Isabelle Bracamonte wrote:
> Perhaps by "technical study" I should better have
> written "technical vocal study in the studio, made up
> of vocalises and repertoire work without the added
> distraction of interpretation, diction, phrasing, et
> al, until the student can add in those aspects without
> compromising her technical integrity."
Now we're getting closer! Actually, I think we really agree on everything, but
I'm doing
this for the fun of it.
I would add the following to the studio work you mention: studio recitals,
recitals for
friends and family, singing in church, retirement home recitals. Because I
think it's
important to put one's technical skills to the test by performing in front of
people,
learning to deal in a safe environment with whatever performance anxiety one
has in them,
and/or that extra "oomph" one gets out of performing. Because, after all,
that's what
singing is all about.
I also think one needs to start work on interpretation, diction and phrasing
early on, to
the extent that one's technical ability permits. Actually, I think diction is
an
inseparable part of vocal technique. The right vowels are essential, and good
consonants
are great for the voice. I think it's best to learn the diction the right way
from the
start. And foreign languages can be better for the voice than the native
language, though
it's also important to get one's native language "right" in vocal terms.
And dynamics - I like a saying a teacher I know uses - dynamics are relative.
One should
never sing louder or softer than one can sing beautifully. (or, as he sometimes
puts it,
"never exceed the beauty threshold") As the technique improves, the dynamic
range will
increase. But a pinched pianissimo or a strident fortissimo a bad, bad, bad.
Better to
ignore the dynamic markings (for the time being) and sing a song with a
wonderful tone at
a mf all the way through.
My voice teacher has several other "dynamics" words of wisdom. 1. When singing
in a
chorus, never sing louder than mezzo-forte. 2. Dynamic markings indicate a
difference in
timbre rather than sheer loudness or softness. Both of these comments are not
literally
true, if one were to measure volume with a scientific instrument. But they're
about the
psychology of the FF or pp, and are a way to counteract the effect of the way
we "think"
we have to sing to acheive the FF and pp written into the music.
Peggy
--
Margaret Harrison, Alexandria, Virginia, USA
"Music for a While Shall All Your Cares Beguile"
mailto:peggyh@i...
|
