Reg Boyle <bandb@n...> wrote: > My minds ear equates a female alto timbre > very closely with the harmonic content of that gut quality, > whereas the counter-tenor I retain is one of a, less fulsome > low spectrum and an even thinner upper. I believe that > JSBachs' juxtaposing of the harpsichord, with its sonic > appeal, against the mellow tone of the gut violin, is a brilliant > disclosure of his tonal evaluation. These days he may have > used a viola, but not a counter-tenor.
Dear Reg,
Whether a rich deep sound or more "on the surface" sound is a better match with a harpsichord is probably a matter of opinion, and I certainly respect your defence of your preference... I won't try to dispute your well-stated arguments there, though my preference is obviously different! :-)
What I'd like to bring up is that there are countertenors with rich voices like some contraltos. You just don't hear many, because in our "earlier than thou" world of classical music, it is very difficult for a rich/vibratoed/chesty/big-voiced/hefty/take-your-pick countertenor to find work!
Perhaps, if I get a chance, I will post a clip of one of my vocalizing soon. My voice is relatively thick harmonically... so you can see CTs don't all sound the same.
Best wishes and thanks for a fun discussion, -Tako
|