Dear Randy and Karen and Vocalisters:
Lets assume that Randy's often made point is most accurate, to wit, that
opera singers (evidently, females especially) tend to darken or color or in
some manner alter their vowel quality in the lower part of the their
voices. (And it goes without saying that this is not acoustically
necessary since these fundamental frequencies are below both the first and
second vowel formants so there is no prohibition of their singing any vowel
they should choose to sing in these ranges of the voice).
And let us further assume that the singers in question (such as Caballe,
Price, Tebaldi, etc.) choose to do this or are taught to do this so their
singing quality can be definitely identified as that of an opera singer.
And let us got further and say that this quality is characteristic of the
opera style for many or most female opera roles or, at the least, that it
has become a performing practice developed over the years for these roles.
And then let us bring on the scene a different style of singing in which the
female singers become more concerned with a vowel pronunciation in the
lower part of their voices that is closer to the vowels as heard in speech
because these singing ranges are closer to those of speech, as Randy has
often said. And we now have famous female voices that can accomplish this
approach with excellence.
What place have such singers in a style of singing that, by some sort of
definition, either through the writing of earlier opera composers or
through the performance practices as they developed, does not seek a
voweling that resemble the voweling of speech.
Perhaps opera singing has sought to create an emotional quality of tone
that, in some sense, supersedes the immediate understanding of the words
being sung. Not in all cases nor even at all times but yet as an accepted
and even sought after tonal coloration that is essential to the role being
performed or the aria being sung. If artists of the recent past are guilty
of this coloration it was certainly not a personality development but more
likely a stylistic demand that either was taught, or absorbed or expected
by the opera genre.
A very fine article about the changes that have occurred in Broadway musical
singing was posted on this list most recently. The effect of the
microphone on this genre has been exceedingly strong and, in fact, has
changed the musical into a form that could not be imagined 35 years ago.
This is not to evaluate which form is better but to clearly draw a
distinction between earlier musicals and those of the new "term" and the
differences in the demands of each form of the genre.
Much of contemporary opera is completely different in singing style and
lyric sense from opera prior to the 20th Century. With no need to evaluate
which is better there is a need to understand the performance practices
that made any genre work and to maintain an integrity to the demands of
that genre.
To summarize it simply and, perhaps, offensively, Dawn Upshaw does not
belong in a lot of opera created prior to the 20the century except is
special roles that fit her singing style. I consider her an artist and I
admire her technique for what she does but her technique is not that of
Price or Tebaldi, etc and, therefore, not appropriate for the demands of
roles these singers created with integrity and artistry. To use Upshaw
technique voices in these roles is to deny the basic concepts of what these
roles are about. And, most interestingly, though we hear so much today
about the size of voices and the need for big voices, the fact of the
matter is that voice size is much less important than meeting the technical
demands of the performance practices of a genre.
Regards
--
Lloyd W. Hanson, DMA
Professor of Voice, Vocal Pedagogy
School of Performing Arts
Northern Arizona University
Flagstaff, AZ 86011
|
