Vocalist.org archive


From:  "Tako Oda" <toda@m...>
"Tako Oda" <toda@m...>
Date:  Mon Mar 12, 2001  10:09 pm
Subject:  [vocalist] Re: What's a countertenor?


--- In vocalist-temporary@y..., Karen Mercedes <vocalist-temporary@y..., Karen Mercedes < > that are somehow supposed to imply a superiority (aesthetic,
> technical?) of one over the other - though for the life of me I
> don't know who sets the absolute standards by which one can
> tell which type of countertenor is "better or "more real".

You know that the groovy, politically correct me is going to say all
countertenors are all good, regardless of labels :-)

Truly, though, it is important to know that differences between
countertenors are mostly about registrational strategies and
resonance rather than the authenticity of production in their upper
registers. You mention the difference in sound between Asawa and
Scholl. Verily, the actuation is the same. What is different is the
style. Scholl is an early music specialist, and limits his vibrato.
Asawa studied opera, so he has a lush sound.

There is also the difference between "chesty" countertenors like
Oberlin and David Walker and "heady" countertenors like Bowman and
Scholl. It's a matter of taste, but once past A 440, it's all the same
game, at least in the larynx. There is a paper by G Ardran and D.
Wulstan from 1967 which filmed a variety of "falsettos" and determined
that all varieties of countertenors are using the same technique above
440Hz. I wish they had some castrati on hand! :-)

More "real" or "better" depends on context. I'd say James Bowman is
perfect for Purcell, Russell Oberlin is perfect for Dowland, David
James is perfect for Part, Stevie Wonder is perfect for Motown. It's
inappropriate casting that encourages people to question to value of
the recent countertenor craze.

Tako


emusic.com