Vocalist.org archive


From:  Greypins@a...
Date:  Sun Jun 23, 2002  2:07 pm
Subject:  Re: [vocalist] Classical/non-classical singing

caio,

in the case of steve perry, i think steve perry uses the same
mechanism for his high range that pavarotti uses and, there are occasional
notes perry sings that are remarkably similar but generally, the timbre and
articulation are completely different. i would compare geoff tate more to
someone like ian bostridge (in terms of mechanism). to me, they both sound
as if they gained their high ranges by beginning with falsetto and adding
weight to it (similar to 'what's his face?' in angra).

while i think that singers like sergio franchi, alessandro safina,
andrea bocelli, sarah brightman and charlotte church sing in a way that is
much closer to the classical model, particularly the operatic model, there is
still a difference between these singers and classical singers. the singers
lloyd mentioned (sinatra, bennett, fitzgerald, etc.) are all great singers
but, they exhibit a use of the voice that is distinctly different from the
classical model.

comparing spectral analyses of opera singers to people like sinatra,
bennett and fitzgerald, you can see very different uses of the voice. the
vibrato rate of most opera singers is constant and unvarying where vibrato,
as used by the others, is varying and not always constant (in fact, varying
vibrato is one of techniques of the 'crooner' style). because of the
necessity of being heard over an orchestra, the opera singer has a constant
presence of activity in the range of 2500-3300hz., the crooner does not.
instead, the crooner's tone varies greatly depending on the expression. in
the opera singer, legato is constant, like a wall of sound (not to be
confused with phil spector's 'wall of sound') where, in the crooner, the
articulation varies.

compared to other forms of singing, classical singing uses a far more
unvarying tone that is constantly produced. whether this approach is due
primarily to the need to be heard under unfortunate circumstances or, if
that result was desired for artistic purposes, doesn't matter. that's the
style. of all the styles of singing, that i can think of, it is the style
that least resembles 'normal' human usage of the voice. crooning is the
most conversational form of singing that i can think of. usually, most
crooning is done in a relatively low key, bringing the voice closer to the
speaking range.

the differences between crooners and opera singers, can be
particularly seen in women. female crooners (fitzgerald, day, clooney) sing
low, in the conversational range and, the timbre of their singing is nearly
the same as the timbre of their speaking. the range that female opera
singers sing in is much higher, to the point of necessitating the use of a
different mechanism from the one they speak with. aside from the
diffrerences i discussed in the previous paragraph, this is almost like using
two different instruments.

of course, any such comparison is relative. when comparing opera
singers to crooners, it is easy to see the differences. however, if you
compare frank sinatra's singing of 'my way' to sid vicious' singing of the
same song and ask "which one is closer to classical singing?", the answer
would obviously be sinatra's. to make the comparison complete, it would
probably be a good idea to include pavarotti and bocelli singing that same
song.

mike






  Replies Name/Email Yahoo! ID Date  
19471 Re: Classical/non-classical singingLloyd W. Hanson   Sun  6/23/2002  

emusic.com