In a message dated 11/8/2002 11:50:29 AM Pacific Standard Time, lloyd.hanson@n... writes:
> But when you touch on the qualities that are NOW being sought in > Broadway singing I began to wonder what has happened to this kind of > singing. Broadway for me used to mean a singer with a quality voice > who could also act and move. The voice was not far removed from what > we now choose to call a classical voice and it was heard in the > theatre without the aid of amplification. The primary difference in > the singing of the Broadway voice and the Classical voice was much > more one of style and presentation. Vocally there was little > difference. > My question is this: If they way teachers are training voices classically is the "correct" way, then why are those singers unable to sing realistically in any other genre. Styles have changed somewhat, and some are abusive, but by and large changing vocal styles is accomplished by understanding the musical differences, not by completely changing vocal techniques.
My biased opinion is that there has become an elitism established with "classical" singing techniques and encouraged by educational institutions and professional organizations like NATS that have favored a vocal sound that is not in the best interest of the singer or professional but is in the best interest of proliferating these establishments.
If technique for theatre has to be taught as a separate technique, then the current technique being taught is faulty and possibly more injurious. More, the belting that is being taught by many I have heard, is purely learning how to pull chest as far as possible and certainly one does not need to attend seminars to learn how to do that!
Big soap box today, Mary Beth Felker
|
| |