Isabelle Wrote:
> Of course, my open chest exercises ARE taking one
> register and dividing it out to work on. So maybe I'm
> wrong.
Dear Isabelle and List,
IMHO Isabelle hit the bulls-eye here!! A vocal register is
determined by the activity of a muscle. To make this explaination
simpler lets just deal with the chest-register muscle (TA or
Vocalis). I know, TA and Vocalis are not exactly one in the same-
but I'm going for simple. If the quality of the voice is 'chesty,'
this muscle is active. In other words, when we sing in our chest
voice, the Vocalis/TA is active. As we increase intensity (volume),
the voice takes on a more 'chesty' quality. On the opposite side, as
intensity decreases, the Vocalis/TA decreases its muscular activity,
and the lighter mechanism takes over.
If we start to exercise a muscle we increase its ability to do
work. And in the process we increase the bulk and size of the
muscle. It's basically the same in the voice: We are working on
building strength and bulk of a muscle- in our larynx. By directed
exercises, we can encourage this growth. And the classic vocal
literature would affirm this belief. In the above comment by
Isabelle she's talking about register building and independently
working on the 'chest' mechanism. This very practice of voice
building was EXTREMELY common in the days of Mancini, Tosi, Garcia,
and is still practiced(by some)today.
Here's Mancini in 1774 speaking about a lack of chest-voice
development:
"It remains for me now to speak of these voices which are
slender and weak throughout their register... One observes that these
voices are very weak in the chest notes, and the greater majority
deprived of any low notes, but rich in high notes, or head-voice...
There is not method more sure to obtain this end, I believe, than to
have such a little voice sing only in the chest-voice for a time."
One must counsel the student to increase little by little the body of
this type of voice, regulating it with the help of art, and continual
exercise; finally you will arrive at making it robust and sonorous."
This is the kind of historical precedence I was implying toward
in my earlier post. Granted, RM's Structure of Singing is a
marvelous addition to our literature. Having worked with him at an
Oberlin seminar, I have great respect and admiration for him, as a
teacher and a singer. However, if a student asks a tough pedagogical
question of me, I want to be 'armed' with more then- "Well, Miller
says on page 136 that....... ;-0
Take Care All,
Taylor L. Ferranti
DMA Candidate in Vocal Pedagogy
LSU
|
|  |
