In paragraph 370, (p.103 in the 1967 edition) he concludes that, "excessive
lowering of the voicebox is almost as poor as raising it." Being Vennard,
he does tell us why! Other paragraphs (384, 386, 387, 388) offer useful
cautionary information that ought to clarify it.
Other writers (perhaps Vennard too, but I've not got through the whole
thing yet) describe the necessity of modifying vowels for women singing G
(on top of the staff) or higher, since that note is the beginning of the
high notes whose pitches start to interfere with some of the characteristic
vowel formant pitches.
john
a singer who is about to start a second semester of vocal pedagogy
At 08:53 AM 1/8/01 -0700, you wrote:
>
>
>John Alexander Blyth wrote:
>
>> Low larynx is all very well, but if you are *forcing* it to remain low
>> on
>> high notes you will indeed cause tension in the area of the base of
>> the
>> tongue. According to Vennard, you don't need such a big resonating
>> space in
>> the pharynx for high notes, so it would be OK to let the larynx move
>> up a
>> bit.
>
>Do you know where that is in Vennard? That does explain things... I was
>thinking of making more space in the pharynx for high notes but often my
>teacher will tell me my throat is open enough just to sing forward
>now... but I didn't take that completely to heart. (bad me)
>A really terrific coach in NY directed me to sing nasal AE as in the
>French word "Vingt" and AE as in "Cat" on the very top and I find that
>helpful to keep the tone clear, free and not too weighty. If I sing
>pure O or AW it seems to be a little extra "noisy,"
>for lack of a better word.
>My teacher doesn't agree with the principle but likes the result! She
>ended up saying if thinking that vowel makes the voice resonate properly
>she doesn't have a problem with it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
John Blyth
Baritono robusto e lirico
Brandon, Manitoba, Canada
|
|  |
