The Art of Singing

A Comment from Opera L

2011-11-29T11:45:00.001-05:00

I'll say first that she was a magnificent vocalist with a very

lovely and fluid tone that bloomed at the top

As fine as she was in opera, some exaggerated diction aside,
I enjoy her most in other works by Berlioz, Mendelssohn,
Bach and Handel. Hear ye, Israel is simply put, among the
greatest recordimga ever made. She has a magnifiicent
Inflammatus recorded in 1951 and as lovely a Danny Boy
as can be imagined. True greatness!

Dan I didn't notice you mention her Fanciulla with Del Monaco
from Florence.

Her Mozart had no equal in its time, to my ears, and she sang
the finest Donna Anna I ever heard or saw during the 59/60
Met season. Unfortunately, she sang the worst in my experience
two years later.

I'll keave it at that! ;-(

Bob

Thoughts on Eleanor Steber from Opera L

2011-11-29T11:20:00.001-05:00

I always felt that Eleanor Steber was a victim of simply "bad

timing". She was on the Metropolitan Opera roster during the same period
as Zinka Milanov and Renata Tebaldi (and don't forget about those two
Callas seasons!), and she couldn't hold her own against those titans. With
Milanov on the roster, Verdi was "locked up", and with Tebaldi on the
roster, Puccini was out of the question. I know that Steber had Tosca and
Violetta in her repertoire, but what chance could she have had when Callas
was singing Tosca and Violetta? I loved Steber and I think that in a
different era, she'd have become a real star. Today, she'd be regarded as
an international treasure.

I have to weigh in again here, since you're making odious comparisons.
eleanor was an american who made most of her career in this country,
her rare and most celebrated appearance abroad as a ravishing bayreuth
elsa. in her prime years, she dominated the met's french repertoire, as
well as singing butterfly and a handful of other lyric roles. tosca and
violetta were not in the core of her repertoire. she had made her met
debut in 1940 as sophie, a light role in which milanov, tebaldi and
callas would have been ludicrous. she was the met's first konstanze
and was by far the greatest fiordiligi of her (or any) time. her donna
anna was the gold standard, as the great bruno walter said. she was
a nonpareil arabella, and, of course was the original vanessa, as well
as the met's first marie in wozzeck. i'm afraid that when you entered
this market, you not only confused apples with oranges, but capers
with watermelons. steber, demonstrably had a vastly wider repertoire
than any of the three wonderful singers you cite ..... and you're also
ignoring the reality which some of us recall first hand, that mr. bing
had a predilection for imported european divas (maybe he didn't
know that callas was born in brooklyn). her intemperance offstage
undoubtedly foreshortened her career, but at her best, the steber
career can stand with any. and by the way, her recital and concert
careers totally dwarf the other three artists, none of whom would
have known the brahms requiem from mairzy doats.

dft

Canto spianata

2011-11-12T06:30:00.001-05:00

Broad in its legato, continuous, rigorously appliedrefers only to a largo - very elegant singing with every kind ofcoloration, but severe and devoid of fussy ornamentation - Listen toCaruso's Bois epais and Ombra mai fu,  although he injects emotion. Alsocalled the Noble style. The earliest singers sang this style. Itrequires a very beautiful natural sound with a great deal of focus tocarry off well. Kirkby Lunn & Destinn duet

Sculptures by the sea

2011-11-12T06:09:00.001-05:00

2011-11-12T05:48:00.001-05:00

Patrick asks questions about timbre, in relation to finding someone’s voice classification

Timbre refers to the “quality” and “color” of a person’s voice. We end up describing timbre in non-scientific language, appealing to other realms and senses. Thus we say that one person’s voice is light, lyric, creamy, or dark, heavy, dramatic. Lot’s of other adjectives are used also “velvety” “brassy” “nasally” “hooty” etc., but some of these may actually be describing vocal faults. When applied to finding a voice classification or voice type, one has to be VERY CAREFUL. Timbre is only ONE criterion in determining voice classification and is one that can be misleading to inexperienced voice teachers. Some classic pitfalls are to assume that a lyric voice is a “high voice” and a dramatic or heavy voice is a “low voice.” This is simply WRONG, because there are lyric basses and lyric baritones just as there are lyric contraltos and mezzos … not just tenors and sopranos. Likewise, assuming that a heavy dramatic voice is low is equally wrong. There are dramatic tenors and dramatic sopranos. I think only an experienced voice teacher can use timbre … and that after other criteria are factored to make an accurate judgment on voice classification.

The other criteria for discovering a person’s voice classification are RANGE, TESSITURA, and TRANSITION POINTS.

Obviously range is going to mark the compass of a person’s singing voice. To choose a classification in which literature demands singing notes outside a person’s range is a clear evidence of wrong classification. If you call yourself a tenor, then you must be able to sing tenor literature. If you call yourself a tenor but cannot sing tenor literature, perhaps the only one deceived is yourself.

But range by itself is also insufficient for arriving accurately at one’s voice classification. “Tessitura” is usually applied to music itself, for example a song. Tessitura indicates the relative AREA of the range where MOST of the notes lie in any given song. Applied to the voice, this means that every singer is going to have an AREA in his/her range in which s/he can sing with greatest comfort, flexibility, expressiveness and STAMINA. E.g., A man may have a range that makes singing high A’s (above middle C) possible, but be uncomfortable sustaining that beyond a moment or two. The ability to linger and enjoy those high notes endlessly simply isn’t there … but he’s most comfortable singing between D (above middle C) and the D below. His tessitura would suggest that while some higher baritone literature may be in order once in a while–allowing for a high A on then off again–his tessitura (the area of his vocal comfort) is more like a baritone’s. The area of the range (tessitura) where a singer predominantly finds most resonance and stamina should be a key ingredient in determining voice classification.

Transition points refers to those notes in the vocal range where there seems to be a natural change of quality. This happens clearly in some singers and not at all in others. Without going into detail on the various voice types, generalizations are made as to where the “changes” occur in each voice classification. While this criterion can be useful (to a limited degree) by an experienced voice teacher, it is advisable to tell you that it is also far from foolproof. Singers can learn to make a transition on any of several pitches. The transition points also tend to vary depending on what vowel is sung. Another problem can be that some student singers who will not accept their real classification adopt a “lift” note of their own desired classification to prove their point. I would say that this criterion is probably used best by an experienced voice teacher on untrained voices.

So, there you have it. Arriving at a person’s voice type entails a knowing and using the criteria of RANGE, TIMBRE, TESSITURA and possibly TRANSITION POINTS.

Canto legato

2011-11-11T06:56:00.001-05:00

Legato singing is the acid test of technique. It is achieved by very
steady support, singing on the breath and the net effect is to tie all
the notes together with no break caused by bumps in the air (support)
not the intrusion of any consonant - so the consonants have to be
pronounced quickly and precisely without any excess movement of the
tongue to disturb the air flow.  florid singing is produced on the
breath, and requires a steady air flow, and the use of even less breath.

Sculptures by the sea

2011-11-11T06:16:00.001-05:00

Thought

2011-11-11T06:03:00.001-05:00

To perform well in today's highly competitive world where technical skills have been advanced to an unprecedented degree, a singer must be able to handle incredible pressure within the performing arena; his or her ability to deal with this stress will often determine whether he or she will succeed. Why, then, do singers with less technical skill sometimes out-perform stars? Why do some stars suddenly stop performing? What is that mysterious factor that makes an electric performance? Consistent, competent performances do not depend solely upon superior vocal skills, nor are they a matter of luck. On the contrary, the best performances result from a combination of mental attitude, concrete performing skills, and excellent technical skills in that order. Yet most singers have never had the opportunity to acquire the essential skills that make for a successful career.

More on The Appoggio

2011-11-10T12:59:00.000-05:00

Support - how you support affects your sound completely. Many theories abound, but in fact, as you ascend the scale the sensation of leaning descends, with the highest notes being felt lower in the belly, the middle voice in the midsection and the chest, voila - in the chest. Of course this does not speak to the fact that the entire range must be felt as high in the head, but that is usually thought of as resonance.

Sculptures by the sea

2011-11-10T09:37:00.000-05:00

One needs to research the song

2011-11-10T09:07:00.001-05:00

Singers are faced with a unique challenge among musicians: they must express not just the music, but the lyrics too. To effectively communicate the meaning behind the words, singers must understand the many references embedded in the vast international repertoire of great art songs. They must deal with the meaning of the lyrics, frequently in a language not their own and of a culture unfamiliar to them. From Zelter and Schubert to Rorem and Musto, Researching the Song serves as an invaluable guide for performers, teachers, and enthusiasts to the art song repertoire. the meaning of less familiar literary terms, figures, and authors referenced in song while placing songs in the context of larger literary sources. The more performers know and understand the literary elements of a song, the richer their communication will be. Researching a Song is a vital aid for singers and teachers in interpreting art songs and building song recital programs.

The Art of Kieron Williams, 9

2011-11-09T14:01:00.001-05:00

Boeing 797 -- WOW!

2011-11-09T13:09:00.001-05:00

Sculpture by the Sea

2011-11-09T08:20:00.001-05:00

Vowel Modification

2011-11-09T08:05:00.000-05:00

Today it is science and research that provide the rationale behind the insistence upon vowel modification, but the great voice teachers of the past came to the same conclusions solely by means of acute observation and pragmatic experience. In a questionnaire distributed by the authors of the new Prescriptions for Choral Excellence, published by Oxford University Press in January 2006, choral directors cited the following five elements as the most problematic in their directing experience:

1. Inability to sing in tune in the area of register breaks.

2. Adverse effects of consonant production on tuning and tone quality.

3. Inability to sing at a soft dynamic level without losing the fundamental

of the pitch.

4. Breathiness in the middle register.

5. Inability to “cover” the tone.

It is evident that these same five factors have everything to do with vocal problems in solo singing as well. Vowel modification will contribute to the solution for each of these problems.

(Note: If you cannot see the IPA symbols below, select this version: tongue.pdf [requires Adobe Reader].)

The belief that singers should sing the exact vowel written by the composer is entirely logical. However, to do is not natural to the vocal instrument. A singer whose vocal resonance is even and consistently good from note to note—high or low, soft or loud—is changing the vowels semitone by semitone (whether or not the listener can sense it), and the vocal tract is constantly changing form (whether or not the singer takes note of it.) This cannot be avoided. This is the way the voice works. As Oren Brown, the noted vocal pedagogue reminds us, “Good singers, whether consciously or not, depend on finding an easy adjustment for the pitch. This will be a modification [my emphasis].” Moreover, when voice teachers or choral directors ask their singers to, for example, sing [i] (ee) but drop their jaws while doing it, they, too, are modifying the vowel, for an [i] (ee) sung with a very large mouth will be an [ɛ] (eh).

With the aid of vowel modification singers will have fewer intonation problems, better resonance across their ranges, more carrying power, easier production of forte and piano, clearer diction, and, if choral directors could persuade themselves to use the modification suitable to each section in place of that common vowel indicated for all the voices, a much better blend.

Perhaps this sounds too optimistic to be true. Your doubts will be alleviated by understanding that the described results are governed by the extent to which the tongue controls events of the resonator tube (the vocal tract), and the tongue’s effect on laryngeal efficiency. For optimal results, the tongue tip should rest at the top of the bottom teeth. This position can be taught by saying, “Hmm!” which maneuver will place the tongue tip correctly. Trying to use other tongue postures in an attempt to achieve more resonance does not allow the proper shapes for the vocal tract and creates tongue tension.

Putting the tongue tip at the root of the bottom teeth produces a dull sound.

Pulling the tongue tip up and back distorts all the vowels. Pulling the tongue

back into the mouth forces the larynx into a very low position, delivering

unclear diction and a muddy sound, if a darker one. Pushing the tongue tip

against the back teeth makes for harsh and tinny timbre.

Each inhalation is best executed with the tongue tip on the top of the bottom teeth. Using this position is not difficult and the rewards are great.

Artistic performance is vital, vibrant, and exciting. Certainly, it is dependent upon the human spirit, the musical and poetic imagination, and health, but it also hinges upon the physical events of vibration and resonation that are brought about by certain muscular activities related to the vocal instrument. Non-singers’ tendency is to forget that the voice is a musical instrument, responsive to the laws of acoustics just as any other instrument is. (They probably forget because the human voice is located inside a human body rather than inhabiting a carved piece of wood or a metal housing.) Artistic limitations will result if the proper muscular activities do not become almost reflexive. Insistence upon singing the vowel written on the page will stultify the natural ability of the singer to find the modification that serves the needs of the music. When the vocal tone is correctly formed by acoustical phonetics, the singer avoids many muscular problems, basically hyperfunction and hypofunction, both of which may result in stiffness of parts of the vocal tract.

Stiffness of the singer’s vocal tract can translate into hoarseness, register problems, unacceptable deviations from the pitch, limitations of range, color, and dynamics, poor vibrato, as well as other malfunctions and/or dysfunctions, all of which present the singer, the voice teacher and the choir director with very real problems.

∙ Singers who are suffering from hoarseness caused by the vocal cord erosion

That speech vowels induce will find it difficult to concentrate on the details of their musical and vocal responsibilities.

∙ Singers who are experiencing register problems find it difficult if not impossible to handle the musical and vocal problems that occur at register breaks.

∙ Singers who are chided for off-pitch singing that seems unfixable simply by more acute listening often cannot think of anything other than pitch. (Faults in singers’ hearing are so seldom the root cause for pitch deviations that musicians are often shocked by the fact.)

∙ Singers who cannot handle the high notes or the low notes, the loud notes or the soft notes, well enough to please themselves, their teachers or their conductors usually become disheartened at their own lack of technique and, as a consequence, are incapable of attending to the musical and vocal qualities of their singing.

∙ And so on.

All these maladies have the same result: in the end they will produce a faltering and more or less inept performance. High on the list of appropriate remedies for performance problems is vowel modification.

There is no disputing the fact that modification of vowels inspires much controversy. However, the conviction that modification of vowels is unnecessary does betray a certain ignorance. It is true that singers can sing any note on any vowel, limited only by the physical boundaries of their range, but some vowel forms will have constructive interaction with the vocal cords (aid and amplify their air pressures), and other vowel forms will have a diminishing acoustical interaction (distort and diminish the cords’ air pressures). A bad tone fights with itself; that is, two vibrators interact badly with each other. For example, in stringed instruments the conflict is between a string and the resonator; in the organ the conflict is between the reed and pipe. In the voice, the conflict is between the vocal cords and the vocal tract.1

Needed is an extended method of bringing sung pitch and the resonance of vowels into their best relationship, or, bringing the frequencies of the vocal cords and the vocal tract into concord with the various pitches and vowels. Voice pedagogue Berton Coffin, together with acoustician Pierre Delattre, worked out the practical details of a system that allowed singers to choose the vowel that would give a compatible frequency with the pitch. This system of vowel modification is found on the Vowel Chart that is included with their book, Overtones of Bel Canto.

Those opposed or indifferent to modification include many choral directors and some voice teachers. Pressed for the reasons behind their objections, voice teachers generally cite the seeming mechanistic quality of the method; choral directors cite lack of blend and unclear diction.. Often, in an effort to promote the elusive “blend,” choral directors subscribe to reducing the sound of their singers to the resonance level of the least resonant voice in the group. To encourage clarity of diction they often embrace a theory of using only “pure” vowels, by which they may mean speech vowels.

By avoiding vowel modification as a part of their technical training, voice teachers have ignored a means of producing in their singers a more resonant, carrying tone and a more efficient way of achieving it, not to mention more control over dynamics, and more ease in upper range singing. As for choral singing, holding all choral voices back to the piano level of the least vibrant voice in the group not only produces a less beautiful tone but is actively unfair to and dangerous for the larger, more resonant voices in the group. Dale Moore, noted pedagogue, has this to say: “I would rather have a soprano of potentially operatic caliber serving as part of a cheerleading squad than have her singing in a group where the tonal ideal for a soprano is the sound of a tired English choirboy.”2Paul Kiesgen, celebrated teacher of voice and vocal pedagogy, echoes Moore: “Loud singing with inadequate vocal technique can be harmful....Poorly produced soft singing, however, can be equally harmful....For most voice students, soft singing is the last skill mastered and one of the most difficult to acquire.” 3 The result of improperly produced soft singing is often perilously close to “pushing,” a term usually applied to loud singing.

The following true story illustrates the power of using the constructive interaction of modifications that “beef up” the singers’ formant, which was done here by means of mechanical help. The very same result can be achieved by the singer’s use of correct vowel modification.

As undergraduates in the music department of a western university were preparing to perform in their yearly opera production, former fears about audibility and clear diction were stirred up. The complaints were the usual ones: the young voices were no match for the orchestra and the text was completely unintelligible. Using the new sound system to boost the singers’ voices led only to amplified “booms.”

Then one of the resident voice teachers recalled voice scientist Johan Sundberg’s words about audibility and how to enhance it. If all that is heard from the singer over the orchestra is the singers’ formant range from 2000 to 4000 Hz., why not use the new sophisticated sound system to boost only that range of frequencies? Immediately, the voices could be heard and beautifully. If boosting the singers’ formant frequency made such a difference in the balance, why not add another boost to the consonant/diction spectrum, which lies between 7000 and 8000 Hz.? Again the result was miraculous. Especially advantageous was the fact that boosting only the relevant frequencies took away the listeners’ annoyance at the obvious tonal interference produced by the usual amplification.4

Turning our attention to the practice of singing only “pure” vowels, voice teachers must recognize that, acoustically speaking, speech vowels are not necessarily “pure.” In addition, speech vowels vary considerably depending upon regional accents. The results are, therefore, less than uniform and less than “pure.” Furthermore, those who really understand the vowel issue, acousticians, consider a pure vowel to be the one that delivers ease, beauty, and resonance on that particular pitch. “Vowel purity is the optimum acoustical response for a given vowel.”5 “...the requirements for singing far exceed the demands of speech. Singing is not simply sustained speech spun out over wide-range pitch fluctuations, except in the most simplistic and technically limited vocal styles.” 6

Whereas spoken vowel values vary according to languages and dialects, in singing they cannot depart from the coincidence of a vowel pitch and a harmonic of the sung pitch. This is an absolute of singing. This is one of the reasons why a person can sing a foreign language without an accent but cannot speak it without an accent.7

Acousticians, if not singers, teachers, or directors, understand that both vowels and sung tone have pitch. The pitch of the vowel being sung must be harmonic with the sung pitch, or there wil be a weakening and/or distuning of the vocal cord vibrations. Because even singers themselves must often be persuaded of the advantages that accrue when adopting acoustical vowels, a comparison of acoustical and speech vowels follows:

Acoustical Vowels

Acoustical vowels, wherein the harmonic of the pitch coincides with the pitch of the vowel, produce amplification of resonance and a physiological feeling of well being.

The more ringing and vibrant we wish the voice to be, the more we should use the harmonic values of acoustical vowels.

Acoustical vowels give the voice more size and more carrying power (important to unamplified singing).

Singing with the best relationship of vibrator (larynx) and resonator (mouth) is therapeutic to the throat, the ears of the audience, and the length of the air supply.

Almost always, the use of acoustical vowels in singing produces tones that are in the center of the pitch.

Singers who use harmonic sounds (modified vowels) sing for a long time.

The use of acoustical vowels aids, rather than detracts from the diction.

SPEECH VOWELS

Singers who insist on singing absolute language values that conflict with the written pitches experience as a result discomfort, an out-of-tune tone lacking in beauty, and a serious diminution of the air supply.

The more we approximate the sounds of speech vowels, the more nonharmonic our voices will be.

Speech vowels give the voice a reduction of carrying power (a fact no longer germane to musical theater singers because of the insistence on amplification).

When the most resonant vowel on one particular sung note is found, it is invariably different from the one used in speech patterns.

The use of speech vowels often gives rise to inexact pitches, flat or sharp, that are not controllable, even by a singer’s attentive ear.

Singers who utilize many nonharmonic sounds (speech vowels) do not sing as long, because this practice is physically unhealthy over time.

Contrary to common belief, adherence to speech vowels does not promote clear diction, because of the tonal interference produced by incompatible vowels and pitches.

It is, in short, advantageous to sing with good interaction, where the vocal cords and the vocal tract augment—not fight—each other. Furthermore, this interaction releases the singer’s spirit and energies for that supra-human effort called artistic performance.

The same acousticians hired to correct the deficiencies of a concert hall’s acoustics tell us these facts. When vowels are correctly modified, three advantageous things happen: the singer experiences more comfort; the tone is more beautiful; the air supply lasts longer. When the vowel is incompatible with the sung pitch the opposite happens: the singer experiences anything from slight discomfort all the way to actual pain; the tone is anywhere from slightly less beautiful all the way to actually ugly; the air supply is diminished radically because it takes more air to sustain an inappropriate vowel.

The research done on perceptibility tells us that, when each voice reaches the pitches of its high passaggio, the human ear can no longer tell the difference between that voice singing one front vowel or another, one back vowel or another. So why sing a vowel that is incompatible with the sung pitch (and more difficult to execute) if the listener cannot even tell that you are singing it?

Science Answers the Question: Why Modify Vowels?

Why must vowels be modified, especially for louder, higher, softer, or lower notes (which doesn’t leave much)? Voice pedagogue Oren Brown answers: “It is impossible to maintain one vowel position at all pitches. Vowel modification must be mastered to facilitate a smooth transition from low to high and soft to loud....As a basic rule, the louder or higher, softer or lower a vowel is sung, the more it will migrate...” 8 Although modification is necessary for all voice types, the problem affects sopranos and tenors especially; e.g., in order to reconcile with higher frequencies and intensities of higher and louder tones, a large resonating cavity is needed. A strained larynx will result when this is not provided.

When concerned with intelligible diction as it relates to modification, consider seriously this basic truth: high notes and very dynamically intense notes are usually musical events, not text events, musically effective, not text effective. Experienced composers of vocal music, knowing this, almost always write the text for such a climactic moment twice—first, on lower, easier to execute pitches, then during the climax, on high pitches where the emphasis is on vocal skill rather than diction skills. Insisting on making a text event out of passages with high or loud notes will produce an uncontrolled and unattractive tone. Generally speaking moreover, what the listener wants to hear at those moments is beauty and/or impressive sound.

Difficulties in the upper range of the soprano and tenor voices come about, especially in amateurs and young singers, because the gradual thinning and elongation of the vocal folds increases with ascending pitches. Coping with this issue demands great vocal skills and extra energy in the breath. In the soprano voice, for example, there comes a certain point in the rising pitches when the cricothyroid muscle activity reaches its structural limit. At this point the damping that produces the flageolet (whistle) voice can help the stress on the cricothyroid muscle, because damping allows only the ends of the vocal folds to vibrate with the necessary rapidity. Correct modifications will allow this to happen.

Science has established that the core of the vowel, which itself is achieved by the size of the jaw opening, the shape of the lips, and the position of the tongue, is also the core of the pitch when that vowel is sung rather than spoken. “Each vowel has a quality which is unique to that particular vowel, a quality which names the vowel or makes it what it is. The vowel core, then, is the identifying quality. It is also an acoustical phenomenon; i.e., when the vowel is identified precisely...the resonance chambers of the vocal instrument are immediately re-shaped so that one hears optimum amplification of the basic sound; one has greater volume and potential for dynamic variation, and one has improved intonation and greater ease of production.”9

Often teachers and choir directors believe it simpler to instruct their singers to use one mouth and tongue shape for all vowels. Regarding such a method, Richard Miller states: “...pernicious is the technique of distorting all the vowels throughout the range by assuming some one ideal mouth and pharynx posture through which all vowels must then be produced.”10 This is not productive as a method.

One more fact as noted by Berton Coffin: when the vowels have achieved their best position, breath-coordination problems diminish. According to today’s voice scientists, freedom of function in one part of the vocal instrument induces freedom in others,.

In the last forty years there have been many vocal researchers working on the issue of formant frequencies. Johan Sundberg is especially skilled at presenting this complicated subject in layman’s terms, of which the following is a précis:

The vocal tract resonator has different requirements for the sounds that try to pass through it, depending upon the frequency of that sound. Certain frequencies pass through the resonator easily and, as a consequence, are given a high amplitude....In the vocal tract these resonances are called formants.They and they alone determine vowel quality and donate personal timbre to the voice. Vowel color is determined by the two lowest formants; timbre is determined by the third, fourth, and fifth formants. Tuning the formant frequencies is done by changing the shape of the vocal tract: the jaw, the tongue, the lip opening, the larynx, and the side walls of the pharynx. Adult females have shorter vocal tracts than adult males. Therefore their formant frequencies are 15% higher on average than those of the adult male.

∙ Adjusting the shape of the vocal tract is the most common

method for tuning the formant frequencies.

∙ The first formant is responsive to the jaw opening.

∙ The second formant responds to the tongue shape.

∙ The third formant is responsive to the position of the tip

of the tongue and to the size of the cavity between the

lower teeth and the tongue.

∙ The fourth and fifth formants are more difficult to control by

these means.

The writings of Berton Coffin do not comprise a theory or a method, but present a body of knowledge with explanations of how to do the vowel modifications. Musical notation and phonetics have been substituted for frequencies whenever possible. As such, they show the practical way to a consistently productive way of singing that profits from the research. Coffin also reminds us that an unknowledgeable diction teacher can undo a great deal by ignoring the laws of vibration and resonance. On the other hand, a knowledgeable teacher can accomplish a great deal by obeying the laws of harmonic pronunciation. Inflexible language treatment tends to impair the musicality, expressiveness, and survival of voices. Speech recognition, which all teachers and singers desire, “is dependent upon the changing shapes of the filtering resonator tracts above the larynx....Attempting to exercise direct laryngeal controls causes the articulatory mechanism to malfunction.”11

Thus, the crux of the matter is this: modifications persuade the resonator (vowel) to work efficiently, and, vice versa, when the resonator (vowel) adjusts so as to amplify the sung pitch, the vowels are, in that instant, automatically modified. This explains why singers experience vocal unease and difficulty when asked to sing speech vowels in the more perilous parts of their ranges. If vowel positions are kept in a fixed state rather than modified, the voice will run into and out of resonance points, resulting in a sound that is out of tune, harsh, unfocused, and unsteady in vibrato. Furthermore, it is a truism that critics and audience members are more likely to point out bad sound than they are to mention slight modifications of language values.

Aperto ma Coperto

2011-11-08T09:57:00.001-05:00

Open but covered.  The sound is forward, but the throat is opened
side to side and front to back, using an opening of the pharynx behind
the soft palate, which increases in function of allowing volume, and
comes more into play as the scale  ascends. allowing the higher notes to
go back behind the soft palate after the passaggio to the head voice.

Sculptures by the Sea

2011-11-08T09:09:00.002-05:00

An installation titled "Simple Black & White" by artists Alan and Julie Aston is part of the annual Sculpture by the Sea exhibition in Sydney, Friday, Nov. 4, 2011. Over 100 works by local and international artists are on display along a popular beach-side walk. (AP Photo/Rick Rycroft)

Carrying Power

2011-11-08T08:50:00.000-05:00

If one disregards stylistic demands, it might be said that opera singing differs from recital singing in only one substantial way, that is, the voice of an opera singer must be audible in a large hall despite the considerable decibel output of an orchestra. A recital singer is required to be audible only above the weaker sound created by a piano, except for those occasions when the modern concert business forces the singer to perform in an unsuitably large hall. Thus, “carrying power” becomes the distinguishing technical characteristic of an opera singer. Indeed, unless the conductor can be persuaded to hold the orchestra down, a singer who lacks a big voice and/or the ability to cut through an orchestra is at a grave disadvantage.

           Clearly, the auditory parameters of your voice are more or less determined at birth. Your vocal gift is just that—a “gift” possessing certain proportions. Trying to enlarge a basically slim voice to suit the operatic marketplace, where “large” is venerated by most listeners and many musical colleagues, almost always ends in the tragedy of a lost voice or the loss of high notes and pianissimo.

           Yet, achieving a tone with enviable carrying power is not out of the question, regardless of the size of your “gift.” The first step toward understanding is to define our terms carefully. (Vocal language is notoriously imprecise.) Is a rich, deep, large, warm voice synonymous with a voice that carries well? Not necessarily. “Size” is not the defining issue for an opera singer. The annals of opera are stuffed with stories about that type of singer whose voice, judged to be too bright, almost drove the listeners out of the rehearsal room, only to triumph on stage in the performance as the only member of the cast whose tone quality seemed to have infinitely more beauty in the house than in the rehearsal room, and the only singer who could be heard in the top balcony and the back of the hall. Or, what about Tito Schipa, a legendary tenor with a smallish voice, about whom each and every article mentions at some point that “every note of his slender voice could be heard in every seat in the house!”

           The next step is to understand what will give carrying power to a relatively small voice--or indeed, to a large voice as well. (Just as a flabby three hundred-pound man is not stronger than a one hundred eighty-pound man who works out, a big voice can be large but flabby and a small voice can be slender but focused!)

           With the appearance of the many fine vocal research teams in the United States and abroad, it became evident that there is an overtone, the frequency of which, when present in the singing tone, will permit it to be heard through the sound of the orchestra, none of which instruments can play in this vicinity. That overtone lies somewhere between 2000 and 3000 Hz. The human ear can distinguish this overtone (commonly referred to as 2750, the frequency of “ring”) from a group of other overtones, thus making the listener hear as “louder” the tone that contains it better than he/she can hear a tone that is without it. Listeners’ non-scientific descriptions of a tone containing 2750 include:

           “focused” “centered” “packed with beauty” “full of tone” “visceral”
           “slender, but with great tensile strength” “satisfying” “clear” “strong core”

           This “ring” can be maintained by the singer regardless of the vowel being sung and regardless of the dynamic level. It is not a figment of someone’s imagination. It is visible on the graphs. On the printout one can clearly see anomalies such as the momentary loss of the overtone or its presence throughout an entire small slide upwards during the attack of a particular high note. Singers vocally gifted in such different ways as Birgit Nilsson and Edita Gruberova have a very strong showing of this overtone. One could say that this overtone is somewhat more valuable for men than for women, because men sing in the pitch area where the orchestra plays most of the time. Women’s voices of the lower fachs spend a lot of time there as well. But a poor high C will actually carry as well as a good high C, more’s the pity.

           Now....how to do it?

           Those same acousticians hired to correct the deficiencies of a concert hall’s acoustics tell us some facts. When the vowel being sung is compatible with the sung pitch, three wonderful things happen: the singer experiences more comfort; the tone is more beautiful; and the air supply lasts longer. When the vowel isincompatible with the sung pitch, the opposite happens: the singer experiences anything from slight discomfort all the way to actual pain; the tone is anywhere from slightly less beautiful all the way to really ugly; the air supply is diminished radically because it takes more air to sustain an improper vowel. The three attributes of the compatible vowel result in a more easily produced, more focused tone, which carries farther without using the forced air of brute strength.

           Do these facts suggest that resonance is a more important factor than loudness?
           Which vowels, therefore, should we modify? Modify to what? On what pitches?

           The answers to these questions are fairly complex. A simple answer would tell you that, in general, a forward vowel will carry better than a back vowel. In general, back vowels can be encouraged to sit further front than their natural position, which is centered in the back of the tongue. In general, a vowel sung with protruding lip corners will carry better than one with the lips stretched laterally. In general, a largish mouth opening will make more noise—all other factors being the same—than one with a smallish mouth opening. In general, the lower the entire tongue sits, the more diffused the sound, even though richer. In general, the higher the pitches one must sing the less useful a real [ɑ] is. (An eminent Italian baritone said to a student of mine that the secret of singing is “never sing ah”?) The pitches in the passaggio of every voice category in general respond better and more efficiently when sung more “narrowly” (front tongue position, smallish mouth opening, protruding lips). In general, the higher and fronter the tongue position, the more carrying power the tone will have and the easier will be both the forte and pianissimo notes.

           The perceptibility tables tell us that, in general, when each voice reaches the pitches of its high passaggio, the human ear can no longer tell the difference between one front vowel than another, or one back vowel and another. So why sing the vowel that is incompatible with the sung pitch (consequently less beautiful and more difficult to do) when the listener cannot tell that you are singing it? Just modify one type of vowel with the same type although different, i.e., change an [i] that is not working to an [ɛ] or [œ], an [I] or [Y], an [e] or [ø], not to a vowel from another series.

           Initiate some of the above generalities into your own singing and see how you will achieve greater resonance and carrying power with less effort. Louder is not necessarily the answer. Resonance and carrying power— thanks to 2750—are. Choose your vowels with these ideas in mind.

Scuola di canto Italiana

2011-11-07T10:44:00.003-05:00

Sometimes Italian School merely refers to beautiful singing in the
belcanto style.

The Italian School ie: OLD Italian school - the Italians first figured
out how to add range to the voice by allowing the larynx to descend as
you ascend in range. Until that discovery people sang with a larynx that
raised (a natural occurrence) which limited their top, and music was
written in a limited range to reflect that fact.

Montare il fiato

2011-11-07T09:30:00.002-05:00

Engaging the breath.

Sculptures by the Sea

2011-11-07T08:54:00.002-05:00

Screwing By The Sea by artist Poul Baekhoj is seen as part of the Sculpture by the Sea outdoor exhibition along the Bondi to Bronte coastal walk on November 4, 2011 in Sydney, Australia. (Photo by Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images)

Tone vs. Diction

2011-11-07T07:49:00.000-05:00

It is axiomatic that singers feel misunderstood by outsiders, that is, by non-singers at large and even by other musicians who do not sing. Not only do singers feel misunderstood, they are misunderstood. How does this come to be?

           The human voice has the capacity--as does no other musical instrument--to express not only music but also drama and literature. For this reason, study of the vocal instrument becomes not just technical and mechanical but also human. To be sure, the vocal cords function on a subconscious level and are best controlled indirectly, often through imagery. It is this fact that makes vocal training highly intimate and convinces other musicians that the personal nature of vocal pedagogy is an object of ridicule. (“What does that mean: send it up and over?” non-singers say with heavy sarcasm. “Send what? Over where?”)

           To be fully rounded artists, singers must use their voices as musical instruments and also as a means of communication. The musical use of the voice necessitates a knowledge of how to maintain ideal conditions for a constantly beautiful and musical tone. In contrast, the communicative use of the voice requires a command of ever fluctuating symbolic sounds (consonants) that are often noisy. Because singers must do both things at once, the art of singing is essentially contradictory. Herein hangs the tale.

           The great voice teacher William Vennard said this: Exactly in the middle—halfway between the entertainer who disdains music that is “classical,” and the ivory-tower instrumentalist who disdains music that is “programmatic”—sits the poor singer of serious music. Affronted by hearing highly successful entertainers (classified by the public as “singers”) break every rule of good singing and good music, the real singer often does not make peace with the fact that such an entertainer concentrates mostly on diction and dramatic projection, the non-musical elements of the craft. On the other hand, hearing some pure musicologists deride “second-rate” composers like Berlioz for writing descriptive music, they are perplexed. For their music, inextricably wedded to words, is by its very nature programmatic. What else could it be?

Vennard bids us digress for a brief look at music history. One sees that voices and instruments were once equal. In the days of madrigals it mattered not whether one sang or played his/her part. Words were engulfed by the contrapuntal themes. Soon, however, voices had to struggle to keep up with the increasing virtuosity of instruments. As voices became successful at this, the words became less important than the display. One syllable often went on for sixteen bars ofvirtuostic singing, rendering unfathomable and unnecessary the poetic content of the piece. Then Gluck put a stop to all this by means of his reforms. Before long, as composers began to separate what kind of writing was suitable for an instrument and what was best for a voice, long fioratura passages disappeared and the poem became an equal partner with the music. The Lied and the opera—exponents of dramatic sincerity—flourished.

           Those composers who were the great writers of vocal literature had believed that poetry and drama went hand in hand with music. After a while, this view was no longer held by composers of vocal music, as they struggled to extend the peripheries of compositional techniques. Many began to regard singers and their audiences as a nuisance and an impediment. An electronic sound that imitated a human voice would give less trouble, they believed. Moreover, the dissonances now primarily used by composers made difficulties for singers, whose singing in tune depended solely upon their ears. Clearly, the singer has no geographical references for pitch: no frets, no valves, no keys, and only a few singers have perfect pitch (the possession of which is debatably not an asset for a singer). Despite this, many singers managed to accustom their ears to the new music and excel in its execution. Today, in a development most welcome to singers, new music’s latest identity has begun to shift its viewpoint back toward dramatic sincerity, considering music and text to be equally responsible for meaningful vocal music.

Is one element—beautiful tone or intelligible diction—more important?

           We see that singing is a paradoxical enterprise. It can flourish only when beautiful sounds issue from the singer’s throat, but those beautiful sounds must be accompanied by an illumination of the meaning behind the sounds. Yet the consonants that help accomplish the meaning often pose a real threat to the beauty of the sounds.

           The singer’s indefatigable quest for a higher level of expression defines the basic elements of singing. They are two: the musical element of the voice (accurate, sustained vowels) and the expressive communication of speech (well-defined consonants). Singers and their teachers seek a diction that is as clear as speech. Truthfully, however, that diction will give only the illusion of being the same as speech; it must be quite different in actuality. William Vennard’s felicitous phrase explains, “To sound ‘natural’ will require studied artifice.” My way of teaching that “studied artifice” is what this article is about.

How to achieve Vennard’s “studied artifice”

           In my view, the first principle is this: It is very easy to have what is known as good diction while singing poorly; the real trick is to have good diction while not letting it interfere with good singing. Such skill is not easy to come by. It is not enough to heed the coach’s frequent admonition to “just spit it out,” or to “sing on the consonants” (Robert Shaw’s immortal words), or to “relax; it’s just like speaking on pitch.” Singing is not like speaking. For one thing, experiments have proven that the consonants [b, d, f, h, s, t, v, m, z] average .058 seconds each in speech and .108 in song. The semi-vowels [l, m, n, r] average .145 in speech and .354 in song. Vowels average .280 seconds in speech and .797 in song. Think of the consequences of these facts. N.B. You will note that I am using the IPA symbols for the vowels, but not for the consonants. To be frank, one can live without the IPA consonants, but not without the vowels

           For all practical purposes, consonants represent the singer’s biggest problem of articulation. The consonants used for purposes of everyday speech are simply not precise enough to be used for singing, especially in American English. Also, remember that the emphasis placed upon a legato line is not a voice teacher’s whim; it is crucial to the demands of good singing. This is why the prime tenet of bel canto is legato. Yet, the greatest barrier to achieving a legato line is the presence of consonants. Why? Think about it. Consonants close your mouth (which ought to be open most of the time). Consonants tense the tongue (which ought to be relaxed most of the time). Most consonants stop the air flow (which definitely ought to be moving all of the time).

           Yet we must allow consonants to sound in order to have intelligible words, one of our singing objectives.... What is the answer?
                                               SHORT but ENERGIZED!
The consonantal movement must be short and rapid, not tentative and extended. In addition, the gesture must be energized, not lackadaisical—in sum, a fast, energized movement of the tongue or lips or any combination thereof.

           For the most part, we singers are not equipped to do such precise movements without training. The sooner singers bite the bullet and learn to do the requisite movements in the proper fashion, the sooner they can hope to become skillful singers. One of my students reported to me that her famous Boston teacher had preached, “You must train that naughty tongue to do your bidding!” This study of consonants cannot be avoided, but it can easily be postponed. Not a good idea for a professional singer.

           Now to the specifics. They are onerous and sometimes boring, but absolutely necessary.

Don’t move the jaw unless absolutely necessary.

           The first skill to be learned is how to snap the tongue rapidly and energetically to the proper area of the palate without necessarily moving the jaw, which would of course change the resonance and the beauty of the tone. The consonants most used in the three major languages of singing are
                       t, d, n, l, and r.
These consonants all touch the palate at the alveolar arch, preferably between the upper front teeth and the arch. (You don’t know where that is? Run your tongue from inside bottom of your upper front teeth to the inside top of them. As the tongue leaves the top of the teeth it touches the bony arch running behind the half circle of teeth. This is the alveolar arch.) Try the following to clarify the issue for yourself. Make a medium-sized mouth opening. Leaving the jaw where it is, bring the tongue up to the space in front of the alveolar arch and articulate the consonant l. For the five consonants listed above, it is almost not necessary to close the jaw at all (except when t and r need a little jaw closing because the mouth for the vowel has been very open). To move only the tongue—not the jaw—is a skill that is utterly necessary to learn.

           Unless singing in a dialect (as do the characters in Copland’s Tender Land, for example), refrain from using the stopped t. That’s the characteristically American one that makes no sound at all. With the stopped t the tongue just hits in front of the alveolar arch and releases silently. This, by the way, is the difference between Americans and the British saying, “I saw it.” When the Brits say this, one hears the t.

Which consonants do or do not require the jaw to close?

           The second skill is to explore exactly where each consonant (other than the aforementioned t, d, n, l, and r ) is located and which muscles do it. Incidentally, remember that the consonants found in the English alphabet are not all that must be mastered. Certainly German and the Slavic languages contain others that you must include in your examination. Remember also that, although the consonant may be spelled differently, the sound is often the same, e.g., schin German and sh in English are the same sounds, as in the words Fleisch and flesh. Dispensing with the arcane phonetic terms (palato-fricative, or some such) makes your work a bit easier. Just examine your speech movements and group together in your personal lexicon all consonants that are executed in the same physiological fashion. The following is a practical list:

                       With k and g the tongue strikes the middle of the palate. They do not need
                                 a closure of the jaw to execute. (E.g., cat, got)

B, m, and p need only a closure of the two lips, b and p being plosive and m
actually sustaining a tone. (E.g., by, my, pie) Although it feels unnatural,
                                   these consonants can be pronounced by bringing the lips together,
                                but without shutting the jaw, if it is necessary for the tone quality.

                       W requires a closing of the lips, but without so much pressure. (E.g., witch)
                                 Watch that you do not sing the wh (e.g., which) sound in the same way
                                 that you sing the w sound. These two words (which and witch) are not
                                 pronounced alike. (It is not witch witch.) In the wh sound the lips do not
                                 touch. Air is blown between them. These consonants require a closing if
                                   the vowel has been extremely open, but can be executed without closing.

                       J (or soft g) and the ch sound require the tongue to strike the palate slightly in
                                 front of the place where k does. (E.g., job, gypsy; charm, chop)
The sound for s is achieved by raising the front half of the tongue close to
the palate, touching the sides of the tongue to the upper teeth, and blowing
air between the tongue and the palate. Z does the same thing, but adds
sound to the blowing air. (E.g., seat, zero) The jaw must close.

                       The sounds for sh (e.g., shall, sharp) and for zh (e.g., pleasure, azure) are exactly
                                 the same except for the fact that the zh is accompanied by sound whereas
                             the sound for sh is unpitched. The jaw must close.

                       The sounds for written x and cks are both in reality a k sound followed by an s,
                                   actually ks. Since it is virtually impossible to pronounce an s without
                                closing the jaw, both consonants must be done by closing. (E.g., six,
                                sticks) A variation would be in the word asks where the ks is preceded by
                                another s, producing sks. These combinations are also found in German.

                       F and v are the same consonant, f being without sound, and v having pitch. They
                                   are both executed by closing the jaw minimally, touching the upper teeth
                                 lightly against the lower lip, and blowing the air through the remaining
                                 space for the f but not for the v. (E.g., fairy, very)

                       The n, ny, and ng sounds differ slightly. With n (e.g., not) the tongue strikes the
                                 palate just behind the teeth. With the ny sound (e.g., onion) the tongue
                                 strikes in the same place as with n and then rolls a little back on the palate
                                 for the y. For ng (e.g., hung) a good part of the tongue plasters itself to
                                 the palate at about the halfway mark, effectively stopping the tone from
                                 going on through the mouth, and sends it on a detour through the nose.

                       The normal h sound (e.g., happy) is made in the larynx itself, but the hu sound
                                 (e.g., Hugh, humor, hue, huge) is made by putting the tongue in an [i]
                                 position and blowing air through the space, followed by a [u]. Do not
                                 confuse this sound with the current popular pronunciation of the four
                                 words above (as pronounced: You, yumor, yoo, yuge), which changes the
                             hu into a simple y. This is not only wrong but also vulgar. No closing of
                                 the jaw is necessary.

The German ch sound after a vowel
(Note: If you can't see the IPA symbols below, select this version of the article: diction.pdf [requires Adobe Reader].)
                       In German, the final ch of words such as ich and ach follows the tongue position
                                    of the preceding vowel. If singers who do not speak German would follow
                                 this rule, these particular consonants would not be such a pesky task for
                                 them. Moving from front to back of the palate, this is the drill:
                                               ich: put the tongue on the [I] vowel and blow air above the
                                                         tongue without moving it.
                                               ech:     put the tongue on the [ɛ] vowel and blow air above the
                                                         tongue without moving it.
                                               ach:     put the tongue on the [ɑ] vowel and blow air above the
                                                         tongue without moving it.
                                               och:     put the tongue on the Italian [ɔ] vowel and blow air above
                                                           the tongue without moving it.
                                               auch:   put the tongue on the [u] vowel and blow air above the
                                                         tongue without moving it.
Try it. The whole trick is not to move the tongue from the vowel while blowing the air.

Italian double consonants

           The flavor of the Italian language comes from the double consonants. Non-Italians must pay close attention to executing these double consonants accurately. To do this is a rhythmic problem. Let’s use the word spaghetti spoken in three quarter notes to illustrate. The second quarter note on the syllable ghemust also accommodate the double [t] of the last syllable. That is, the double consonant is given a somewhat longer duration than the vowel [ɛ]. Once the [ɛ] is articulated, go immediately to the double [t], opening to the syllable [i] exactly on the third quarter note. Effectively, this gives you three equal durational values: SPA GHETT I. The double consonants are not stronger, just longer.

Does it matter to the diction where the consonant is in the word?

           Consonants occur in one of three possible positions:
                       1. initial consonants of the words, especially the first word of the phrase,
                       2. consonants beginning or ending words in the middle of the phrase,
                       3. consonants that end the word, especially the last word in the phrase.

            1. Initial consonants
           When starting a phrase with a word that begins with a consonant, do not prepare the consonant. Instead, prepare the vowel position with your mouth, then inhale, mouth retaining the vowel position. Then, on the beat, snap your tongue, lips, or lips and teeth—with whatever movement the consonant demands—to the consonant, rapidly and energetically, but not in a sustained gesture. (E.g., with the words Caro mio ben, prepare the [ɑ] position, inhale in that position, let only the center of the tongue make the k sound without changing the [ɑ], and attack the note.) What do you achieve doing it this way? An easier attack, a better tone, less tension, clearer diction. N.B. See Placido Domingo’s Mozart CD for a clear exposition of this technique.
           2. Interior consonants
           Those final consonants that occur in the middle of the phrase are always delayed until the very last moment and then attached to the next word as swiftly and energetically as possible.

                       Example, Joan and Bill stood easily. (Imagine a quarter note for each syllable.)
                                   Sung: Joa.....nan....d[ə]Bi....ll[ə]stoo....dea...si....ly.

Note the schwa, [ə]--a very short “uh” sound without much character--inserted after each sounded consonant. Why do we do this? In English, German, and Russian, languages which are famously full of more consonants per square inch than Italian, Spanish, or French, the real problem in deciphering sung words is that (given the obligatory legato) we sometimes cannot tell where one word ends and the next begins. A schwa [ə or ʌ] sounded on pitch (after consonants that have pitch, e.g., d, b, m, l) or unsounded (after consonants that have no pitch, e.g., t, p, k, f) will separate the two words, such as an....d [ə]Bill. Without the schwa, it might sound vaguely like handbill or something else. So consonant clusters at the end of one word and consonant clusters at the beginning of the next word must not be bunched together without a schwa. The schwa will help the listener to separate one word from another and to comprehend the sentence. In the case of the unsounded schwa, the empty space between words will have the same effect.

                       Example, Both of them took their time. (Quarter note for each syllable)
                                   Sung: Bo....tho....v[ə]the....m[ə]too....k[ə]thei.....rti....me[ə].

Note the unsounded schwa between the k of took and the th at the beginning of the word their. There is no tone, just barely audible air noise in the schwa, but the space does the job: it separates the two words so that the listener can comprehend.

           Remember: however strange and unnatural this feels and sounds to you, you cannot judge its efficiency until you ask a listener to tell you whether or not he/she heard the word. That is the proof.

           The British, it must be said, do not look kindly upon schwas. That is their prerogative. However, I find that their singing without schwas (often somewhat ineffectual) supplies one of the reasons why they tax their voices when singing loudly and sonorously. (Even the Italians, who do not admit the existence of the vowel schwa, adopt schwas when singing in their own language. E.g., on the last page of Alfredo’s Traviata aria, I have yet to hear an Italian tenor sing the wordsin cielo without executing them in this way: in[ʌ]cielo.) To do this well, the schwa must be executed (not à la Liza Minelli--home [ɑ..ɑ..ɑ..ɑ..ɑ.] with a lengthy, wide open [ɑ] after the m of the word home) but as an extremely rapid [ʌ or ə] on pitch. What pitch? The pitch on which the vowel was sung. The pitch will carry; a noise will not.

           Listening to pop singers invariably singing a word starting with a vowel as a glottal, we have begun to believe that is the only thing to do. Personally, I am not a fan of this many glottals. My rule is this: if eliding the last consonant of one word to the vowel beginning the second word creates another word, then a prudent glottal will help to clarify. Otherwise, do not do it, unless some unwritten edict makes this maneuver sound un-English or un-American. Use your instincts to make this decision. In general, try not to pepper your singing of English with glottals.

           So the rule holds: When the first word ends with a consonant or a consonant cluster and the next word begins with a consonant or a consonant cluster (e.g., and strong), your job is to put a schwa between them (on the pitch of the last vowel of the first word) and move rapidly through the consonant(s) at the beginning of the next word to the vowel of that word. If the second word begins with a vowel (e.g., and I), then the final consonant of the first word and is attached to the vowel of the second word ( a....ndI). This accomplishes two important things. We understand the words better, and it is the vowel that is elongated, not the consonant. Thus the singing itself improves.

           3. Final consonants
           For the very last consonant in a phrase, it is important for you to understand the following principle. Especially in English and German texts, but also true for Italian and French, we do not fully understand any phrase until the last word has been uttered or sung. This means that comprehensibility often hangs on the last word. In order for the audience to understand the phrase, the singer must sing a clear last word; in order for the audience to understand the last word, the singer must sing a very clear last consonant.

           Singers often labor under the misapprehension that it is the first consonant in a word that must be attended to. Coaches, in their effort to help with diction problems, often pursue this route—generally to little effect. For it is not the first consonant in any word that must be totally clear; it is the last one. This is an inviolable principle of the English and German languages.

           Thus, the same principles as articulated in section 2., Interior Consonants, apply here. If the final consonant has pitch (e.g., d, b, m, n, z, etc.), it should be followed by a tiny schwa on the pitch of the last note. If the final consonant does not have pitch (e.g., p, t, f, s, k, etc.), it will be necessary to execute a triple strength spurt of air to accompany the unpitched consonant. Anything less will not carry.

Some other options with consonants, or how to handle consonants on high pitches

           For the most part, the lower the pitch for a vowel that comes after the consonant, the easier that note is to execute (a fact that pop singers take total advantage of). The opposite is also true: the higher the pitch for a vowel that follows a consonant, the more difficult it is to sing it, not to mention making it intelligible. That is, on high notes preceded by a consonant one generally has this option: one can be understood, or one can make a beautiful sound. In truth, in a moment defined by a very high note, the word scarcely matters to the listener. The sheer sound of the vocal tone itself carries that moment. Furthermore, it is the composer who must anticipate the problem that will be caused by the word written on the high note. If the composer is well versed in writing for the voice, he/she will do what Mozart did—that is, not write a word that is crucial for the understanding of the plot only on that one high note. Instead, he/she will have repeated that word many times before the high note, and reserved the high note moment for tone, not import. Douglas Moore of Baby Doe fame once apologized to me for creating such a dilemma for the leading soprano in an earlier opera of his, saying, “If I had known then what I know now, I would not have allowed the audience’s understanding of the drama to hinge on that one word. I would have preceded that high B on the word kill (!!!) with several other repetitions of the word kill on lower notes. Then you would have been free to just sing the B to the best of your ability.”

“Fudging” and/or lengthening the consonant

           When faced with the problem of a very high note that is being ruined by a consonant (assuming there have been other repetitions of the word previously or will be repetitions later) the singer can panic, or “fudge” the consonant and modify the vowel, or he/she can do what might be called the “Pavarotti trick.” At one time in my teaching life, a student of mine was accorded the privilege of working with Pavarotti each morning for several weeks. In the afternoon this student would come to me, and I would ask for the precious details of what The Great Man had said. In this way, I learned that Pavarotti had insisted that the student put the consonant on the lower note that preceded the high note and then go directly to the high note in a great leap of air. He called this “landing piano on the high note.” By that, I assume he meant gently. And, indeed, it is so easy to accomplish that it does feel like a gentle onset.

           It is, of course, a rhythmic problem. For, if you wish to put the upcoming consonant on the preceding note, the time for executing that consonant will have to be subtracted from the preceding note. The vowel of the following high note will have to open right on time. For example, imagine a skip from F to B flat on two quarter notes. Words: O, God. Executed in the “Pavarotti” style, it would become O,GGG......od, with a closure of the consonant G to the palate on the F and an opening of the vowel [ɔ] on B♭. In other words, the G of God would come on the F, and the B flat would have only the vowel [ɔ]. Try it. It is unmistakably what Pavarotti does in his own singing. Remember how everyone admires the clarity of Pavarotti’s “diction.” Listen to a recording. He does “the trick” before every high note. The skip to the high note sounds very easy and gentle. The diction is clear as a bell, because this technique makes the low pitch consonant more audible than if it were put on the higher note.

           There is a further plus accrued to the vocal tone when putting the consonant on the lower note before a skip upwards. A plosive which is lengthened will give higher pharyngeal pressure, thus giving the higher note more chest content and, therefore, a darker, stronger quality. The plosives g and k (center of the palate), t and d (in front of the alveolar arch), p and b (lips together), will give, when lengthened and placed on the lower note, a stronger, darker, more cutting tone. In contrast, the consonants m and n, when lengthened, will produce a tone lighter and more heady on the following tone. Consider what result you would like to achieve, and choose accordingly.

           Lengthening the consonant has another purpose in artistic singing--not just a vocal technical one. That is to produce a more expressive word when desired. For example, in Schubert’s “Nacht und Träume” the word stille is repeated two times at the end of what might be called the first verse. Lengthening thesh sound on the second stille creates an expressive, meaningful moment that is very lovely. Extending an s or an f or any of the various chs has the same result. The moment seems to reveal a personal speech pattern and thus appears to heighten the sincerity of the singer. If you want to hear such a technique at work, listen to any song sung by Fischer-Dieskau with the music before you. In adopting this skill, the vowel may begin slightly late. As long as the effect pleases you and doesn’t annoy a conductor, go for it.

           Back to the issue of “fudging” the consonant before a difficult note. An example would be this. Using p, b, m, v, or f, all of which must touch the lip to the teeth or the lips to each other, simply do not touch whatever is supposed to be touched. Just come close to closing, but don’t touch. The listener will intuit what word is intended, especially if the composer has done a good job. (See any of Giuseppe Verdi’s arias.)

Context as an aid to diction

           Another principle: Context helps us listeners to understand the words. There is no doubt about this. Think of the last time you went to the theater. There is no way that you understood every single word. You guessed successfully at several of them because you comprehended the context. However, in songs and opera texts, some poetry and prose is written in an arcane fashion and requires time to study to comprehend the meaning—which time is not available to the audience. For example, T.S. Eliot’s poetry is difficult even for those who speak English. Rock poetry or Woman’s Day poetry may speak to its audience, but it is not difficult to fathom on first hearing. The language of this poetry is—in that most useful 20th century word—“accessible.” Adding inaccessible text to bad diction will produce a disaster. This means that the audience will probably have a lot of trouble understanding the T.S. Eliot (or other difficult) poetry even when sung withexcellent diction. To a singer, poetry that is too deep, requiring long and concentrated attention, is a handicap. And also to the composer, and to the poets or authors, many of whom do not wish their words to be used in vocal music for this very reason. They are very aware of this problem. They must deal with it all the time. It is also one of the criteria influencing how the composer chooses poetry to set in his songs. The singer’s problem is to be sure that he/she can illuminate for the audience poetry or prose that is not accessible. This equates not only to superb diction but also to performance skills.

Summary

           Don’t be put off by the complicated solutions addressed above. In my experience you can better your diction skills within six weeks of real, applied effort. Is it not clear from the necessary length of this article that the singers’ diction problem cannot be mastered simply by “spitting it out?” Far better that singers spend the requisite time to conquer the difficulties and make it their goal to achieve superb diction accompanied by fine singing.

It can be done. Good luck!

Sculptures by the Sea

2011-11-06T12:06:00.001-05:00

Message In A Bottle by artists Steven Thomson and Jonas Allen is seen as part of the Sculpture by the Sea outdoor exhibition along the Bondi to Bronte coastal walk on November 4, 2011 in Sydney, Australia. (Photo by Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images)

Vibrato

2011-11-06T10:48:00.001-05:00

The issue of vibrato in a singing tone causes many problems for singers. Although all singers are concerned with their vibratos, choral singing often gives rise to vibrato problems, and many of these problems occur in choral singing. Many choral directors want that elusive thing, “blend,” and worry that, when their singers give them a tone with vibrato, the blend will be ruined. Clearly, they equate vibrato with tremolo or wobble. In so doing, they are blaming the wrong thing. A vibratoless tone resembles a boy soprano’s tone, where absence of vibrato is natural. Singers are confused when someone tells them to take the vibrato “out.” This is because they do not believe that they are “putting” vibrato “in.” It is a natural component of adult singing.

Let us use the choral director’s reasoning and attitudes in order to clarify our own. One wonders whether choral directors have ever noticed that orchestral conductors never ask their instrumentalists to “synchronize their vibratos?” Observing, one can see that the string players are actually moving their hands in various rhythms to achieve their vibratos. The movements are far from uniform among the players, although the resulting tone is in accordance. Nor do orchestral conductors consider whether or not there should be vibrato in their instrumentalists’ tone. It is viewed as a necessary component of a beautiful tone. So should it be with a singing tone.

Many choral directors believe that a soft dynamic level will obliterate the vibrato and deliver “blend.” In this belief they are wrong. Vibrato will still be there in pianissimo, just not as audible. More importantly, expressive possibilities are severely limited when only soft singing is permitted, and vocal fatigue is a sure result. Dale Moore, noted pedagogue, has this to say: “I would rather have a soprano of potentially operatic caliber serving as part of a cheerleading squad than have her singing in a group where the tonal ideal for a soprano is the sound of a tired English choirboy.” Paul Kiesgen, celebrated teacher of voice and vocal pedagogy, echoes Moore: “Loud singing with inadequate vocal technique can be harmful....Poorly produced soft singing, however, can be equally harmful....For most voice students, soft singing is the last skill mastered and one of the most difficult to acquire.”

Often choir directors justify their dislike of vibrato in a tone by citing a belief that singers of early music never used it. Before we accept the premise that singers in Renaissance and other early music styles used no vibrato we must ask several salient questions:

1. Do contemporary writers from these two periods accurately describe in unmistakable terms the sounds they admired and those they disliked? Bear in mind that there are no recordings from which we could draw our own conclusions.

2. Do the writers of the period clearly indicate that there was or was not vibrato in the vocal tone? Or whether some singers used it and others did not? Do they report whether some singers may have used it part of the time for specific music and eschewed it in other music? Are we in fact sure of the meanings of the descriptive words used by period writers on music? Do we now understand what was meant by the terms they used at that time? (Even present-day voice teachers have considerable difficulty agreeing on exactly what constitutes a wobble, or tremolo, or even the desirable degree of vibrato.) Do we really know exactly what Tosi meant by his treatise of 1723, often quoted by both sides of the vibrato argument?

3. What does the music itself really tell us? We know that the use of the voice changed significantly in Rossini’s day after the tenor Dupré demonstrated the possibility of the high C in full voice rather than falsetto. Was there a significant change at some earlier point between the early music we are discussing and that of, say, the Baroque?

4. Does the range used preclude the use of any particular type of tone? How about the tessitura of solo parts and the tessitura of ensemble parts? It is possible that some of the dissonances used must have been sung without vibrato for the sake of clarity and accuracy. Was a distinction made between the tone adopted by soloists and by ensemble singers?

5. Do we have any reliable information on the vocal longevity of singers of that period? Did they go on singing well into their later years as some of our recent and even present singers do? Were there in fact professional singers in the current sense at all?

All of the above questions (extracted from a Statement issued by the American Academy of Teachers of Singing, “Early Music and the Absence of Vibrato”) seem relevant to the subject of singing early music and the possible vocal abuse in relation to singing early music. Choir directors should know that, across the profession, voice teachers are very concerned about the vocal debilitation that occurs in their students who sing nothing but early music in groups that shun vibrato.

Former Indiana University pedagogue and vocal researcher, and a great singer himself, Ralph Appelman, wrote, “Correctly produced, the vibrato is a vocal ornament that is directly related to the sensation of support. It is physiologically controlled by the muscles of respiration and is thereby, basically a respiratory function assisted by coordinated laryngeal controls.”1

The assurance with which Appelman makes this statement should not cause us to ignore the complexity of the task facing the singer who is attempting to keep an optimal vibrato rate through the vicissitudes of :

singing in many different musical styles:

(early music, mainstream, bel canto, jazz, Middle Eastern, etc.),

changing dynamic levels, crescendos and decrescendos, sustained

and non-sustained utterances (trills, staccato, marcato,

martellato, etc.),

fluctuating vowel and consonant demands of different languages,

activating glottal onsets, stresses, and unvoicings in languages not

their own,

achieving their musical intentions or those of their conductor,

executing extreme pitches, both high and low.

These are not simplistic tasks and they are not made easier when the singer does them as part of a group in a chorus situation.

Each of the tasks listed above influence the rate and extent of the vibrato. Each of the tasks listed above are made easier by the maintenance of the appoggio, which produces vocal stability.

Some Science Background on Vibrato, Tremolo, and Wobble

If you are not interested in the scientific studies of vibrato, feel free to skip this section, although reading it will undoubtedly clarify your thinking on the subject.

As long ago as the 1930s, Carl E. Seashore initiated a study of the vibrato. Until only very recently when the issue was raised again, by Ingo R. Titze among others—without conclusions as yet—the results have stood as a hallmark. Seashore’s definition of a vibrato is the traditionally accepted one: “A good vibrato is a pulsation of pitch, usually accompanied by synchronous pulsations of loudness and timbre, of such extent and rate as to give a pleasing flexibility, tenderness, and richness to the tone.” 2Several important points were revealed in the Seashore study, among which were these, roughly extracted from that study:3

1. The vibrato is a fundamental attribute of the artistically effective singing voice.

2. With the exception of trills, and an occasional note, every tone of every artist registers vibrato, whether long or short, gliding or steady, high or low, pianissimo or fortissimo. The upper and lower limits of each vibrato pulse...are always present.

3. Most singers cannot sing a tone that would have any semblance of desirability without using the vibrato.4

4. It is this fact--that the vibrato is not heard even by the best musician as it really is--that lies at the bottom of the confusion which has prevailed on this subject.

5. The impression that a vibrato disappears in pianissimo is false. When a vibrato is not detected in pianissimo tones, it is a fault in the ear of the listener. The vibrato is actually present in production.

6. Both the extents and rates of the vibratos of excellent singers are in a continual state of flux.

7. The whole problem of the prominence of the vibrato in a voice revolves around auditory fusion. Probably the fusion of the slower vibrato rates is not as perfect as the fusion of the faster. At the slower rate...the vibrato is less of a unity since it is completely broken...Too fast a rate, such as in a flutter, also attracts attention more than the artistic vibrato rates.

8. Although the vibrato consists of a frequency pulsation in the sound wave, it has only one salient pitch in perception. This perceived pitch is approximately midway between the extremes. There are individual differences. The vibrato that one person hears as in tune may be appear to be out of tune to another person, pitch discrimination being equal.

9. Those who are most critical of the vibrato are generally those with very sharp ears for pitch discrimination. To those, a vibrato that is too slow or too wide is undesirable because the two notes cannot blend into one.

Dr. Friedrich Brodnitz, a leading New York otolaryngologist of the fifties, stated: “A well-trained voice exhibits always a certain amount of vibrato that gives changes, both in pitch and volume. By vibrato we understand small rhythmical changes in pitch and volume. These oscillations are more noticeable in forte than in piano....If the wavering becomes excessive—up to twelve times per second—it is called tremolo.”5

Later scientific authorities also do not disagree with Seashore’s earlier findings: Vennard (1971), Large (1971), Shipp and Izdebski (1975), Shipp, Leandersen, and Sundberg (1981), and Hirano (1985) all consider a vibrato of from five to eight regular pulsations per second to be that of a good singer. They are in agreement that pulsations slower than that (called a wobble) are picked up by the human ear as separate pitches and unpleasant, and that a rate of more than eight pulsations per second is too fast, producing an equally unpleasant sound (called a bleat or tremolo).

The ordinary and extraordinary tasks for which a singer is often responsible present a variety of problems that impinge upon the desired stability of the vibrato.

1. The extent of the vibrato decreases when rapid pitch changes take

place. If the vibrato frequency could be matched to the rate of

pitch change in an agility passage, this difficulty could be avoided,

but the singer must choose his/her tempo with that principle in mind.

2. Jazz singers commonly change from straight tones to a vibrato tone by

altering vibrato extent. See the paragraphs following the science section

below for definitions of rate and extent.

3. Sustained, slow moving music accepts more vibrato than fast-moving music.

4. Middle Eastern music asks that the vibrato extent be reduced even

further in order to distinguish between melody and vibrato.

5. Whatever we perceive, neither the straight tone nor the vibrato tone is

rock-steady, although they are more steady than a tremolo.

6. When pitches vary, intensity and timbre fluctuate greatly.

7. Classical Western singing styles have not always asked for the same

type of vibrato; in fact, they have changed in the last century.

In Carl Seashore's day (the 30s) faster vibratos were common (6.0-7.0);

Caruso's vibrato was near 7.0, whereas Luciano Pavarotti's

average frequency is near 5.5 Hz.

8. Some shapes of the vocal tract--consonants--may affect phonation to such

a degree that it is difficult to keep a stable phonation. Thus one could

expect disruptions in vibrato during a great deal of changing articulation.

9. Since vowels tend to have intrinsic pitch because of the tongue and hyoid bone

height, rapid changes of vowels may cause some vibrato frequency

instability, even when the singer's intent is to keep the frequency steady.

Recognizing the facts listed above, the question still remains: What is an acceptable frequency and extent for a vibrato? A simple answer is 4.5 - 6.5 Hz in frequency and 0 - + or - 3 % (+ or - .05 semitone) in extent. This answer demands a great deal of explanation. Vibrato extent increases with a crescendo. Vibrato frequency increases with pitch and with level of excitement. Therefore, a wobble is the result of a lack of excitement, poor muscle tone, or fatigue. (This suggests again that physical fitness and good vocal conditioning is necessary.)

Vocal researcher Ingo Titze reminds us that “a vocal vibrato may be described as a fluctuation in fundamental frequency and amplitude....The vibrato is itself a pattern, rather than a deviation from a pattern [my emphasis].”6

When, as Ralph Appelman states, “minute alterations of body pressure...are reflected in undulations to the breath column,” a vibrato is produced. “The singer is attempting to control the pitch by keeping the mass, length and tension of the vocal cords constant.”7 Therefore, the singer who does not sing with proper support cannot control the vibrato rate. The appoggio is again a primary answer, this time to vibrato ills.

Rate and Extent and their Effect upon Vibrato Difficulties

There is virtually no disagreement among vocal pedagogues and voice scientists regarding the cause of vibrato difficulties: the two main causes are: (1) excessive tension in the laryngeal mechanism and (2) unbalanced breath support. The answer to the problem of tension lies mostly in relaxation techniques. The solution to unbalanced breath support is the appoggio. (See the articles "Breath Management" and "Update on Breathing" for the method of finding and maintaining the appoggio.) Since proper vowel modification results in less laryngeal tension, it also plays a related part in vibrato stability.

Vibrato faults, which are not mutually exclusive, can be categorized like this: defects of rate, defects of extent, and defects of breath energy.

Rates can be too fast or too slow.
Rates faster than five to seven times per second are generally judged as unacceptable, as are rates slower than five times per second. When a muscle is tensed for too long and not allowed to relax, it will begin to quiver and eventually develop an uncontrolled tremor in the tongue, jaw, larynx, abdominal muscles, and rib and chest muscles. If the quiver is fast, the vibrato will be fast, nervous, and insecure. Quivering in the larger muscles of the body takes longer to begin to shake. Therefore the vibrato will come in slow wave--a wobble-- producing insecurity in the pitch and tending toward too loud. Slow vibratos can also be instigated by trying to produce a bigger sound than the voice is sized for, or by supplying too little support to a genuinely large voice. A bleat is the result of the larynx alternately resisting and releasing the excessive breath pressure. Forcing the chin down against the larynx will make the vibrato change both rate and extent erratically and irregularly.
The average acceptable vibrato displays an extent of one quarter tone above and below the desired pitch.
When the extent approaches a whole step or less than a quarter tone, the perception is one of an unacceptable width or a perilously straight tone. The aberrations rising from unbalanced breath energy are probably most objectionable.The singer should be checking for both excessive tension and unbalanced support. The location of the various quivers is a clue. Audible but not visible vibrato faults indicate that the cause is in the larynx or the support mechanism. Most authorities would vote for the breath support as the likely culprit. Teaching yourself to maintain an appoggio for inhaling and for singing is a must.
The bleat has two causes.
First, the tension in the abdominal muscles must be reduced. Second, the cords must be trained to stay in continuous phonation. This can be effected by using legato exercises while not pushing the breath. The cause of a unwanted straight tone is tension in the larynx or the tonal model of the singer. Perhaps the singer was told at some time that his/her tone was too shaky. Maintaining the appoggio should alleviate the problem. The slow, wide vibrato--a wobble--is unfortunately prevalent among choral singers. The culprit, in addition to the absence of an appoggio, is lack of physical and vocal exercise. Bending and stretching exercises are recommended during the warming-up period and in private. This will be a help to older singers.

Balanced support (the appoggio) and released tension will be major factors in alleviating your vibrato problems.

Why the Appoggio will Alleviate an Objectionable Vibrato

Three eminent vocal pedagogues/vocal researchers supply the reason for depending upon the appoggio for the greatest help with objectionable vibrato problems:

“The acoustical properties of vibrato are obviously inter-

dependent with aerodynamic events and muscle activities

related to phonation.”8

“Support of tone is dependent upon maintenance of subglottal

pressure. This is done by maintaining balance and position of

the rib cage, which allows abdominals and diaphragm to

function efficiently. Inexperienced singers allow the rib cage

to be drawn down by increasing expiratory effort. When the

rib cage is high, continuing thrust from the abdominals gives

a steady tone.” 9

“A perfectly controlled vibrato rate is the result of a balanced

musculature conceptually energized by the muscles of respir-

ation (rib-raisers holding against the rib-depressors) assisted

by specific laryngeal control, i.e., control of length, tension,

and mass of the vocal folds.”10

Vowel modification also contributes to solving the vibrato-tremolo-bleat-wobble problem. Since Seashore’s day, it has been noted that in good singing the center of the vowel is the center of the pitch. When there is no warring between the pitch frequency and the vowel frequency (a correctly modified vowel), there will be an artistic, highly acceptable vibrato.

A View from the Piano

2011-11-04T12:47:00.000-04:00

Jump Start Your Recital

2011-11-04T09:23:00.001-04:00

All musicians, especially those of us in the vocal community, recognize that the song recital has fallen upon difficult days. Children no longer grow up hearing serious music of any kind, because schools, citing budget reasons, have cut back on musical activities with the result that. Students are denied the experience of live music; they hear and recognizing only electronically reproduced sound. We could ourselves lucky if they have heard live music theater performances. The older audience, composed of those who did spend time with music in their youth, is disappearing—and not so slowly.

           When Newt Gingrich used his former power to cut severely the funding of the National Foundation for the Arts, almost all musicians lost impetus, to a certain degree. The Marilyn Horne Foundation and certain other organizations such as The Vocal Arts Society of Washington, D.C. are laboring mightily to take up this cause.

           Young adults are beginning to appreciate and attend opera because television has featured it and because it has theatrical qualities and large forces that are more easily understood and more exciting. But a performance featuring one long singer and one lone pianist performing songs for a whole evening is not something they are accustomed to supporting. The bottom line: The result is that the song recital has lost the core audience it enjoyed in the past.

           Is there anything that a singer can do about this situation? Yes, you can enhance your performing skills. You can include some theatricality in your presentations. You can try some innovations in your programs. You can stop being so relentlessly formal. Most important, you can learn the art of effective program building. This is within your power.

           Every time two recital artists manage to gather an audience, they must provide a striking and enjoyable entertainment. Yes, entertainment at a high cultural level—refined and esthetic to be sure, but entertainment.

           How can you do this? Aside from high musical, vocal, linguistic, and dramatic competence, the most important factor is VARIETY. In every possible way, your recital must have variety.

           Why variety? Think of a person who is passionately fond of chocolate. How many days could this chocolate lover eat nothing but chocolate cake before he or she became sated, even with so enticing a taste? In the same way, fervent music lovers cannot suffer happily through endless quantities of the same type of composition. Variety will keep the committed audience interested, and variety will pique the interest of those new to the recital world.

     Variety cuts down on the possibility of boredom—and boredom is our mortal enemy. Boredom must be avoided at all cost. Variety will inspire your listeners to come hear you, and probably inspire them to go hear another recital team as well.

           What kinds of variety are there? Visual variety, for one—not the most important recital issue, perhaps, but very effective.

                       Visual Variety

                       ●          Change the look of your gown a little for the second half of your recital. A jacket or cape that you remove, for example, or a stole that you add. For a special group of ethnic music, perhaps something that suggests a costume. Hei-Kyung Hong wore a white dress for her debut New York recital a few years back, just so she could add a Korean robe of scarlet silk over it for the last group of Korean songs. What a beautiful sight! The audience sighed with pleasure.

                       ●          Encourage your accompanist to change something about his/her clothing: If a man, the cummerbund, the tie, the jacket, the socks. At an Alice Tully Hall song recital, an internationally celebrated pianist came out for the second half wearing red socks that he deliberately flaunted as he pedaled. Much gasping from the audience—but no one was asleep!

                       ●          Include an solo instrumentalist in the program for at least one group. Instead of seeing the same two people in the same clothes come out yet again, the audience sees a new face and a new combination of performers, and hears a new sound.

                       ●          Stand someplace other than in the curve of the piano, if you can find a good reason for doing so. If your instrumental colleague is a guitarist, for example, you could place a 3-by-5 rug with two chairs on it—off to stage right or left, or in front of the piano—and move there for the guitar/vocal group, singing seated, changing the entire look of the stage.

                       ●          If you are singing a group of music theater pieces, as another example, use a stool in many different ways. Be creative. Find ways to employ a stool that have not yet been devised. Catherine Malfitano used a stool for her Kurt Weill group in Alice Tully Hall, and used it in ways never seen before, once standing behind it while leaning forward on her hands. She also changed into pants for that group, so that she could manage the stool. Very attractive.

                       ●          The first thing seen by your recital audience is the program. One look at the sample program (figure A) convinces most people that it is going to be a long, long, long evening. It looks lengthy, wearying, and uninviting. The other program (figure B) looks more promising and interesting. Arrange the program layout to be attractive. When you do four songs by Strauss that happen to be taken from Opus 42, give that as a title in one long line, indenting the song titles under it.

                                   Figure A

                                   ____________________________________________
                                   ____________________________________
                                   _____________________________
                                   ______________________________________
                                   __________________________________________

                                   ________________________________________
                                   ______________________________________
                                   __________________________________________
                                   ______________________________________

                                   ______________________________________
                                   __________________________________________
                                   _______________________________________________
                                   __________________________________________

                                   Figure B

                                   ___________________________________
                                               _______________________
                                               __________________
                                               _____________________

                                   ________________
                                               __________________________
                                   _________________
                                               ____________

                                   ___________________
                                   __________________
                                   ____________________
                                   ___________

                       Variety of languages

                       ●          Change languages frequently. Sing in an unusual language. What about Czechoslovakian? Or Norwegian? If the language is really off the beaten track, talk about the songs and the poetry. Do oral program notes.

                       ●          If you’re singing in just one language, make sure to feature plenty of variety in the music.
If you’re doing a specialized program in French, for example, be sure that each group features a different kind of French music. French song repertoire probably contains more variety than any other language. And wear a dress that suggests France (French blue?)

                       Variety of styles

                       ●          Even though Romantic composers have provided us with a great deal of beloved and beautiful music, spice your program up by digressing to something modern, or something sophisticated, or Impressionistic. More than one group of bel cantomusic, beautiful as it is, will tend to have a soporific effect on your audience.

                       ●           This is what I call the Tiffany window syndrome. In Tiffany’s window, you see one enormously expensive bauble. In Kmart’s window, you would not even be able to see the Tiffany jewel, because of all the many articles stuffed into the window. Showcase your musical jewel by surrounding it with music that is very different, so that the jewel cannot be overlooked.

                       ●          More than one group of contemporary music, however, may inspire fury in your audience. Unless the program is for a group of contemporary music lovers, choose carefully for audience appeal. Minimalist compositions, for example, with their endless repetitions, have a way of inducing people to nap.

                       Variety of eras

Not everything should be from the 19th century. Move around historically. Juxtapose the groups in such a manner that the beginning of each new group inspires a small and pleasant frisson of surprise at the contrast in the styles.

                       Variety within the oeuvre of one composer

If you search, you can find different types of composing within any composer’s body of work. Very few composers wrote the same way all their composing lives. Be curious. Do your homework.

Many second-rank composers wrote just one jewel of a song. Make it your business to search them out. (“Psyché” by Émile Paladilhe or “À Cloris” by Reynaldo Hahn come to mind.)

                       Variety between familiar and unfamiliar compositions

A steady diet of old favorites can be dismaying, even to avid music lovers. After an old favorite or two, sing an unknown composition from that era, or in that style, or from that composer. On the other hand, if most of your audience is not musically sophisticated, be sure to include a lot of old favorites. A good rule of thumb wehen facing such an audience is to choose pieces that are so dramatically clear that your listeners can understand the drama without reading the program notes and without knowing the words.

                       Variety of tempos and keys

Too many compositions in the same key can be stultifying and monotonous even when the listener does not know why he or she is getting restless. Pay attention to the keys in each group. Make the change from one song to another pleasant and musically logical.

                       Variety of song types

Evaluate each song for its type. In general, songs fall into one of five regular types:
                                               1. The narrative song, which tells a story.
2. The lyric song, which deals with emotions, atmosphere, or sometimes personal responses (reverie, contemplation) to aspects of nature or situations.
3. The character song, which delineates through the text one or more of the following characteristics of the protagonist: gender, name, personality traits, physical attributes, personal philosophy, or romantic interests.
4. The fun song, concerned with humor, frivolity, or nonsense.
5. The pyrotechnic song, which shows off the vocal skills of the singer, and which may be, but is not necessarily, of musical worth.
You probably don’t want to program three songs of the same type from the same composer, or even three songs of one type from three composers. Move around among the types. Do not repeat types in close proximity. The great majority of songs are set to lyric poetry. Programming too many such songs in a row is not a good idea, despite their undeniable beauty.

           Do you face any problem at all when aiming for great variety? Yes. Each group must have unity in its variety. A group that has no connecting tissue—all by the same composer, all dealing with the same subject matter, all coming from the same era, all in the same language, or all in the same style—will smack of carelessness and instability.

           Unity within variety is a must. Unity wish no variety is boring, but variety with no unity is confusing and off-putting. For example, a group of Schubert songs about flowers or brooks (there must be hundreds) would have a great deal of unity, but would be dangerously close to boring, if Schubert can manage to be boring. A group with one song by Wolf one by Debussy, a Handel song or aria, and an American song by Rorem (all very beautiful) would have enormous variety, but would have no unity at all and be totally confusing to an audience, not to mention inartistic and unacceptable to a knowledgeable critic—that is, unless all four disparate songs had to do with the same subject. One could put together a group of songs by different composers, in different languages, but unified by their content, all of them about Christmas, or Hallowe’en, or madness, or some other unifying subject. This would be a sort of “homemade cycle.”

The psychology of a solo recital

           A social gathering is a beautiful example of a psychological situation similar to a solo recital. During the first few moments of the gathering, participants shake hands and make remarks that use almost exclusively social formulas: “How do you do?” “Isn’t the weather grand?”

           The hostess’s duty is to ease the transition from formality to informality by supplying a few details about each person’s background: “Mr. X. is in stocks and bonds.” This is Ms. Y. She is a singer.” Then it is up to the guests to further the acquaintance. People who have just been introduced, however, seldom if ever discuss with each other the intimate and emotional details of their lives, at least until they are much better acquainted. This is the rationale behind choosing a first group that does not require great emotional bonding between audience and singer.

           A recital is a social occasion in which the same psychology prevails. This is why many successful programs present more formal, less emotional music for the first group, music from the Baroque, Renaissance, or Classical periods. If you do your job well, each succeeding group of repertoire asks for more emotional involvement from the audience. The barriers fall bit by bit, and by the end of the program, you and the audience have become friends; you can sing virtually anything and they will approve. Informality, therefore, should increase as the program goes along.

           The first group on your recital is your calling card. It says: “This is how I look. This is my personality. This is the quality of my voice. This is my musical ability. This is my dramatic flair. These are my linguistic skills. This is the breadth of my repertoire.” It says, “Sit back and enjoy. I will capture your attention because I am ever so ready to perform. You will have a wonderful time, because I too am going to enjoy the evening. I am very good, and I can’t wait to show you this music that I love.”

Other suggestions

           Give your recital a title. When Stanley Sonntag and I wrote The Art of the Song Recital (as long ago as 1979) we tried our best to persuade people to do this. Ten years later, singers began to title their programs, and it has helped.
Think of these wonderful concert titles that were so inviting: “Second Helpings,” a charming title used by St. Luke’s Chamber Ensemble. “Seriously Satie,” a joke about the composer’s sense of humor,. Was the title for a concert at which the ushers wore roller skates and carried blue balloons on strings. “Classicabaret” worked for a soprano’s recital of cabaret music by Poulenc, Britten, Schoenberg, Weill, Babbitt, and Bolcom.

           Don’t be afraid to talk from the platform when it’s appropriate. Do you realize that an audience is absolutely longing to hear your speaking voice?
Some time ago, Swedish soprano Elizabeth Söderstrom gave a marvelous recital in New York; she broke all the old rules with great panache. There were no groups. She sang one song at time in whatever language it happened to be written, explaining before each song—nine in each half—why she chose it and how it related to the previous song. The variety was there, and the unity was served by the fact that the songs were all her own favorites. Her speaking was exactly what it should have been: charming, amusing at times, musically informative, informal, autobiographical, and delightfully revelatory of her artistic feelings,. The audience was enchanted.

           A recital is a one-man or one-woman show. You must appeal to all levels of music lovers. Songs are small dramas. You must make it possible for your entire audience to share in your understanding of those miniature events.

           Don’t make your program too long. A good rule of thumb is thirty minutes of music for each half. “There is no such thing as too short a recital,” a renowned vocal coach once said. You can always lengthen it with encores. What you want to hear after the concert is: “ I could have listened forever!”
Speaking of encores, the last song on the program is usually a “blockbuster,” loud,high, and rhapsodic. Programming something short, light, and humorous for your first encore is effective, or an operatic aria (one for which you are known, which you deliver in a spectacular fashion, or one that everyone knows and loves), after which you will absolutely be called back for another encore. This second encore should be serious but contain a summary of your singing virtues. After that, the choice doesn’t matter. Just remember: variety.

           No matter how good your reasons, no matter how much you love the music, no matter how well it fits the program—do not sing anything that doesn’t show you off to your advantage.
Keep a log of songs that might be good for you. Pull it out when you start a new program. Put your best foot forward. Don’t be modest. Self-awareness is the bedrock of success. Know what suits you. Judge your skills and gifts objectively.

           Remember that you are not stuck with your first choices. Learn the pieces you have chosen, and while doing that, ascertain if they are as good for you as you had envisioned. If not, abandon them immediately and without regret. The less skilled and experienced you are, the more careful you must be about your choices. Try to program only songs that elicit intensely personal reactions from you, and do some serious study on how to become more skilled at transmitting your feelings to your listeners—in other words, become a better actor.

           Leave room for some non-blockbusters. Everyone, you and your audience, needs a rest now and then. Program some simple, lovely, attractive, but easy pieces in the midst of your other selections. Everyone will relax.

           Audience members are of several types. Some come to your recital because they know and love you and want to hear anything you care to sing. Some come because you are singing wolf, and they would come to hear anyone who sings Wolf. Some come because a friend or spouse dragged them there. Some come because they want to see you fail (yes, it happens). Some come because you are singing chamber music for part of the recital, and they love vocal chamber music. You must captivate them all, so that they will come again and tell others what a good time they had.

Summary

           The prime purpose of a song recital cannot be educational, although it might turn out to be just that. Every recital, every group of songs should have a scenario as interesting and absorbing as you can concoct artistically. The word “entertainment” does not connote lowered standards, worthless musical values or inferior poetry. On the contrary, entertainment can mean exciting music of high caliber, challenging repertoire, total communication, elegant execution, two people of attractive physical presence, and—perhaps most important—subtle and discriminating taste in programming.

           You can do that. Go to it. Good luck.

Imagery

2011-11-02T20:51:00.001-04:00

Imagery has long been a primary skill of high profile sports competitors like Tiger Woods and Michael Johnson. Yet, traditionally, the value of imagery in the training of singers has been regarded simply as a useful tool to increase dramatically their interpretive skills, probably by at least fifty percent. Alma Thomas and I, after many years of combined experience teaching singers to utilize imagery in far reaching ways, propose that imagery skills have more than one application and offer a myriad of benefits. Far more than increasing singers’ interpretive skills, imagery strongly supports a singer’s ability to give an elite performance by promoting correct performance thinking. Imagery facilitates singers’ capacity to modify their vocal skills toward improvement when that proves necessary. Imagery enables a singer to practice proficiently and to reduce musical problems to a manageable entity. Imagery provides singers with a method of avoiding distractions during performance. Imagery allows a singer to rehearse silently on those many occasions when that is useful. Imagery helps makes it possible for singers to do under the stress of performance what they have been doing in rehearsal. Imagery can even be utilized to work at controlling singers’ performance anxiety levels.

           Our theory, based upon eleven years of shared work as the only known voice teacher/ performance psychologist team, states that imaging for singers can be described as a “method of using all the senses to create or re-create an experience in the mind.” It is clear that those singers fare better in their careers who have acquired a heightened awareness of all their senses: of visual, auditory, and tactile stimuli, of kinesthetic feedback signals, of taste and smell—and are skillful in their use.

They bring a much greater detail to their interpretations and do so with far more ease. They see colors; they hear sounds; they feel the emotions; they sense the performance kinesthetically as part of the body. In addition, it is a simple matter for them to rehearse repertoire while awaiting their turn at an audition or competition. Efficiently and silently they see and hear and feel themselves executing the piece perfectly (while not being distracted by their surroundings).

Those singers who have honed their imagery skills will find it simpler to remember more clearly the essence of a vocal technical skill and repeat it efficiently until it is firmly within their grasp. In this way, they will eventually move from analytical thinking, which is decidedly not recommended during performance, to the intuitive, musically-responsive thinking that is necessary for elite performance.

What singer has not at one time or another found it necessary to change his technical skills so as to improve vocally? Those singers who have well-developed imagery skills can more swiftly characterize the old way and the new way by feeling, by hearing and by seeing. In the end, they are much more adept at leaving behind the old technique and adopting the new. Such singers, in sum, practice better.

Singers with highly efficient imagery skills can focus more easily on the pictures, colors, and objects conjured up by their imaginative interpretation and not yield to the person in the front row who is blowing his nose so loudly; in short, those singers are better equipped to resist distractions.

           Our results show that improving one’s imagery skills is not a difficult task. It simply requires learning the skills and understanding the nature of their application, the will to do this, and the time in which to do it. Imagery exercises are readily available in performance literature. If one were to count up the factors that lead to a successful singing career, imagery would play a large part in most of them:

The acquisition of dependable vocal technical skills;
The maintenance of a beautiful tone;
The capacity to remain in control, focused, and concentrated during the stress of performing;
The confident enjoyment of performance;
The power to transport an audience into the life of the composition by the singer’s sheer personal belief in self and the text.

           It is difficult to think of another single skill that has so many applications to the art of singing. It is easy to believe that imagery is the language of performance. Voice teachers might well say to their singers: “Image your way to a successful career!”

Competitions, American Idol and X Factor

2011-11-02T05:31:00.000-04:00

Adjudication is an issue fraught with problems for everyone. Both the vocalists and the judges have strong feelings about what ought to be the criteria, the process, and the ethics of judging a competition.

           When a singer or a judge is asked for his opinion on the subject, the most likely complaints to come up are those of ethical misconduct. There is the story of the judge, a voice teacher, who passed out her personal cards immediately after the competition, proselytizing for new students. There is the tale of the judge, a conductor, who sat with his arms folded against his chest at the beginning of an aria, was visibly affronted by some passage in the middle of the aria, loudly slammed the contestant’s application upside down on the table with both hands, and turned his back on the singer for the rest of the aria. Then there was the judge whose vocal inflections carried with each word a clear indication of his approval, boredom, disapproval, or praise. In the early days of the Fulbright Scholarship, a well known voice teacher who often judged was infamous for blackballing those competitors who had left her studio. Clearly, all adjudicators are not of the same mind with regard to the ethics of their deportment.

           Although we of the vocal community are all more affronted by ethical lapses on the part of a judge than anything else, there are equally daunting problems raised by judging criteria and competition processes. The sponsoring organization has a responsibility to make its rules of conduct, its criteria, and its designated process clear to the judges prior to the competition. If these rules are not acceptable to the judge-to-be, he/she can then withdraw before the event. Such questions as these must be resolved:

            How many judges should there be? Even or uneven number?
           Is there a head judge? What are his responsibilities? How much power does he have?
           What are the criteria for judging? Does the organization have firm criteria for the
                       attributes of the singer who should win? Have the judges been apprized of this?
           Do the judges have authority to judge on the basis of repertoire or length of program?
                       Or should those issues be corrected previously by the sponsoring organization ?
           Are the judges responsible for policing illegal photocopies, etc.?
           What method shall be used for ranking--percentage, numerical, etc.?
           How many singers must be ranked by number? All? Just the first three?
           Are ties permitted?
           How many compositions must be heard from each singer? Can the number vary?
           Must the judge write comments that will be given to the contestant at the end?
           Should the ranking appear on the comments?
           May the judge compare the present performance with those at a higher or lower level
                       than the competition?
           May the judges confer during the competition? May they applaud? May they respond
                        verbally?
           May the judges engage in conversation with teachers, entrants, parents of entrants after
                       the announcement?

All adjudicators are not created equal. Each adjudicator brings to the process his or her own knowledge, biases, and preconceptions about these factors:

           1. the literature being sung
           2. the interpretation of that literature
           3. the appropriate tone quality or vocal timbre
           4. the size and dynamic possibilities of a voice
        5. the physical processes involved in singing (breathing, phonation,
                  resonance, articulation)
           6. the number and use of registers
           7. the various areas of vocal technique (legato, staccatop, messa di voce, control,
                  vibrato, agility, and consistency of production)
           8. the acoustical environment
           9. musicianship
         10. all factors of communication: appearance, deportment, personality,
                  gestures, involvement, charisma

           In addition, each adjudicator brings his or her own personal baggage: chronological age, hearing acuity, physical and mental health, years of study, performing experience, teaching experience, and amount of exposure to vocal artists of the highest order.

           In order to understand the problems of adjudication process better, let us imagine two contrasting judges. One is a tenor, sixty-five years of age, retired from an illustrious career in opera. It is safe to assume that he knows the tenor operatic repertoire much better than he does that of other voice classifications, and that his knowledge of art song literature is spotty at best. How can he resist consciously or subconsciously holding up his own interpretation of certain tenor arias to those he is judging? Surely he will expect a voice to be large enough and of a timbre that can be heard over a sizable orchestra in a large hall. Will he be inclined to dismiss subtleties of tonal color and dynamic nuances that will not be heard over an orchestra? Since he has been trained to act as he sings, will he not expect the singer he is judging to move about, make use of gesture, stance, facial expression, and other physical responses to depict the musical situation? Will he judge musicianship and vocal technical skill to be as important as the singer’s realization of the dramatic moment? Due to his chronological age, will he not have suffered a significant loss in his ability to hear high frequencies associated with certain consonants. Will this result in his opinion that many singers have poor diction?

           Another hypothetical adjudicator is a thirty-five year old lyric soprano of international reputation as a recitalist, known for her artistry in German lieder and the French mélodie. She admires Elly Ameling and Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau and is fond of the timbre of the countertenor voice and its literature. Because of the smallness of her own voice, she has never done much performing on the operatic stage. Will her reactions to the contestants not be different from that of the tenor? Will she be more concerned with vocal freedom, beauty of tone, perfection of technique, musical sensitivity, the shaping of phrases, subtleties of tone color related to the meaning of the text, than she will be with the amount of sound produced? Will she expect the singer to convey the meaning of the song by facial expression and sounds produced, rather than acting it out through body movement and other physical manifestations? Surely she will not have suffered any hearing loss due to age as yet. Surely she will be very knowledgeable about diction and the importance of text.

           Not only are these two hypothetical adjudicators light years apart in what they expect of a singer, but might it not be profitable to consider other hypothetical adjudicators--an opera conductor, a booking agent, a stage director, a voice teacher who never had a major singing career but is a fine teacher? The point has been made: the biggest problem in the process of adjudication is the number and extent of variables present. Some effort must be made to limit or control these variables if the process of adjudication is to be at all equitable.

Possible recommendations:
           1. Include some fixed repertoire in every competition. Thus apples can be compared to
            apples. Requiring a fixed unit of all contestants has worked well in the Olympics.
           2. Each contestant should choose his first number. The contestant should be informed in
             advance the remaining numbers chosen by the judges and their order.
           3. The number of judges should be at least 5 and preferably 7, with the highest and
                lowest rankings given by the judges to be dropped from consideration as is done
                in the Olympics.
           4. The majority of the judges should be teachers of singing and/or performers.
             In no instance should voice teachers and/or singers be in the minority.
           5. Judges should not be drawn from the same age bracket, but represent a
            diversity of ages, including some below the age of fifty.
           6. Judges should not communicate with each other while adjudication is taking place, and
            should do nothing to indicate approval or disapproval of what the contestant does.
           7. At least in the preliminary round of auditions, each performer should receive written
               comments indicating in a positive way the judge’s evaluation of the performance, with
                reasons given as to why the performer was not given a higher rating.
           8. Judges should be informed as to the purpose of the competition, e.g., to choose
        the singer who is best equipped to sing a leading role at La Scala tomorrow, or to
            choose the singer who has the greatest vocal endowment and potential for a major
            career, or to choose the singer who sings the best technically and who sings the
            most artistically.
              An effort should be made by the sponsoring organization to list the criteria on which
              they wish the judging to be done.
           9. Performing ability (charisma, vital energy) should be a part of the criteria.
        10. Dispense with elaborate evaluation sheets because judges spend too much time filling
              them out, thereby missing part of the performance.

           On the other hand, wouldn’t it be dreadful if everyone thought alike and judged alike, for that would mean that some singers with cherishable qualities would never have a chance to win anything. In the lower echelons of training it is perhaps preferable to look for talent rather than reward a performance of inferior polish.