Vocalist.org archive


From:  "Caio Rossi" <rossicaio@h...>
Date:  Sun Jun 23, 2002  11:48 pm
Subject:  Re: [vocalist] Classical/non-classical singing

I wrote:
"It seemsto me that male classical singers go as far as their "mix
register",
shortening their cords without thinning them up ( or much ), so as to keep
producing overtones and project their voice above the orchestra while still
portraying a typical male timbre."<

Lloyd:>COMMENT: The vocal folds produce the complete overtone series in any
form of phonation short of being partially opened. Projection of the
male voice above the orchestra is possible only when there is a peak
in the vocal spectrum at around 2800-3200 Hrz (the Singers Formant)
and the production of this peak is little dependent on the presence
of all of the fundament's overtones. It is more a matter of
emphasizing particular overtones.<

Ok, I've learned that here, but the peak waves projected above the orchestra
without the bulk of the other overtones and the fundamental "thickening" the
sound "on the background" wouldn't sound appropriate, would it? But I think
I'll make my question clearer below.

>Me:>Asit's not distorted, experts wouldn't say they belt, but if you take
into
consideration that there's more effort involved than that necessary to
produce the pop singing sound you yourself equaled to classical singing,
even if that extra effort is completely managable by and not harmful to the
cords, and only under that point of view, they're COMPARATIVELY belting.

Lloyd:>The extra effort of which you speak in regard to the male high voice
is, in terms of actual energy, only slightly greater than the singing
in other parts of the range.<

But my point was that it's greater when compared to those pop singers you
mentioned, not to their own high voice. Don't you think there's more
energy/air/breath support involved in opera than in that kind of pop
singing?

Let's put it more clearly: although you say both groups use classical
technique, what exactly do you think makes them different ( ops... or do you
think there isn't such a big difference between the sounds they produce )?
You said "It is the efficiency of the voice that makes it sound classical,
not the attempt to match a given quality or color. This is the elusive,
almost intangible quality of classical singing that so often eludes the
listener as well as the singer". Too elusive a differentiation for an expert
like you! :-) When you said to Mike you classify them all under the broad
category of "classical singing", did you mean you wouldn't place them under
any differentiating subcategories? Do you think the only difference is that
opera singers work on their resonators so as to achieve that projection, not
constituting a technical subcategory? All I can say is "Wow"!

Best wishes,

Caio




emusic.com