Dear Caio and Vocalisters:
You wrote:
>Do you mean that singing 'lIve' or something similar to that when it was
>supposed to be 'lEAve' does not appear as a distortion to 'unbiased' English
>speakers? Don't you think that it must be no more than tolerated, as
>something singers JUST do, not really perceived as 'not distorted'?
When a voice sings with vowel resonance that accurately matches the
vowel formants to the partials of the phonated sound the vowel is
accurately heard even if the singer is not singing that particular
vowel. I know this sounds like a contradiction in terms but it is
not. If a tenor is singing the English word "live" on an F3 he may
have real difficulty singing it in his head voice. If head voice is
desired on this pitch it is quite easily achieved by replacing the
/I/ vowel with /i/. The sonic effect is a warm rich head voice and
the quality of the vocal line is smooth and even. But most of all,
the listener does not perceive that the singer is singing something
closer to "leave" than to the intended word "live". I hear tenors do
it all the time but I listen for it because I want to know how they
achieve the quality of tone that is being produced.
> >But
>> amplification of the voice is an option because amplification
>> precludes a voice singing at maximum efficiency. In fact,
>> amplification does not allow a voice to sing with maximum efficiency.<
>
>I don't get that! Why not?????????
>
The problem with a voice singing with maximum efficiency into a mike
is that the mike does not react well to the formant peaks in such
voice production. Consequently the singer begins to remove these
peaks because they cause distortion and, essentially, they are not
needed. It is for this reason that some wonderful operatic voices do
not record well and some voices which record well do not sound
acceptable in the opera house. It is also the reason that well
produced voices that record a lot gradually begin to lose their
"ring" and their ability to be heard in even a modest venue.
Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau is a good example of this recording hazard,
in my opinion. His early recording was wonderful, his middle
recordings begin to show vocal production changes that sound good on
recording but not as well in personal performances. Or so, I have
been told. I did not have the privilege of hearing him during this
middle time.
> >Opera in English and other languages is not only succeeding
>> but growing by leaps and bounds in the United States. It is the fast
>> growing performance art in the USA. And though amplification is used
>> at times to overcome a venue that was not designed for opera, because
>> in the past opera was not very popular in the US, that is not yet the
>> norm.<
>
>Mmm... but now you're talking about demand ( market ), not art! When I
>talked about perfection X imperfection and you answered with ?'s I meant
>that difference. As an art, not entertainment, opera singing aims at
>achieving the most in the art of singing without sacrificing any esthetic
>aspects ( I'm assuming that you assume that too! ). Of course, there's no
>such thing as a culturally-unbiased form of art, so whether that kind of
>sacrifice happens or not depends on the culture you're referring to. In the
>case of vowel modification, perceptions from each audience vary, and,
>CONSEQUENTLY, so should the art form. You said English-speaking audiences
>don't feel that as an imperfection, or distorted, but, honestly, I don't see
>you and most posters waiver that lack of demand for perfection by the
>audience when miking is under analysis.
>
>Miking and vowel modification are two competing solutions to the very same
>problem: allowing the audience to hear the singers. Miking goes against a
>perfection ideal in voice production, and you don't seem to accept it
>regardless of what the audiences think of it; vowel modification in operas
>sung in English goes against that ideal in another aspect, comprehension,
>but your reaction is exactly the opposite. Mmmm!!!!! hehe
Please see above. Vowel modification is not an issue in achieving
the synthesis of elements that is required in Opera. Also, it is the
synthesis of operas diverse elements that gives it its special place
in music and theatre, not perfection.
>Me:
>
>>I think I got you, baby! hehe
>
>Him:
>> I am sure we all appreciate the competition reflected in your last
>> statement but I choose to consider this forum as a discussion or even
>> an argument but never a competition.
>
>Relax, Lloyd! That was a joke ( I assumed you assumed that 'hehe' meant
>that! ). I can assure you that, although I was born with a competition
>processor in my brain, like most people, my mind is by Microsoft so it
>doesn't take much advantage of that hardware.
--
Lloyd W. Hanson, DMA
Professor of Voice, Pedagogy
School of Performing Arts
Northern Arizona University
Flagstaff, AZ 86011
|
