Dear Mike
On 21-Jan-01, you wrote:
> these two approaches produce different sounds and having the ability > to do both allows the singer the option to chose what is more appropriate > to the material being sung. in the singing of a number of non-classical > styles, particulary the ones that are closest to speech, using the folds > as a valve to control the breath produces the more appropriate sounds as > this is the approach that more closely resembles the one used in speech. > (there is a minority of speakers who, even during 'normal' conversation, > maintain the 'noble posture' and the traditional breath managment of the > international school. i don't include this group when i refer to the > general tendencies of speech.)
I would have to disagree with the inference of your statement that the vocal folds act primarily a valve controlling breath in the normal speaking voice. Quite the contrary, most speakers are totally unaware of their use of breath during speech. This is because in normal speech and normal speech levels only that breath which is needed is used and, consequently, the breath management system is operating correctly in a natural manner.
In oratory or singing, the volume or intensity demands required make it necessary to intensify the breath usage and, because the correct breath management of speech is not a conscious action, the breath management used in speech is often not applied. Instead, an excessive breath pressure is applied to the vocal folds to obtain increased intensity and the vocal folds are recruited, as it were, to regulate that excessive breath pressure. This is not a normal response nor a healthful use of the voice.
But using the vocal folds as a regulator of excessive pressure is also not necessary. It is possible to use the same breath management approach as is used in speech, for singing or oratory. The increased intensity required by these forms of phonation are provided by a more conscious awareness of the normal breath management approach. This requires that the singer become aware of how his/her normal breath for speech functions and replicate that form of function for singing. This is the basis of the "appoggio" method of breath management for singing.
In other words, the breath management system used in singing and in speech is exactly the same system but the singing form of that system is a slightly more intense use and definitely a more conscious one.
One other point on which we have disagreed consistently is the nature of art and its relationship to what we perceive as the real world. You appear to prefer singers whose performance more closely approaches the use of the voice in speech. I have no difficulty with that preference but, and for me this a very large but, the more closely singing resembles speech the less it is singing. Singing and speech are not extensions of each other except in that gray area of parlando singing and some folk song singing. Most other singing is far removed from the real world and is, instead, a synthesis of ideas and feelings prompted by the real world. Once that separation is made it really makes no difference, logically, how far away from speech the singing voice might move. And if a masterpiece is born its style, content, and execution is usually very far removed from the real world.
Each step in that growth from the real to the world of art is taken by each of us as we are ready for it. There is no good, better or best along the way, in my opinion. But it has been my experience that the systems of expression that have been developed for a classical art are more concise, susinct, and, therefore, more freeing for the artist.
Regards -- Lloyd W. Hanson, DMA Professor of Voice, Vocal Pedagogy School of Performing Arts Northern Arizona University Flagstaff, AZ 86011
|
| |