Vocalist.org archive


From:  RALUCOB@a...
RALUCOB@a...
Date:  Fri Oct 6, 2000  1:23 pm
Subject:  Re: [vocalist-temporary] The rest of the voice, beneath the singer's formant


linda & john,

i thank you both for your responses. my purpose in the original post
was to challenge the explaination of the singer's formant. i don't feel
that a correlative relationship between what a machine hears and what we hear
has been 'actually' demonstrated. i don't think the sampling has been wide
enough. it is not as bad as "i was vocalizing just before the earthquake
therefore, i started the earthquake (i think it was my 'singers formant' that
did it)."

if you look at the questions i posed- if it is the singer's formant
that allows the singer to be heard over the orchestra, then how do the
mid-range sounds, vowels, make it through? couldn't they make through on
their own? or are they somehow connected to the 'singer's formant'? and i
want those who would claim that to demonstrate it beyond a reasonable doubt.
science changes its mind with each new installment of data. the universe
still exists whether we think it the result of a 'big bang' or an afterschool
activity by some fairy tale god.

the judgment of one's life being horrible is subjective. perhaps
candide just has different taste than we.

mike

emusic.com