with wide open lips unlike all other sounds inves-
tigated in the study. Wide opening of the lips boosts aired
sound energy at mid-frequencies, a boost not captured by the
BCM. This observation agrees with the report by Letowski
and Carvella (1994), who measured sound levels produced at
and in the occluded ear of the talker. The authors reported that
the relative level of the /a/ sound produced in the occluded ear
and at the ear through open lips was much lower than the rela-
tive levels of other speech sounds. Since the sounds produced
in the occluded ear can be considered as generated by bone-
conducted speech, this observation agrees with the result of
the present study. Since the /a/ sound is one of the strongest
sounds in human speech, its lower level at mid-frequencies
frequencies not critical to speech intelligibilityis not neces-
sarily a reason for special concern for the BCM.
C. Effect of type of sound on BCM sound spectrum
The curves shown in Fig. 6 present the same informa-
tion as the curves in Fig. 5, but are organized by the type of
sound rather than by the BCM location to illustrate more
clearly the effect of bone conduction on the type of sound.
The main observation that can be made by inspection of
Figs. 5 and 6 is that bone conducted speech contains high
frequency energy in the region exceeding 4 kHz. However,
in comparison to air microphone recordings, bone conduc-
tion boosts low frequency energy up to about 20 dB. This
effect is especially evident for /m/ and /u/ sounds at some
locations. The data for all locations on the head shown in
Fig. 6 also show a relatively large boost of high frequency
energy for the / / sound in the 26 kHz region. A smaller
boost can be seen in the case of the /u/ sound. Assuming
again that the air conducted speech spectrum is the gold
standard for bone-conducted speech, the sound /i/ shows the
most unfavorable BCM speech spectrum, regardless of the
BCM location. However, even in this case, the forehead
location seems to be relatively good. In general, all five
sounds show relatively small variation of spectra among the
forehead, temple, condyle, and mastoid locations. The collar
bone and chin locations are equally detrimental for all
sounds, but especially for the /a/ sound.
V. CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study shine some light on the underly-
ing causes of some previously documented poor experiences
with using a BCM as an interface for communication pur-
poses. The previous attempts to locate the BCM at the top of
the head or at other locations leading to high BCM output
led apparently to compromised speech intelligibility.
The BCM recordings made in this study at the talkers
chin and chin angle had the highest overall intensity levels,
while the locations at the temple, inion, and forehead
J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 133, No. 6, June 2013
generated the lowest levels. At the same time, these levels
are negatively correlated with expected speech intelligibil-
ities as shown by McBride et al. (2011). Therefore, it can be
hypothesized that strong speech-related vibrations at some
locations on the talker are due to head resonances and result
in speech coloration and compromised speech intelligibility.
Indeed, comparative analysis of speech spectra recorded
with the BCM at various head locations and with the air
microphone indicated that the low intensity spectra of the
temple, forehead, condyle, and mastoid placements were
much more similar to the air microphone speech spectrum
than the spectra recorded at stronger vibrating locations.
Among all the recordings made at 11 BCM head place-
ments, the forehead and temple have shown the greatest
similarity of the recorded spectra to the respective spectrum
of the air conduction recording. McBride et al. (2011) also
showed these two locations as producing the speech that
was rated as the most intelligible across all 11 placements.
These locations, together with the condyle and mastoid,
seem to be the placements of choice for the BCM for BC
communication.
The reported datatogether with the data reported by
McBride et al. (2011)show that when considering the
tradeoff between speech intelligibility and high level input
signal to the BCM, speech intelligibility should be the ulti-
mate criterion. Such an approach may result in reception of
bone-conducted speech at places that generate 1020 dB
lower signals than other locations. However, the differences
in the speech intelligibility ratings between various BCM
placements are quite large and must be considered. The loss
of sensitivity can be easily compensated for by a miniature
auxiliary amplifier attached directly to the BCM while the
loss of speech intelligibility is not easily undone.
Notice that a BCM in-the-ear location was not investi-
gated in this study. Such a location compromises the greatest
advantage of bone conduction communicationcommuni-
cation with unoccluded earswhich allows for simultaneous
auditory awareness of the surrounding environment and
direct face-to-face communication.
In summary, this study shows that the signal intensity
and frequency spectrum of BC recordings significantly
depend on the BCM location and somewhat less on the type
of speech sound. The high-level resonance-driven locations
on the talkers head are poor choices for the BCM location
due to colored and poor intelligibility speech. From all loca-
tions investigated in this study, the forehead seems to be the
best location for the reception of bone-conducted signals.
Some other low-output locations, such as the temple, mas-
toid, and condyle are also acceptable if preferred from the
practical (operational) point of view.
Acker-Mills, B., Houtsma, A., and Ahroon, W. (2005). Speech intelligibil-
ity with acoustic and contact microphones, in Proceedings of New
Directions for Improving Audio Effectiveness, RTO-MP-HFM-123, paper
7, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France, pp. 114.
Buck, K. K., and Zimpfer, V. V. (2011). Ambiguity in phoneme recogni-
tion when using a bone conduction microphone (A), J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
130(4), 2469.
Carhart, R., and Hayes, C. (1949). Clinical reliability of bone conduction
audiometry, Laryngoscope 59(10), 10841101.
Tran et al.: Bone microphone location for speech 3907
Dolan, T. G., and Morris, S. (1990). Administering audiometric speech
tests via bone conduction: A comparison of transducers, Ear Hear. 11(6),
446449.
Edgerton, B. J., Danhauer, J. L., and Beattie, R. C. (1977). Bone conduc-
tion speech audiometry in normal subjects, J. Am. Audiol. Soc. 3(2),
8487.
Goetzinger, C. P., and Proud, G. O. (1955) Speech audiometry by bone
conduction, A. M. A. Archives of Otolaryngol. 62(6), 632635.
Gripper, M., McBride, M., Osoafo-Yeboah, B., and Jiang, X. (2007). Using
the Callsign Acquisition Test (CAT) to compare the speech intelligibility
of air versus bone conduction, Int. J. Ind. Ergonom. 37(7), 631641.
Hodges, M. L., and McBride, M. E. (2012). Gender differences in bone
conduction auditory processing: Communication equipment design
implications, Int. J. Ind. Eng. 42, 4955.
Leghayi, M. S., and Karimi, A. (1998). Evaluation of the speech test via
bone conduction in normal subjects aged between 1825 years old, Iran.
Audiol. 6(12), 2629 (abstract in English).
Letowski, T., and Caravella, J. M. (1994). Sound levels produced at and in
the occluded ear of the talker, Arch. Acoust. 19(2), 139146.
Letowski, T., Mermagen, T., Vause, N., and Henry, P. (2004). Bone con-
duction communication in noise: A preliminary study, in Proceedings of
Eleventh International Congress on Sound and Vibration, July 58, St.
Petersburg, Russia.
McBride, M., Hodges, M., and French, J. (2008a). Speech intelligibility
differences of male and female vocal signals transmitted through bone
conduction in background noise: Implications for voice communication
headset design, Int. J. Ind. Ergonom. 38(1112), 10381044.
McBride, M., Letowski, T., and Tran, P. (2005). Bone conduction head sen-
sitivity mapping: Bone vibrator, ARL Technical Report ARL-TR-3556,
U.S. Army Research Laboratory.
McBride, M., Letowski, T., and Tran, P. (2008b). Bone conduction recep-
tion: Head sensitivity mapping, Ergonomics 51(5), 702718.
McBride, M., Tran, P., and Letowski, T. (2008c). Head mapping: Search
for an optimum bone microphone placement, in Proceedings of the 52nd
Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society,
September 2226, New York, NY, pp. 503507.
McBride, M., Tran, P., Letowski, T., and Patrick, R. (2011). The effect of
bone conduction microphone location on speech intelligibility and sound
quality, Appl. Ergon. 42(3), 495502.
3908 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 133, No. 6, June 2013
Osafo-Yeboah, B., Gripper, M., McBride, M., and Jiang, X. (2006). Effects
of bone conduction vibrator placement on speech intelligibility using the
Callsign Acquisition Test CAT)A pilot study, Paper presented at the
2006 Annual Industrial Engineering Management Systems Conference,
March 1315, Cocoa Beach, FL.
Osafo-Yeboah, B., Jiang, X., McBride, M., Mountjoy, D., and Park, E.
(2009). Using the Callsign Acquisition Test (CAT) to investigate the
impact of background noise, gender, and bone vibrator location on the
intelligibility of bone-conducted speech, Int. J. Ind. Ergonom. 39(1),
246254.
Robinson, M., and Kasden, S. (1977). Bone conduction speech discrimi-
nation, Arch. Otolaryngol. 103(4), 238240.
Scharine, A. A., Tran, P., and Binseel, M. (2004). ARL acoustic measurements
in buildings 518 and 520 at APG, ARL Technical Report ARL-TR-0580,
U.S. Army Research Laboratory.
Srinivasan, K. P. (1974). Bone-conducted speech reception threshold,
Scand. Audiol. 3(4), 145152.
Stanley, R. M., and Walker, B. N. (2009). Intelligibility of bone-conducted
speech at different locations compared to air-conducted speech, in
Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and
Ergonomics Society, October 1923, San Antonio, TX, pp. 10861090.
Studebaker, G. A. (1962). Placement of vibrator in bone-conducting
testing, J. Speech Hear. Res. 5(4), 321331.
Toll, L., Emanuel, D., and Letowski, T. (2011). Effect of static force on
bone conduction hearing thresholds and comfort, Int. J. Audiol. 50(9),
632635.
Tran, P., and Letowski, T. (2010). Speech intelligibility of air and bone
conducted speech over radio transmission, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 127,
1896.
Tran, P., Letowski, T., and McBride, M. (2008). Bone conduction micro-
phone: Head sensitivity mapping for speech intelligibility and sound qual-
ity, in Proceedings of IEEE, 2008 InternationalCconference on Audio,
Language and Image Processing, July 79, Shanghai, China, pp. 107111.
Watson, N. A. (1937). Hearing of speech by bone conduction, J. Acoust.
Soc. Am. 9(2), 99106.
Zimpfer, V., and Buck, K. (2008). Ambiguity in the recognition of phonetic
vowels when using a bone conduction microphone, in Proceedings of the
European Acoustic Association Meeting (Acoustics08), June 30July 4,
Paris, France, pp. 489494.
Tran et al.: Bone microphone location for speech
Copyright of Journal of the Acoustical Society of America is the property of American
Institute of Physics and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to
a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may
print, download, or email articles for individual use.