| | From: "Lloyd W. Hanson" <lloyd.hanson@n...>
Date: Sat Nov 16, 2002 4:21 am
Subject: [vocalist] Re: classical isn't the only way (was amplification)
| Dear Vocalisters:
A lot has been brought forward under the "Amplification" thread
including a long discussion between Randy and Leslie. All for the
better.
Beth, I would disagree substantially with you when you say that
"head-predominant classically trained singers don't evidence injuries
as quickly because their voices are rarely able to produce enough
volume to create fatigue". You also added that "they aren't singing
continually the demands on their voice are not consistent enough that
vocal rest doesn't remedy or resolve many of the issues caused as a
result of improper singing. I am not sure what you mean by the last
statement but I would counter the first statement by saying that the
choice of bringing the head voice lower than is found in pops singing
is the very quality that makes it possible for the classically
trained singer to produce a voice that carries and does not suffer
fatigue.
Randy has clearly said many times that the problem with classically
trained singers is their error in carrying the head voice down too
low and that this is damaging to the voice. Yet it these very
classically trained singers who are able to be heard over an
orchestra without the aid of amplification. I doubt the same
un-amplified carrying power is available to any but a very few Pop
singers who carry their chest voice much higher regardless of how
well they make the transition into head voice at their upper range.
This classically trained head voice technique allows the singer to
more completely concentrate formants 3 through 5 into a more narrow
pitch spectrum that gives the voice its ring and carrying power in
the upper middle voice.
It may be the choice of pops style to use chest voice much higher
than would be used by the classical singer. But if the pops singer
were required to do this without the aid of amplification their
career would be a short one. The classical singer's choice of using
head voice earlier in the pitch ascent of singing is a techniques
that has been proven over 300 years as the best way to gain vocal
projection without amplification AND vocal longevity. Here is a very
clear example of a major difference between the techniques taught by
Seth Riggs and the major teaching techniques that have been a
mainstay of classical teaching training for many centuries.
I would also add that all research indicates that it is necessary for
female singers to open vowels as they approach G5 if they are to
obtain maximum resonance. In doing so the female voice adjusts the
vocal tract vowel formant to match the ascending pitch and thus
produce a proper match between phonated sound and resonated sound.
This is, and always has been, a basic precept of classical voice
training. Your comments would indicate that this is unnecessary or
even undesirable.
Although the classically trained singer is not performing for as
large an audience as the pops singer it should not be assumed that
"they aren't marketable enough to get a demanding job in their own
genre." Let us give each singing style and the preference of each
singer its own due. Certainly singing for a larger audience or
making more money or being better known or famous is not the
beginning or foundation of any valuable art. Those niceties might be
the icing but they are not the cake. Few great musicians or singers
ever founded their careers primarily on becoming famous. It is the
process of 'becoming' a musician that makes one an artist, not the
product of fame.
--
Lloyd W. Hanson
|
|  |
|
