Kevin, Actually, I think what you've just written is clearer and more helpful than almost any definition from the scientific camp! However, from lower down, I don't think a falsetto production can sound full and rich. If it does then there is probably some adduction, allowing for a wider range of partials which can resonate at formant frequencies. That's what I think. john
At 04:06 PM 8/25/00 +0100, you wrote: >Hmmmm.... I got the impression that it was rather singers >who raised the confusion between head and falsetto and >that scientists were rather clearer. > >As I understand the neat 'scientific' view:- >Chest - firm adduction of the chords, vibration along the > whole length. >Head - less firm adduction of the chords, vibration along > part of their length. >Falsetto - No adduction of the chords, vibration along the > whole length. > >The problems seem to come from singers equating this >neat division of the chord resonance into sound or resonance >perceptions. > >One of the fantastic properties of the human voice is it's >flexibility. Hence falsetto voices that sound/feel full and rich and >chest voices that sound/feel light and breathy. Clearly colour and >balance of overtones etc.. comes not only from the chords. >The perception on the part of the singer or listener does not >necessarily equate with the mechanism of vibration being >employed in the chords. Thus the need to have a trained >listener (teacher) to help figure out what the voice is doing >and what it needs to do that it isn't. > >I guess it depends upon whether the chest/head/falsetto >division is defined by mechanics in the chords or perception on >the part of the singer. I choose the mechanical theory of the >scientist for description and the perceptual feel for actually >trying to make the noises. :-) > >Kevin. >(Computer programmer, singer, physicist - hopefully the order >will change over time !) > > > > > > > John Blyth Baritono robusto e lirico Brandon, Manitoba, Canada
|
| |