Rise of the belting-sopranos- Page 3

[TooDarnHot]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 8:07pm

I know jrb said he didn't want to get into it, and I don't blame him, but that's a question for him.

I'm a singer myself so I understand the concept and technique of "mixing" but it's extremely difficult to explain on the internet.

[nygrl23]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 8:10pm

Ah...sorry jerbs.

I get the impression it means a legit/classical upper register combined with a, er... folksier lower register.

[TooDarnHot]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 8:12pm

it's mixing your "belt" with your "falsetto", to create a sustained (and healthy) vocal resonance.

that's the simplified explanation...

[nygrl23]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 8:15pm

You mean sort of like using a twang technique?

[broadwaybaby086]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 8:29pm

Small note: Audra McDonald did theatre throughout her childhood and has said that she fought her teachers tooth and nail to sing theatre while at Juilliard. She definitely pursued theatre before classical voice; it just happens that her voice is more of a classical one.

[TooDarnHot]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 8:30pm

"You mean sort of like using a twang technique?"

not really...

it's like how some singers can train themselves to eliminate the break (or pisaggio) in their voice where it switches from chest and head voice. and they can seamlessly switch between each vocal resonance without any voiced glotal attacks or breaks.

now imagine someone singing high notes where their break would usually be. instead of having to switch into their head voice, they are mixing.

maybe JRB can explain it better.

I can't really think of female examples of true "mixing" (there are a bunch) but if you are familiar with Gavin Creel, he has the amazing ability to mix. I mean a female mix is hard to come by but a male mix? It's rare... and beautiful.
Updated On: 4/10/08 at 08:30 PM

[nygrl23]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 9:14pm

I see, kinda. Thanks for the explanation. It sounds like a tone and strength quality in the higher register.

[lois128]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 9:20pm

I was watching a video of a little girl singing "defying gravity" and I found one of two 12 year olds belting it [I think] on the related videos.
Defying Gravity

[jrb]

Posted: 4/11/08 at 9:51am

Mixing is hard to explain – as is any vocal technique – because it varies from singer to singer and is based heavily on “feeling” and “placement” - concepts that are perceived more so by the performer than the audience.

While the Belt involves increased breath pressure, a pulling of the weight and color of the chest voice through the passagio (literally, passage…we can explain this later) and into the top, and a restriction of vibrato (at times), the mix is a compromise of sorts.

Mixing (really, really simply put) is when the head voice and the chest voice are literally mixed together – or dovetailed. It’s really vague and almost impossible to describe as almost everyone has a different definition.

Before you can really understand it, you need to understand that men and women deal with different complications of the voice.
Women have Chest Voice, Head Voice, and sometimes a Whistle Tone that floats above the other two.
Men deal with Chest Voice, Head Voice (a middle ground), and Falsetto (the male equivalent of whistle tone…kind of. lol)

Head Voice and Falsetto are not the same thing. This is a misconception. Men have a head voice AND a falsetto. They are not the same. Head voice is marked by a higher placement and more engagement of the “mask” and nasal bone with more head resonance. Falsetto is a supportless use of only the edges of the vocal folds (unless you’re a countertenor).

For men, mixing is almost more about a dynamic shift. We perceive the use of a mix in men when they gently float a high note or decrease their volume. It is often created by mixing falsetto into the head voice. Some believe that it’s really just a well-developed head voice, but I definitely hear falsetto in it.
For women, mixing is more about color (in my opinion). It is derived from a blending of the light upper and darker lower to create a glorious mix. It can be loud or soft. Again, some believe it’s really just a well developed head voice being used to sound like chest.

Does that help at all? As I say, this is all really touchy. People get passionate about this stuff and can disagree really intensely. I’m leery putting technical concepts on a forum.

This is something that would be discovered in voice lessons over a persiod of time. It's not a single-post sort of thing. lol.

[dwperkins]

Posted: 4/11/08 at 10:06am

These singers are definitely legit, not belters:

Audra McDonald
Kristin Chenoweth
Judy Kaye

McDonald studied at Juillard, Chenoweth at Ok City University and I don't know about Kaye but all have sung with major symphony orchestras and in opera houses.

They are not "belters".

[jrb]

Posted: 4/11/08 at 10:11am

If you read the whole thread, you'll see that the original post was ill-phrased. It's changed into a thread about technique and how refreshing it is to hear healthy legit singers who can also manage a nice mix and even a belt now and then.

[nygrl23]

Posted: 4/11/08 at 10:12am

>People get passionate about this stuff and can disagree really intensely. I’m leery putting technical concepts on a forum. <

Thanks for your post, jrb. I've learned a lot from you today, cf. the resume thread. :) Hey...I'm cool with _all_ of this information. I'm really enjoying hearing about these points of view and the words that people keep using in lessons and rehearsal, but never can explain, as understanding the terms seems to be a time-release sort of process.

Are you a voice teacher, jrb? (or for that matter a writer?)

[jrb]

Posted: 4/11/08 at 10:15am

As for audra being more theater than opera - that's often the case. Very few classically trained singers started off being passionate opera lovers. Most started in theater and then moved into classical voice once they entered college.
Some - like Ms. McDonald and myself (lol) - loved theater, went classical, faught to continue doing theater, and eventually left opera. Of course, now Audra does both...as will Chenoweth, when she does Ghosts of Verseilles at the Met.

[jrb]

Posted: 4/11/08 at 10:24am

Hey nygrl23!
I've taught voice before - but I'm actually a singer/actor (who loves to write). I just became obsessed with vocal technique in my undergrad and began teaching voice lessons and taking vocal pedagogy classes. The obsession continued in grad school. I became really tired of people not knowing how to define the very terms they were so quick to throw around.
Now I live in the city as an actor/singer trying to find a balance between the classical and MT worlds.
They're like siblings who don't quite get along, you know? They should, though. They've got more in common than they would like to admit.

[EponineAmneris]

Posted: 4/11/08 at 10:46am

Thank you, jrb!!!

VERY informative for those who are unclear.

Interesting discussion here.

[nygrl23]

Posted: 4/11/08 at 10:46am

Very cool, jrb. You're definitely passionate about this, and it's contagious.

Sibling rivals they may indeed be, but their differences are their strengths. Makes it more interesting. And IMHO there are a lot of Kristins and Audras out there, versatile performers who bridge that gap.

Right now the only thing that the Met and MT have in common is trying to appeal to wider audiences by skewing younger and younger. The Met's hiring green, yet attractive, singers (with not the best results from what I've heard from people who work there) and MT's been Disneyfying for quite some time now.
Updated On: 4/11/08 at 10:46 AM

[jrb]

Posted: 4/11/08 at 11:05am

Peter Gelb is trying to push the Met in a more commercial direction (due in major part to his media campaign) - and (imho) thank God. Granted, it is causing a slip in vocal talent, but I'm all for realism in theater AND it's bringing more people into the house.

As for Disney - they are as double-edged as one can get. They could be credited with reinvigorating Broadway after a major slump...but they could also be credited with the whoring of it.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 4/11/08 at 1:28pm

The problem is that many MT fans dislike more operatic singing. For instance, if an MT singer uses a lot of vibrato, many people complain.

[jrb]

Posted: 4/11/08 at 2:05pm

Which I completely understand. Vibratos can get out of hand...although that's usually a sign of bad technique. Though even a healthy operatic vibrato is far too much for the MT stage.
We certainly don't want a Broadway where supertitles are necessary!
However, I think that Opera (Modern Opera, that is...or more, modern American Opera) is starting to make a move toward MT.
More current pieces tend to stress text as a crucial aspect of the art. I think that productions of operas based on American novels are forcing composers to create coloquial sounds and singers to create intelligable ones!
In any event, there's a happy medium. You can be a legit singer who uses healthy, classical technique, while still sounding MT enough to please the crowds - it's just rare.
That being said, there is also a place for pop singers who can do things that most legit ones cannot.

Updated On: 4/11/08 at 02:05 PM

[tj-dancer]

Posted: 5/1/08 at 2:14pm

I wish this thread had been around 2 years ago. I graduated from college last summer, and spent my junior and senior years fighting with teachers about my vocal sound. I have a very natural classical sound, and I can stay in my head voice throughout my range (about 4 octave), but because it was a music theater course, a lot of the teachers wouldn't accept it, and said that I had to find my chest voice and learn to belt, which i physically couldn't do whilst i was there. Though I had a wonderful MD at college who kept pushing my soprano, and saying that there are always parts for soprano's and was really supportive.

During my final assesments before graduation, we had an external MD on our panel, and he summed it up, and said that I've got a great soprano voice, but there is more underneath there that no-one has showed me how to access, so he put me in touch with a wonderful voice coach. I can still stretch 4 octaves in my soprano range, but I can also now belt up to a G. Which I'm proud of myself for.

But if I had the choice, I'd rather be in musicals such as Oklahoma and the Light in the Piazza, than Rent and Wicked anyday. Because I just adore the sound!

And thank you, JRB for the technical talk, it's so interesting!