This current trend has been widely embraced by current pedagogies which is why we rarely hear a female voice, especially a high soprano, who can execute a chesty low G for example.
I feel that many teachers disregard the chest-register in females and label it as bad, ugly. I've even heard famous teachers say, "I don't teach my females to sing in the chest voice." From what I have learned about voice science and pedagogy...if you DON'T teach the female chest-voice, you're missing a valuable part to the puzzle.
Hello - I'm way behind on my mail, but thought I'd put in my two cents worth here.
Two things: 1. I am a full lyric soprano who can hit a C3 any day of the week (though no one would pay to hear it!) and who regularly exercises most of her soprano students down below C4 on a regular basis, as part of developing a complete and viable voice with a mix of registers throughout. I can't imagine being satisfied with the sound of only the high register in ANY voice type; a mix (to me) adds such depth, core, and richness to the voice. That having been said.. 2. When I am singing below middle C, I don't completely eschew the higher register either. I keep a subtle mix all the way down to maintain ring, vibrancy, flexibility and easy facility in leaps and runs. The percentages of each register in the mix changes depending on the range, the piece and the style of singing I am doing. 3. Ok - so there's a third too. I just came back from our Regional NATS auditions and I heard lots of good singing in which both registers were evident, in student and teacher singing (the NATSA competition). While there may be teachers who don't go there, at least down here, there are many who are advocating the blend of registers throughout.
Sharon (bring on the low F3 at the end of the Menotti "Lullabye" anyday!) Szymanski
|