Mary Beth wrote:
>Unless, of course, his students that won the National Metropolitan Opera
>Auditions and fill in for Pavarotti and Domingo, are not considered "True,
>legit, succesfull" Opera singers.
This is what I find so very curious about SLS. I only recognised one of the
opera singers on the list of Riggs's pupils (but then I don't live in the
US). That person had a pleasant, easy baritono tenorile of wide general
musical application (good for shows, lieder, ensemble singing, &c), but of
very limited application in opera (to Billy Budd, but no further).
I already mentioned that I feel an affinity to a lot of what Riggs says, and
I think I do a certain amount of it myself. I even agree about the
'over-cultivation' of many operatic voices! Yet the school in which I
studied produces consistent results which are not at all like those of the
equally consistent Riggs. So I am still trying to put my finger on what it
is that makes the difference.
I think Isabelle is on the right track when she says that SLS guarantees a
kind of basic level of vocal health, but that beyond that level lies another
layer of vocal technique, in which area ideas and practice diverge sharply
(please note that this is not at all the same thing as imposing style on
SLS, or an equivalent).
That said, I still want to know why the SLS opera singers I've heard don't
sound a bit like me, even when our vocal material is similar.
Happy Singing,
Regards / vriendelijke groeten
Laurie Kubiak
Commercial Analyst - Europe & Africa SMMS
Sales and Contract Support, Shell Services International
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA
Telephone: +44 171 934 3853; Fax: +44 171 934 6674
Mobile: 07771 971 921: E.mail: Laurence.l.Kubiak@i...
Office: LON-SC 631
|
|  |
