Dear Vocalisters:
I have been re-reading some of the information that was put forward by Steve Chicurel <schicurel@m...> via Sunil Cho and over the by Steve Chicurel <schicurel@m...> via Sunil Cho and over the signature of Barry Bonous regarding the differences between belting and classically trained singing.
In this post a strong case is made that the primary changes between these two forms of singing is in the vocal tract filtering that takes place, produced primarily by 1 high larynx which gives a shortened vocal tract, 2 high tongue which reduces pharyngeal/buccal space or places an acoustic obstruction between the pharyngeal and buccal space, 3 tight (I assume that means closed) aryepiglottic sphincter which creates another acoustic obstruction, this time between the epiglottic space and the pharynx 4 retracted ventricular folds which opens the space at the bottom of the pharynx below the high tongue.
It is also claimed that the cricoid cartilage tilts which is "not a part of any other quality" and that the thryroid can also be tilted to "add a little sweetness to the sound. I am not sure how this relates to the obvious need for the cricoid and thyroid cartilages to change their positions relative to each other as pitch changes.
This same post states that the ventricular folds ( false vocal folds) are in a "released" or neutral position for classical singing but that they "see" high-power singing, such as opera (or twang), as "work," and want to close. But in belting the ventricular folds are kept im a retracted position.
And, as well, the larynx is "anchored" which displaces the effort of the larynx and obtains that effort from much larger muscles such as the sternocleidomastoid, latts, etc.
Each of the above appears to me to be a use of the vocal mechanism musculature that is not normally found in most speech and classical singing. High larynx, high tongue, tight aryepiglottic sphincter, retracted ventricular folds, tilting of cricoid and thyroid cartilages, anchoring the larynx so other, larger muscles can become involved, all seem to imply that a hyper tension and extension is present. It has been my impression that most successful musculature/frame athletic achievements are accomplished by avoiding as much unnecessary muscle tension as possible.
I write this not because I am against the belting idea in singing. I have taught it when I needed to, but I have never found it particularly beautiful regardless of who does it. To me belting is an unnatural attempt to display emotion by creating the tension of emotion rather than creating a synthesis of emotion which is the nature of art. But, if singers need to develop this tonal ideal then we, as teachers must either dissuaded them from attempting it, or find a method of doing it that can be healthy and without the seemingly undue tensions described above. Perhaps that can only be accomplished by amplifying the voice wherein it is easier to imitate the quality of "belt" without constructing the vocal tract arrangements that have been listed.
That "belting" shows emotion in music is no more true than that "vocal indicating" shows emotion in acting. Actors are carefully trained to avoid "vocal indicating" because it is not an accurate portrayal of emotional content. Perhaps singers should learn the same lesson.
-- Lloyd W. Hanson, DMA Professor of Voice, Pedagogy School of Performing Arts Northern Arizona University Flagstaff, AZ 86011
|
| |