Nasal resonance in singing, Streisand, etc.

Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports
1

Just wanted to clear up some mistakes in the recent mailbag article “Does a big nose help you sing better?” which may be found at: http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mbignose.html

To get right to it…

Many mistakes here…

First, a nasal singing tone typically results from a failure to seal off the opening to the nasal cavity with the soft palate – not from a raised larynx. An easy way to prove this is to pinch the nose while making a nasal tone and observe how the tone changes. Some “nasal-sounding” tones may be produced by aggressively focusing the tone forward (tenor Alfredo Kraus being the prime example), but we wouldn’t call this a true nasal tone. So, in fact, the condition and size of the schnozz (or rather, the properties of the resonant space in the nasal and sinus cavities) has everything to do with a “nasal” tone. In addition, a properly produced “nasal” tone can actually be a good deal louder/fuller/more resonant than a “non-nasal” tone due to the additional resonant space used.

That said, the larynx and soft palate tend to move reflexively in opposite directions. When the soft palate is high, as in yawning, the larynx is usually low; when the soft palate is low, the larynx is often high. So, while it is often the case that the larynx is high during “nasal” singing, the larynx is not the root cause. Furthermore, “nasal” singing does not necessarily have to include a high larynx, as anyone who sings French opera can attest.

As far as a high laryngeal position “crimping a portion of the vocal cord” and “directing too much air into the nasal cavity” – this isn’t the way it works. A basic review of vocal anatomy shows that it is impossible to crimp or pinch a portion of the vocal folds with anything other than perhaps an excessively forceful closure of the arytenoids. And, as I mentioned above, no amount of “throat closing” can direct air (or, more importantly, sound) into the sinus and nasal resonating spaces unless the soft palate is unsealed. I do understand where these ideas come from, but one has to differentiate between semi-scientific “voice teacher talk” and scientific truth.

Actually, Barbra’s tone resonates quite strongly in the nose. She, along with a huge majority of pop singers, fails to seal the soft palate properly when she is singing. This is largely obscured by electronic amplification and, more significantly, the electronic manipulation of her sound. Without all the studio engineers and sound engineers and state-of-the-art sound electronics, Barbra’s tone isn’t nearly as “lush full and gorgeous” as you might think. This is not to say that she isn’t a good singer or that she doesn’t have a good sound – just that the sound we hear from her on records and in concerts is not necessarily “her” sound and owes much to technology.

Moving on, I think one misrepresents Streisand’s singing greatly by implying that she has a smooth transition from the “chest” to “head” registers. I would call her a classic belter, which is to say that she carrys the chest register unnaturally high, rarely if ever uses head resonance and exhibits a pronounced tonal difference between the two. Again, these things are somewhat obscured by electronic modification, but are readily apparent to a classically trained singer.

Finally we reach the subject of her lung capacity/breath control. Although she does seem able to sustain unusually long tones for a pop singer, her abilities in this respect are in no way outstanding when compared to classically trained singers. A friend of mine who is a huge Streisand fan mentioned to me in awestruck tones that she had sustained a note for 17 seconds on one of his recordings. He wondered what I, a trained opera singer, thought about that and we discussed it for a while. At some point in the conversation I easily sustained a note for over 60 seconds as a demonstration. My goal in tellin this is not to crow about what a good singer I am, but to point out that this is not an unusual skill – most opera singers could do the same. FYI, the ability to phonate for long periods of time without taking a breath is more related to the efficiency of the phonation than to the individual singer’s lung capacity.

2

Is there a pop singer that has made the transition to opera and how about the reverse? Or would the re-training be just too difficult?

3

[QUOTE]
Is there a pop singer that has made the transition to opera and how about the reverse? Or would the re-training be just too difficult?[\QUOTE]

If you’re talking about the modern pop style and established pop/opera singers, there have been none who were particularly successful.

First, I’ll talk about switching from pop to opera… Singing opera is a skill that requires careful training to coordinate certain muscular actions and to strengthen certain muscles. This is a time-consuming process that takes years, and it is not something one can do half way. In order to build the technical platform necessary for operatic singing, singers are often required to give up old ways of singing in order to allow new, more beneficial habits to develop. This means that most pop singers would have to abandon their pop sound forever to allow an operatic sound to develop. Few established pop singers are willing to make this sacrifice – and by the time they have done enough singing to become established it’s probably too late anyway (certain permanent physiological changes accompany certain ways of singing once enough time has passed).

That said, there are two pop singers who are quite well known for singing the operatic repertoire: Andrea Bocelli and Micheal Bolton. Bocelli started as a somewhat unusual case because his original pop style was already quasi-operatic and his sound is naturally Italianate. With the proper training he might be able to make the transition. However, very few people in the business take him seriously as an opera singer, the general concensus being that he has a naturally beautiful voice but poor technique that is only really effective with electronic amplification. Bolton, as I imagine you are aware, is a much more traditional pop singer. He became interested in opera after doing a “Pavarotti & Friends” concert and wanted to expose his fans to the music. He actually took a fair amount of time off and worked with some of the best teachers and coaches in the business. Early on, the decision was made that they wouldn’t try to change the base sound of his voice – that was the sound that made him a star, and he probably has some permanent physiological stuff in his throat due to the years of pop singing. That said, his basic technique seems fairly strong and the style isn’t bad if you can listen around the unorthodox tone and occasional pop mannerisms. Again, no one would take him seriously as a real opera singer, but his heart is in the right place.

As for opera singers crossing over to pop… Opera singers seem to try this with some regularity, often with embarrasing results (anyone remember the song with Placido Domingo and John Denver?). As I mentioned before, operatic training involves the directed development of vertain vocal habits. Once these habits are set they permeate all uses of the voice and it’s very difficult to go against them. For example, think of how different, how resonant are the speaking voices of most opera singers. It’s almost impossible for an opera singer to break these deeply ingrained habits enough to sound like a pop singer rather than an opera singer trying to sound like a pop singer. This is all the more so because these “crossover” opera singers always want to keep their opera careers. A similar situation happens with ballet dancers. Their physical habits are often so strongly developed that they walk and carry themselves in a very distinct manner. It is highly unlikely that a professional ballet dancer at the highest level could successfully transition to hip-hop dancing.
Note that I have been careful to define pop singing as the modern style of pop singing. Several singers have successfully crossed between opera and classic pop singing or classic musical singing. Surely the most famous of these was Mario Lanza, but Ezio Pinza and Giorgio Tozzi were huge hits in “South Pacific” and Dawn Upshaw has recorded a very good CD of classic Broadway pieces.

4

Thank you! Great explanation and I think I’ve seen movies with Mario Lanza and/or Ezio Pinza. I’ll trip through biography and see if I can figure out which was which.

5

Tenor Mario Lanza appeared in many movies and movie musicals starting around 1950 – often performing operatic selections (the most famous being “The Great Caruso”). He as initially trained as an opera singer and appeared in perhaps two small operatic productions in his early years. WW2 postponed his operatic career aspirations, however, and he went to Hollywood after the war. Since he also performed classic pop music extensively he never developed a classical technique to a level that could sustain a career in opera, but he could make an operatic sound on his recordings. He definitely had the goods vocally and could have pursued a distinguished career in opera had he made that choice.

Bass Ezio Pinza was one of the stars in the operatic world (especially the Metropolitan Opera) from the late 20s until the early 50s. After his operatic career wound down, he was able to find new fame in musical theater and the movies – something he strongly resisted at first. He was very well known for South Pacific in 1949.

6

Okay, while I don’t know much about opera, I do disagree with your assessment that Barbra’s sound owes much to technology. Her records, maybe. But concerts? No way! I’ve got a recording of her singing live in central park in 1968 and she sounds amazingly beautiful. I doubt that technology could take a sow’s ear and turn it in to a silk purse, especially thirty years ago. If technology were all that it took, then Rosie O’Donnell would sound fabulous, and as anyone who has ever heard her sing knows, she doesn’t.

7

You have some points there… It is certainly true that Barbra has way more raw material to work with than Rosie. That said, the sound that you may have heard at her concerts is not the same sound you would hear were you occupying the same room and listening to her sing completely accoustically. In fact, you would probably be amazed at the difference. Haven’t you noticed how dissappointing it often is to hear a favorite pop singer sing a few bars in a television interview or some other setting where the sound is largely unmodified? The smart ones (and Barbra is a smart one) never allow this to happen.

It is true that the possibilities for sound manipulation are somewhat less in a live setting, but it is used extensively nonetheless. In its most rudimentary form, the singer’s basic sound is modified by nothing more than the choice of amplification hardware: certain speakers impart a warmer sound while others impart a brighter sound. Similar things may be said about the choice of microphone, amplifier, etc.

Going up to the next level of sophistication we have the ubiquitous sound board. This device allows the sound engineer to manipulate the sound of all the insteuments and singers in a variety of ways. Even a “garage level” sound board will include dials for raising/lowering the high, middle and low frequency components for each input. This is nothing more than an extremely sophisticated version equalizer – in other words: tone modification.

Finally we get into some of the more sophisticated electronic effects where things like a barely perceptible echo and chorus effect are added (among other things). All of these modifying techniques are used daily at pop and rock concerts by the big stars all the way down to the average bar band – and they have been for at least the last 30 years. Indeed, it is impossible to use electronic amplification without some change in the sound due to the use of electronics. It is a 100% certainty that a superstar like Barbra Streisand uses and has always used the most sophisticated electronics in her concerts.

This is how it works: If the singer’s voice is a little light, turn up the middle frequencies. If the singer’s voice is a little unfocused, turn up the high frequencies. If the singer’s voice is a little thin, add some echo and chorus. If the singer’s voice is a little rough around the edges, filter out all the nonharmonic overtones… You get the idea.

By the way, don’t think that your 1968 concert recording wasn’t worked over by sound engineers before it was released. In fact, it has been worked on at least three times: once by the sound technicians who mixed and recorded the original concert, once by the engineers who prepared the concert tapes for LP release and again by the engineers who prepared the recording for CD re-release.
Again… none of this is to say that Streisand is anything other than a top-rate performer at what she does.

8

Didn’t Linda Rondstandt also make the transition from pop to opera? Or was her new sound not considered opera?

9

Linda Ronstadt did a one-time, largely pop-styled version of La Boheme in English. This was by no means a transition to operatic singing and her efforts in attempting opera were generally considered a huge failure. In fact, recordings of Ronstadt and Gary Morris (the pop/country singer who was her partner in the production) singing material from the show are prized in the opera community for the laugh value.

10

Linda was a classically trained singer before singing Rock. She did a heck of a job in the movie version of Gilbert & Sullivan’s “The Pirates of Penzance” (in my humble opinion). And if you had heard her live on her “Canciones de mi padre” tour (which I know is not opera, but it did require a big voice to fill a stage), you would believe she could sing opera. As to her “La Boheme” turn, I find the opera community to be a bit stuck up anyway. And Gary Morris has a wonderful voice (fond memories of his Jean val Jean in “Les Miserables”). So let 'em laugh. I may not know “art” or “music,” but I know what I like.