From: Michael Gordon
Organization: Mr. Chen's Cookies
To: vocalist
Subject: Re: Tenor timbre vs baritone timbre
Send reply to: VOCALIST <vocalist>

Dear List:

This thread has touched a nerve, so allow me a bit of venting. While
some members of this list might only have e-mail, I would hope most
members can access the internet and world-wide web with a browser. I
would humbly suggest that the topic of Vocal classification be
researched at the Vocalist web site by searching the archives ... Also I
have found that the search engine google finds posts at the Vocalist.

For example, if you go to www.google.com and search for "vocal
classification" a number of posts from the list come up. One of them I
wrote, and I think is worth reading:
please see http//www.vocalist.org/html/9809/msg01189.html.

I don't know why "we" are obsessed with classification, but it is
probably an identity thing and a desire to belong to a "named" group.
While there are many vocal classifications, we are all unique and do not
necessarily fit into neat little boxes - the term fach itself I believe
means to "pigeonhole."

There are reasons to classify a voice, and I understand them. For
example, a voice teacher of a relatively advanced student must naturally
deal with classification issues in order to select appropriate material
for the student. As a practical matter, one cannot go to an audition
without some selectivity in the material one learns and practices, and
if the set of pieces is not "coherent" with respect to vocal category
the auditioneer may think the auditionee does not know his/her voice.

I do take issue with some points Karen Mercedes raised regarding Thomas
Hampson and Placido Domingo. To keep this short I am responding further
in two follow-up posts: one titled "Lazy tenors" and the other titled
"Domingo - a baritone?."

Cheers,

Michael Gordon
("lazy" list member)