Reg Boyle <bandb@n...> wrote: Reg Boyle <bandb@n...> wrote: > Now that there's a lull in the fire, I'm relieved to see that > we agree that a contralto is NOT an alto .....whew... and that > the CT approximates a mezzo soprano as a support voice in a > chorus, rather than a soloist.
Not quite, but bear with me. It is all very convoluted, I agree. Again, alto is still very much a relational term. In an all male SATB choir, the assumption is that boy trebles are on soprano, and that adult altos are on the alto part - with a tessitura a good 3rd below the usual mixed SATB alto part, since most mixed SATB choir altos have women who would be considered mezzos in a solo setting, who have higher voices that the typical adult male alto.
The term "countertenor" was decided upon by Deller and Tippett *specifically* to indicate a *solo* voice type. So a male adult alto in a choir is not necessarily a countertenor.
> The implication this raises of course is the likely balance of > such a combination, in that the CT may have needed the vocal > size of a castrato to achieve the desired result.
It is unlikely that castrati sang alto parts in all-male choirs, though they probably could have. I believe the castrati and boys sang soprano, whereas the alto section was a mix of intact adult male altos, older castrati, and teenagers. Choral church music from Italy from this period is rarely done, so talking about castrati vs. countertenors in HIP choral situations is probably pointless.
In a solo setting, you have to look at each individually. Castrati as a group had larger voices than countertenors as a group, but I'm sure there are CTs working today (Bejun Mehta, James Bowman, and a few members of la gran scena) who have vocal size comparable if not larger than some of the smaller-voiced castrati of years past.
Tako
|