In a message dated 09/06/2000 11:55:28 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
buzzcen@a... writes:
<< << Of course, I would never (okay, rarely) take raw chest
voice above an Eb or E (4). The flip side of
over-hooty is what I think is referred to as "muscle
bound." Taking raw chest too high is a danger. >>
Why the certainty in this statement? Taking chest up even a fourth higher
does not mean it is muscle bound. You can still incorporate vocal fold
lengthening at a higher point and it is not unhealthy for the voice. >>
Don't you think the term in question here is "raw chest"? In my way of
thinking, there is more than one way to sing "chest", and "raw chest" is that
chest which, when carried up too far, stretches and strains to the point of
breaking into a disconnected head voice at about B or C. (A lot of the lesser
distinguished pop singers use this type of chest voice. . .Gloria Estefan,
for example.) "Balanced chest" (as I call it) is mixed from the bottom all
the way up the voice, (usually by a very frontal placement) so that when one
is singing, you feel very chesty still at F and G and A, but it is connected
to the whole system so that by the time you reach the second passagio at B
and C, you naturally feel the head resonance taking precedence, albeit
without relinquishing the connection from the bottom. When Seth Riggs refers
to bridging, I believe he is referring to finding this "one register" way of
singing. What some call the "modal" voice. What is also considered true
"bel canto" singing. What all the really distinguished pop singers do . .
.Aretha Franklin, for example, and what all the greatest of opera singers do.
. .Marilyn Horne and Montserrat Caballe for example.
TinaO
|
|  |
