lloyd wrote:
<<
Regardless of what Mike's preferences are in singers, opera singing for
females reflects the natural potential of the female voice>
mike says: if a counter-tenor can do it then it is a males natural potential
as well.
back to lloyd < and the
environment into which each singer is born and lives.>>
mike puzzled, asked do you mean both sexes here?
lloyd continues:
<<To make an assumption that women sing above their chest voice primarily
because they are dominated by men and somehow required to do so is a bit
preposterous.>>
mike says: that wasn't me who said that.
<<And if today's women speak primarily in their chest voice, which I think is
very debatable, it is very likely a reflection the environment of the pops
culture in which they live. In the 1950's this was not the case.>>
men and women from boston speak in a nasty, father drinan-esque chest
voice, southerners, male and female speak in more of a mix. every male who
starts singing, starts with his speaking voice. a lot of women sing in
their speaking voice unless they think they are supposed to sound like 'head'
voice when they sing. it is not natural. even if you might consider their
speaking voice to be a mix, when an operatic female sings it is not the same
as their speaking voice. when an operatic male sings, it is the same as
his speaking voice.
<<I would also add that from Mike's comments he appears to think that Randy is
suggesting that the female so called "falsetto" is found at the top of
their range as it is in the male voice.>>
i never said any such thing! i am talking about the timbre, regardless
of where it appears in the range. the problem i have is with women singing
in 'falsetto' too low when it should be their speaking voices, in whatever
mix an individual speaks with.
<<However, Randy has made very clear
that this female "falsetto" is found near he bottom of the female range.
Which sort of shoots down Mike's argument.>>
it appears that my argument has been misunderstood. (see next comment
for an explaination.)
<< I would prefer that we consider falsetto as a particular configuration of
the voice. If this concept is accepted then what Randy describes as female
falsetto does correspond with what we now normally consider is a definition
of male falsetto. The actual manner in which the vocal folds function is a
much better determinant for classifying a particular kind of vocal
production.>>
i maintain that the 'configuration' that david daniels sings in is the
same as someone like giulietta simionato. she cracks into chest voice on
her low notes in the same place where men's voices tend to crack- around
middle C. the rest of the time, i think she is singing in the same
'configurtion' as david daniels when he sings.
i don't care if we call it 'falsetto' or 'salami on rye' as long as we call
them the same thing, if they are. now, all we have to do is find out.
the implication is that, if operatic women are singing like david
daniels and they teach male students, they cannot give instuction to a male
student on how to sing like robert merrill based on the 'configuration' they
use.
<<A good discussion>>
it has that potential.
mike
</PRE></HTML>
|
