> >Message: 13 > Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 10:39:21 -0700 > From: "Lloyd W. Hanson" <lloyd.hanson@n...> > From: "Lloyd W. Hanson" <lloyd.hanson@n...> >Subject: The Vowel Line > >Dear Linda and Vocalisters: > >Classical singing does tend to emphasize the vowel line. A common >device to encourage students studying classical singing is to sing a >phrase using only the vowels from the words in order to obtain the >idea of the musical phrase being continuous, that is, continuous >vowels. Consonants are then sometimes described as clothes pins on a >clothes line; they are attached but they do not cut the line nor >detach the elements between the clothes pins. All of this is a poor >attempt to convey to the singer that the essence of what is being >sung must be expressed through a continuous, connected series of >vowels, at least as much as is possible. > >In this sense there is no difference between singing classical song >and singing opera. Opera places much stronger dramatic demands on >the voice because of the conditions such as singing with orchestra, >playing a character in costume with sets, scenery, lighting and so >on. But classic song is also dramatic in the sense that a character >is often being played by the singer. > >The differences that I see between classical singing and pops >singing, at least for the last 35-40 years is the presence of >amplification and the electronic alteration of the voice that >possible with this technology. I do not lament the introduction of >this technology, in fact, I often find it very interesting. But I do >object to the singing style that electronic technology encourages >crossing over into the classical song style or opera. And it >clearly has become more and more a part of some the singing that we >hear from not a few presently well known singers. > >I believe it is possible to sing in both styles but my experience is >that the singer must be very diligent about making the required >differences in style. I might also add that because pops singing is >so strongly personality oriented it is less of a error for a >classically trained singer to bring classical elements into pops >music than for a pops singer to bring pops elements into classical >music because classical music is less personality oriented, or should >be. > >Good discussion! > >-- >Lloyd W. Hanson, DMA >Professor of Voice, Pedagogy >School of Performing Arts >Northern Arizona University >Flagstaff, AZ 86011 > > >_____________________________________________________________________ >Message: 15 > Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:35:32 -0700 > From: "Lloyd W. Hanson" <lloyd.hanson@n...> > From: "Lloyd W. Hanson" <lloyd.hanson@n...> >Subject: Re: The Ubiquitious AH Vowel > >Dear Linda and Vocalisters: > >Linda wrote: > >I rather like the expression "clean" vowels: it seems to me to convey a > >lot of what we're trying to find in the voice, and also to neaten up the > >borders between consonants and vowels. Waht do you think? > >I like this term. For me it better defines what I consider and >listen for in vowel pronunciation. > >-- >Lloyd W. Hanson, DMA >Professor of Voice, Pedagogy >School of Performing Arts >Northern Arizona University >Flagstaff, AZ 86011 > > >Message: 21 > Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 14:22:03 -0700 > From: "Lloyd W. Hanson" <lloyd.hanson@n...> > From: "Lloyd W. Hanson" <lloyd.hanson@n...> >Subject: RE: The Vowel Line > >Dear Mike and Chiris and Vocalisters: > >I am not suggesting that classically trained singers should bring >classical ideas into pops singing, only that to do so is less a >violation of the pops form than if the reverse were done. > >Pops music, by definition, is intended to be completed by the >performer. That is one of its great charms; each pops artist is >granted extensive freedom to perform the music as they wish and >nothing they do can be considered incorrect in light of the musical >concept that began the process. > >But that does not mean that everyone will like any given performance. >There is great discrepancy between the performances of a given song >by two well respected and accepted pops-only performers but not >everyone will appreciate each performers work on any given tune. > >However, one of the characteristics of classic song or opera is a >reduction in the freedom that a performer may assume in performing >the song within a classic or operatic style. This is so because the >creative work of the composer is considered complete and is not left >to be completed by the performer as is the case in pops music. (I >know someone will bring up the example of cadenzas in arias and >concertos but these are exceptions that are limited to particular >short places in the music). > >If a pops performer sings a classic song or opera aria in a pops >style, it is no longer a classic song nor an opera aria because a >basic tenant of the style (the limited freedom allowed the performer >because of the completeness of the composer's work) has been violated. > >It is not possible, given the opposite quality of pops music to so >violate a pops song regardless of our own personal feelings about who >does it best. An example of how this can be misunderstood is the >case of an older person who loved the arrangements of Glenn Miller >being offended by a rock version of "Sting of Pearls". The personal >choice is acknowledged but no violation has been done to the piece if >it is presented in new clothes. And it is still pops music, rock or >swing rendition. > >But if "Nessun Dorma" is belted by pops singer it is no longer an >opera aria. It is now a pops song. > >Just differences in concept carried out to a logical conclusion. > > > >Mike wrote: > > > >I think you'll find that people who listen mostly to pop music would > >not want to hear anything operatic in the singing of pop music. >-- >Lloyd W. Hanson, DMA >Professor of Voice, Pedagogy >School of Performing Arts >Northern Arizona University >Flagstaff, AZ 86011 > > ________________________________________________________________________________\ _____
|
|
| |