Thursday, August 25, 2005
Nature or Nurture
[NOTE: I think we can all acknowledge that, when talking generally about genres, styles, and techniques, there are always exceptions to the rules, and there are always extraordinary people who do extraordinary work within a specific genre, style, or technique.]
Here's a story: I was performing in a theater piece a few years ago, and there was a part where I had to run backwards from downstage to upstage, and I would get nervous because I couldn't see where I was going. Everything had gone fine for several rehearsals, but then, one of the other performers was off her mark and I tripped over her. When I fell, I fell backwards and my instinctive reaction was to try to catch myself by putting my hands out and using my hands to stop my fall. I ended up breaking *both* of my wrists.
I think most trained dancers would advise that you shouldn't try to catch yourself with your hands. Your hands are just not strong enough to support the weight of your body; that's why I broke my wrists. Apparently, I should have just landed of my back or on my butt. Trained dancers know how to fall. They use their shoulders or upper arms, or they roll onto their sides. They have all sorts of reactions to falling that come instinctively after having learned them in training. But none of the other dancers or performers told me that breaking my fall with my hands was "not natural." Everyone totally understood my instinct to do that.
Have classically-trained singers convinced the classical music world that singing with vibrato is "natural?" Do they believe, just because they have trained themselves to perform with a certain tone, that their tone is what's "natural" for everyone else? I can't imagine that very many classical singers would believe this, but it seems that some do.
Falling on your hands may be damaging to your body, but singing without vibrato is not inherently damaging to your voice.
Excessive vibrato was necessary for performing operas by Wagner, for example, because it helped the unamplified voice to be heard over Wagner's orchestration. Singing with vibrato creates a wider sound, in acoustical terms, as Alex Ross points out in his excellent piece about how (recording) technology changed acoustic performance practice - "The Record Effect."
Some classically-trained singers have a beautiful vibrato sound. Some composers prefer the bel canto sound. But now, since electronic amplification can be incorporated into live performance, vibrato is not necessary. And as several other folks have acknowledge, vibrato can obscure the text.
Singing without vibrato is an alternative technique that should be accepted and cultivated in conservatories and music schools. It is just as valid as singing with vibrato, and there is obviously a demand for it that is not being met.
posted by Corey Dargel
7:26 PM
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
Voices in the Wilderness?
Since 1945 or so, vocal music was largely eschewed in academic compositional circles, as was much of lyric and tonal music in general. Yet despite the trend, much has been written, and survived as the pendulum invariably swings. Vocal music is becoming increasingly popular again, and there are good things to be found in all streams of musical thought. In fact, I would theorize that vocal music, even more than instrumental, is where much of the evolution of music actually takes place.
So I’m a bit surprised by the concerns about singers, their training, etc. My own ensemble, Aguavá New Music Studio, more or less routinely performs music requiring operatic singing, jazz singing, rock singing, amplification, microtonal singing, electronic processing, and just about everything else in between. We’ve premiered operas, cantatas, masses, motets, and just about everything else, requiring all sorts of extended techniques. It makes us hard to catagorize, but our training is essentially classical. Several of our number have performed early music, played in jazz or rock bands, and other genres as well.
Yet we have been something of an anomaly: a vocal group interested in mostly, in fact exclusively, new music. We concentrate on music where the ink is still wet, or at least on paper only since the latter half or the 20th century. I’m exceptionally lucky to have a captive vocal/instrumental “band” to perform and record my own works at such a high level.
And I must say that our singers are special: monster technique coupled with great musicianship and intelligence, and a willingness to try something new. Oh yeah, it helps that about 50 to 80 percent of them (we change personnel and forces according to each project) have perfect pitch.
So, while I acknowledge that I’m exceptionally blessed, I disagree with those who lament that singers won’t do new music. Vocal music is more vibrant than it’s been in the last 50 years, and there are all sorts of singers, choruses, and ensembles that are willing to perform new works that are well written.
And after glancing over a respected colleague’s blog, I must also disagree with those holding a deathwatch over classical music. It’s not dying, but it will certainly change. Culture is, by definition, about time frames and geography, about fragmentations and fusions, or clashes and marriages. Classical music won’t die, but it will incorporate other ideas, other styles, and other methods.
We (living) composers have a larger audience now, in terms of numbers, if not percentages, than ever before. There is support for our work. There are great performers and ensembles that specialize in or at least occasionally program new music. These are exciting and wonderful times for composers who aren’t dead yet.
One final thought, and I’ll get off the soapbox: The old guard will do what it does best, and will pass away when their age and culture passes. It took me awhile to get it through my head that these old paradigms and infrastructures are not there to support my work: They are there to support their own and do what they do best. St. Paul Sunday and Performance Today rarely offer anything outside the common practice period. Most big romantic orchestras don’t program unknown new works. Great romantic pianists don’t step outside of the golden age of keyboard music.
Even Josh Bell, a great player and a great proponent of new music, knows his bread and butter consists of Tchaikovsky.
But the wise musician does not live by bread alone.
posted by Cary Boyce
11:16 AM
Sunday, August 21, 2005
The Voices In Your Head
Fifty years ago, one could safely assume that composers who wrote for voice were imagining the classically trained version heard in opera houses and song recitals.
That assumption is no longer safe. While many composers continue to write for classically trained voices, many others prefer to write for voice types that reflect our amplified era. Some of these voices are trained in non-classical techniques, and some are simply untrained.
Composers: when you write vocal music, what kind of voices do you imagine? Do you hear classically trained voices, or pop voices, or something else? What do you like or dislike about different vocal styles? What do you want most from a singer? What bothers you most in sung music?
posted by Lawrence Dillon
11:05 AM
|
