Dear Isabelle and Vocalisters:
Isabelle wrote: > So, mike, I dispute the idea that women "naturally" > speak and ought to sing in chest voice. I think it's > just a 20th-century thing, imposed by cultural ideas, > and that the "ideal" women's voice wasn't supposed to > be either strong or low in the past centuries... so it > was allowed to be heady, its natural state.
COMMENT: I strongly agree with Isabella on this. When I began teaching in the High Schools in 1956, it was common to hear a lot of sopranos and baritone/basses and difficult to find tenors or mezzo/alto for the High School Choirs. But 15 years later it was just the opposite, tenors and mezzo/altos were the most common voices and sopranos and basses were more difficult to find.
The pops music of the period up to the 50's included singers such as Crosby, Sinatra, Como, Bennet, etc. all of whom were baritones. The women included Ella Fitzgerald, Doris Day, etc (and the odd ball Sarah Vaughn of low voice fame). The students emulated these singers voices naturally, and the student voices were most comfortable in these ranges.
The pops music after the 50's emphasized a unisex vocal range. Men sang high and women sang low. The students emulated these singers voices naturally, and the students voices were most comfortable in these ranges which were diametrically different from the former period.
Regardless of what Mike's preferences are in singers, opera singing for females reflects the natural potential of the female voice and the environment into which each singer is born and lives. To make an assumption that women sing above their chest voice primarily because they are dominated by men and somehow required to do so is a bit preposterous. And if today's women speak primarily in their chest voice, which I think is very debatable, it is very likely a reflection the environment of the pops culture in which they live. In the 1950's this was not the case.
I would also add that from Mike's comments he appears to think that Randy is suggesting that the female so called "falsetto" is found at the top of their range as it is in the male voice. However, Randy has made very clear that this female "falsetto" is found near he bottom of the female range. Which sort of shoots down Mike's argument.
I would prefer that we consider falsetto as a particular configuration of the voice. If this concept is accepted then what Randy describes as female falsetto does correspond with what we now normally consider is a definition of male falsetto. The actual manner in which the vocal folds function is a much better determinant for classifying a particular kind of vocal production.
A good discussion
Regards -- Lloyd W. Hanson, DMA Professor of Voice, Vocal Pedagogy School of Performing Arts Northern Arizona University Flagstaff, AZ 86011
|