> Maybe we need to clarify what we each think of as a
> "register."
The books all say a register is a group of tones all having the same
muscular adjustment. Vero? In that case... maybe each note has its own
register! :-) We can't agree on how many there are, where they are or
what the names are.
> Part of the reason discussing technique
> is so iffy is that there is no way to objectify the
> language -- what is "forward" to one singer is
> "chiaroscuro" to another and "singer's formant" to a
> third. Of course, telling one student to sing
> "forward" may result in one singing a beautiful tone,
> another singing a shallow, over-bright tone, and a
> third developing jaw tension. Wait, I titled this
> email "registers." Okay...
So true! That is the danger. That's why you need a good teacher there
to listen, guide and support you, and when necessary, change the
terminology to something understandable - reproducible. As with many
other things in music, there is no agreement on the terminology. For
example the Art Music System of labeling chords and their functions vs.
the Jazz Music System.
> Gina is saying that she doesn't believe in doing
> exercises that separate the voice into registers and
> then integrate them.
Why take it apart when it's not broken? If you have a student with no
head voice - you may want to isolate it and bring it down and forbid
chest voice for a long time. I don't have to deal with such things
much, except when I was a TA and had belters and folk singers. There
was a lot of unbalance there. Most of it was psychological... they
didn't like the way the head voice sounded and so avoided it.
> Well, I do raw chest exercises
> because I believe they strengthen the top. That is
> obviously separating out one register, but I don't
> think it's what the majority of "pro-register"
> teachers are talking about on this topic.
That's different... I believe in doing that. Ah-Oo-Gah! I need a good
chest voice for Verdi! The voice should be strong in all areas. A lot
of people say that the strength and openness found in chest helps in the
top. For all voice types. I guess if you have to think of registers at
all, you could say chest and head, but the head voice doesn't exclude
the chest voice involvement. It's pure chest and mix - with varying
degrees of mix.
> I would bet that Taylor et al are thinking of
> registers as middle voice, passaggio, top... Gina
> would probably say those are parts of the whole
> seamless voice and not "registers," even though you
> may work them differently (i.e., don't fatten up the
> passaggio or else you'll be killing your top),
Since I also believe in "focus," I know if I keep my voice pointed and
focused around that E-G area and not blast through into a "wide" sound,
it it's smooth sailing. Very pointed and "small." I also added a bit
more jaw drop to that area of the voice - (around F-G) with good
results. That's the beginning to drop open zone.
> while
> someone else might say, "But of course I work the
> registers separately! You treat the passaggio
> differently than the top and you treat the middle
> voice differently than the mixed chest tones."
Whatever works for them. As long as they get the desired result and
consistency.
> Everyone is doing the same thing, but some are calling
> the various sections of the voice (like, low, middle,
> passaggio, top, whistle, etc.) "registers" and some
> are not.
It could be needlessly confusing to the beginner. Maybe focusing on the
goal - (one voice) would be better. Just a thought.
Gina
|
