Against neutral listening

PITCH – Notes on Vocal Intonation by giulia deval is an investigation into the politics of the voice. Drawing on ethological, phonetic and sociological studies, the work shows how vocal pitch functions as a device of social classification, shaping judgements of credibility and authority even before words are spoken. The performative lecture and video essay are currently on show at Art City Bologna.

From 5 to 8 February 2026, in the spaces of Bologna’s former Institute of Zoology, PITCH – Notes on Vocal Intonation takes shape both as a performative lecture and as a video essay, as part of the Art City programme. The project by artist giulia deval originates from a very simple question, namely “Why do we hate high-pitched voices?”, and occupies a hybrid space where artistic research meets critical dissemination, ultimately prompting the viewer to ask themselves: “Why can a voice sound authoritative or unreliable even before it says anything?” or, again, “What do we really hear when we hear a voice?”.

The performative lecture, inspired by artists such as Erik Bünger¹, was conceived a few years ago in the context of NUB Project Space in Pistoia and was designed for the Periferico festival in Modena, which in 2023 focused on the voice. The work later evolved into a video essay after winning the Lydia Prize, awarded by Fondazione Il Lazzaretto in partnership with PAC Milan and curated by researcher Claudia D’Alonzo. Alongside this, the workshop REASONS WHY I HATE MY VOICE also emerged, focusing on the negative judgements that are typically expressed when listening back to one’s recorded voice.

«In a sense, PITCH is a theoretical formalisation, albeit a playful one, of something you are constantly in contact with when working with the voice», deval explains, «and which has to do with one’s own singularity and with the relationship with the other».

Who has the right to sound authoritative?

Pitch, that is, tone, refers to the perceived height of a sound and is one of the fundamental parameters of the human voice. Put simply, it is what allows us to recognise a voice as higher or lower. Although it is linked to the physiology of the vocal apparatus, pitch varies constantly according to context, communicative intention and the relationship with the interlocutor.

«On a personal level», deval explains when recounting the genesis of the project, «I realised that I would involuntarily lower my pitch in all situations that required greater “credibility”, such as university exams or job interviews. Talking about it, especially with female friends but not only, I found that this mechanism was shared and that intonation was used by us, more or less consciously, as a tool of defence or adaptation to contexts in which an averagely high vocal range would have made us feel at a disadvantage». This feeling is echoed in numerous recent studies, including large-scale and transnational ones, such as the research conducted by David Puts, anthropologist and evolutionary psychologist at Pennsylvania State University.A cross-cultural study² carried out on 2,647 adults in 44 locations across 22 societies in Asia, Europe, Africa and the Americas analysed the effects of intonation. By digitally manipulating the pitch of voice recordings and observing how listeners’ perceptions changed, the study showed that a lower male vocal pitch increases perceptions of prestige, strength and competitive ability, especially in contexts characterised by high relational mobility and higher rates of violence. Similarly, a series of studies published between 2023 and 2025³ in the field of work and leadership psychology highlighted how, for women, a lower pitch tends to increase assessments of competence and “hirability” in professional and recruitment contexts, while a higher pitch is more readily associated with traits such as emotionality or coyness.

 «I felt the need to communicate», deval continues, «in a simple and not particularly “mysterious” way, indeed perhaps a slightly didactic one, something that for me had the dignity of being put on the table and shared».

«This is how PITCH was born, an ironic digression that connects ethological, phonetic and historical sources on the ways in which different species, including humans, use high and low tones in their communication».

It is all about meaning

One of the theoretical cornerstones of PITCH is the theory of the Frequency Code, developed by phonetician John Ohala⁴, who extensively investigated the role of intonation in human communication. Drawing on comparative studies, Ohala observed a shared perceptual tendency to associate high tones with vocalisers possessing small bodies and low tones with vocalisers possessing large bodies.This mechanism has its roots in ethology and was itself taken up by Ohala from the work of zoologist Eugene S. Morton⁵, whose studies focused on the function of intonation in conflict dynamics and communication among different animal species. Morton showed how many animals strategically modify their calls in order to appear larger or smaller than they actually are, depending on the situation.

It is precisely this shift — from physiology to strategy — that struck giulia deval. «What fascinated me about Ohala was the theory of the Frequency Code», she explains, and PITCH sets out from this already “sealed” investigation. It is not so much a matter of biology in the strict sense, but of how we use tones, of the possibilities for modulation and mimicry that every voice possesses. Even though each body has its own comfort range, determined by the vocal apparatus, the voice remains an extremely plastic field. «How many voices can each speaker have or perform?», deval asks, inviting us to think about the inflections that emerge when speaking to a newborn, or the imitations that permeate everyday speech. From here stems the attention of the lecture-performance to the way in which different species — human and non-human — “play” with pitch, questioning the implicit purposes of these variations: to intimidate, seduce, reassure, deceive.

Ohala himself recounts, in one of his articles, an experiment⁶ conducted in 1979 on “personal attributions”, which deval also discusses, in which many people judged higher-pitched voices to be less authoritative. «I think that today this should be related above all to the conventions perpetuated by the media and to the rules imposed on recorded voices that we are accustomed to», deval explains. It is no coincidence that in the workshop REASONS WHY I HATE MY VOICE these mechanisms are made immediately visible.
«The first exercise consists of closing one’s eyes and imagining a perfect voice-over for a scientific documentary. The voices imagined by participants tend fairly uniformly towards a low voice, with flawless diction and often belonging to an older person. The rules and tastes that we can trace in audiovisual media are very interesting for exploring the relationship between identity and the idea of “legitimate knowledge”, and more broadly, sonic imaginaries. Annalisa Pellino⁷ and Domenico Napolitano⁸, do this with great skill, and their texts are a key reference for me».

We recommend reading

14 July 2025

Is the witch the last rebel?

Rituals and spirituality against the patriarchal order

Africa Popular culture Rights

Voices out of control, monstrous voices

«Greek women of the archaic and classical period were not encouraged to emit uncontrolled cries of any kind within the civic space of the polis [city] or within earshot of men». And again: «It is largely on the basis of the sounds people make that we judge who is sane or mad, male or female, good or bad, trustworthy, depressed, fit for marriage, dying, more or less animal, inspired by God. These judgements happen quickly and can be brutal». This time it is not deval speaking, but Anne Carson in The Gender of Sound⁹: The list is deliberately excessive and effectively conveys how differential listening is capable of positioning bodies within a hierarchy before they can truly “speak”.

PITCH by giulia deval finds one of its most incisive fissures precisely in this essay by the Canadian poet and essayist, just under fifty pages long, because it asks what history made such a hierarchy possible. «That is where, for me, the heart of everything lies», deval says. «On the one hand, Carson retraces the construction of the rhetor’s voice, disciplined downwards to express self-control, and on the other she discusses Solon’s laws, which prohibited high-pitched vocalisations in public space».

«Let us remember that high pitches emerge in all situations that are out of control, such as laughter, pleasure and pain, and that, unsurprisingly, the mythological figures associated with this mindset are monsters with high-pitched, animal-like voices and verbal incontinence».

For the Greeks and Romans, unpleasant female voices were easily exemplified by a wide range of irascible mythological figures: from the Gorgon, known for her guttural howls, to the screams of the Furies, the fatally seductive tones of the Sirens, Cassandra’s stammering, and Echo’s verbal incontinence. It is not insignificant that these are female, hybrid, “animal-like” creatures: their voices seduce, disturb, repeat or interrupt. In this perspective, myth becomes an archive of acoustic norms disguised as narrative, and the public sphere, in the genealogy reconstructed by Carson and taken up again by deval, is also built as a device for subtracting the body. It is not only certain voices that are expelled: the bodily conditions that produce them are expelled as well.

«I would like this reflection», deval explains, «which seeks to remain open and continues to be nourished also through the workshop REASONS WHY I HATE MY VOICE, to generate a sense of liberation and the curiosity to experiment with the many possibilities of vocal expression that we often ignore or censor».

«“Rinsing our ears” of the conventions we are used to is a long process that does not happen all at once; it requires practising and experimenting together».

It is not enough to “take the floor” if the sound with which one does so is already read as illegitimate. And it is not enough to claim visibility if audibility remains governed by invisible parameters. PITCH suggests that the politics of the voice do not coincide with the right to speak, but with the right to be listened to without credibility being assigned on the basis of pitch.

 

1. For further information about Erik Bünger: https://www.erikbunger.com/ ↩︎
2. A lower male pitch increases the perception of fighting ability and social prestige, especially in societies characterized by greater relational mobility and higher murder rates—contexts in which quickly recognizing formidable competitors and high-status individuals can be crucial. The same lowering of pitch also increases women’s perception of male attractiveness. Aung, T., Hill, A. K., Hlay, J. K., Hess, C., Hess, M., Johnson, J., Doll, L., Carlson, S. M., Magdinec, C., G-Santoyo, I., Walker, R. S., Bailey, D., Arnocky, S., Kamble, S., Vardy, T., Kyritsis, T., Atkinson, Q., Jones, B., Burns, J., . . . Puts, D. (2024). Effects of voice pitch on social perceptions vary with relational mobility and homicide rate. Psychological Science, 35(3), 250–262. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09567976231222288 ↩︎
3. Read more: Wilms, R., Oostrom, J. K., & Van Garderen, E. (2025). The effects of the charisma signal and voice pitch in female leader selection. The Leadership Quarterly, 36(3), 101857. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1048984324000869 ↩︎
4. About the Frequency Code theory: Ohala, J. J. (1995). The frequency code underlies the sound-symbolic use of voice pitch. In Cambridge University Press eBooks (pp. 325–347). https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/sound-symbolism/frequency-code-underlies-the-soundsymbolic-use-of-voice-pitch/1D05AB5A9266731D6C66FA7BD6F4058C ↩︎
5. The quoted studies: Morton, E. S. (2017, April 1). Animal vocal communication. Cambridge Core. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/animal-vocal-communication/animal-vocal-communication/165DEEA338ACFEC55E14757D42874547 ↩︎
6. Apple, W., Streeter, L. A., & Krauss, R. M. (1979). Effects of pitch and speech rate on personal attributions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 715–727 ↩︎
7. Read more: Pellino, A. (2023). La voce in transizione. Cinema arte contemporanea e cultura fonovisuale. https://www.mimesisedizioni.it/libro/9791222303680 ↩︎
8. About Domenico Napolitano: https://www.ssmeridionale.it/domenico-napolitano/ ↩︎
9. Carson, A. (2025). The gender of sound. ↩︎