In a message dated 12/8/2001 3:06:24 AM Eastern Standard Time, lloyd.hanson@n... writes: lloyd.hanson@n... writes:
<< The idea is a bit daunting and researchers have spent no little amount of time trying to determine exactly how such a beginning of tone can occur. In fact, at one time a well respected voice scientist (Husson) proposed an unusual hypothesis known as the neurochronaxic theory that postulated the vocal vocal folds are set into oscillation by neural impulses and thus are not dependent on air flow at all! >>
lloyd,
i am assuming husson was unable to prove his hypothesis? at any rate, for a 'balanced onset', using 'balance' in the true sense of the word, there would have to be a simultaneous start of the breath and an independent start to the oscillation of the folds (in that case, to be thourough, we'd have to know at which point the breath took over the oscillation of the folds and how that turnover affected the sound).
<< For singers there is no need to be so archly concerned. The simultaneous beginning of breath and tone is their goal if they are to obtain the most efficient and healthy oscillation of the vocal folds for singing. >>
i agree singers need not concern themselves so. additionally, as much of the control of the laryngeal muscles exists on a sub-proprioceptive level, the singer can only use such information to target a feel. and, when put in simple terms like 'see if you can start the sound and the breath at the same time', most students can understand the task fairly easily. putting it into practice, in my experience, is not always immediate for them and a minority seem to have difficulty with it. this minority who have the difficulty, almost always, seem to err on the side of an aspirated attack. (in anticipation of the question; the only time i work on such an onset with my students is when they are doing exercises that start on a vowel. otherwise, when working on a song, the model for the onset, generally, is how the student would speak the word.)
'efficient' and 'healthy' are seperate, though not necessarily different, concerns from artistic satisfaction. 'efficient' and 'healthy' are also seperate concerns (kerry wood, for example). although, i tend to think of 'efficient' as relative to the 'artistic' goal, as in, was the chosen method the most efficient way to accomplish the artistic goals. i don't think of any vocalism as an absolute with regard to efficiency.
'healthy' is a little closer to being an absolute if we think of healthy as having longevity with less decline in the condition of the voice than is even inevitable with age. again, 'healthy' can sometimes be the direct opposite to artistic satifaction. some fires burn so brilliantly, they can only last a very short time, while others are boring as hell forever.
mike
| | |