lloyd wrote:
<< Regardless of what Mike's preferences are in singers, opera singing for females reflects the natural potential of the female voice>
mike says: if a counter-tenor can do it then it is a males natural potential as well.
back to lloyd < and the environment into which each singer is born and lives.>>
mike puzzled, asked do you mean both sexes here?
lloyd continues:
<<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.>>
mike says: that wasn't me who said that.
<<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.>>
men and women from boston speak in a nasty, father drinan-esque chest voice, southerners, male and female speak in more of a mix. every male who starts singing, starts with his speaking voice. a lot of women sing in their speaking voice unless they think they are supposed to sound like 'head' voice when they sing. it is not natural. even if you might consider their speaking voice to be a mix, when an operatic female sings it is not the same as their speaking voice. when an operatic male sings, it is the same as his speaking voice.
<<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.>>
i never said any such thing! i am talking about the timbre, regardless of where it appears in the range. the problem i have is with women singing in 'falsetto' too low when it should be their speaking voices, in whatever mix an individual speaks with.
<<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.>>
it appears that my argument has been misunderstood. (see next comment for an explaination.)
<< 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.>>
i maintain that the 'configuration' that david daniels sings in is the same as someone like giulietta simionato. she cracks into chest voice on her low notes in the same place where men's voices tend to crack- around middle C. the rest of the time, i think she is singing in the same 'configurtion' as david daniels when he sings. i don't care if we call it 'falsetto' or 'salami on rye' as long as we call them the same thing, if they are. now, all we have to do is find out.
the implication is that, if operatic women are singing like david daniels and they teach male students, they cannot give instuction to a male student on how to sing like robert merrill based on the 'configuration' they use.
<<A good discussion>>
it has that potential.
mike </PRE></HTML>
|